Walk this way. .

We all have "chosen" a path to walk on in our lives. I put "" around the word chosen because frankly most of the turns were just taken—due to circumstances, upbringing, ignorance and mostly pure laziness of not thinking.

I want to lay out a new path for you guys or maybe just little signs to help you find out more on your own later. Let's just get into it.

Throw out faith and religion

I could have just said religion if I was only attacking superstition here but faith it seems operates on other levels in people's lives too. Not only does faith make people believe in gods and angels, but in memes like "finding a soulmate" in love, "doing the right thing" (getting married) , "just counting on it to workout" (choosing a career) are somewhat branches of faith where reason has taken back seat.

I want you to completely suck faith out of your subconscious so that everything you finally do, every decison you make comes down to relentless thinking, of course this is not to say that every decision like this will be always right but you won't delude yourself into anything.

And religion! Frankly it's a been a long time since I am simply bored of criticizing religion—it's just too easy now. I am also aware that a point by point criticism of religion usually doesn't convince the believers at all. I just want to take a route where any religious person takes it upon himself to sit down and go through religious ideas and forms conclusions. It's like just planting a seed and letting it grow from there.

The seed I have for now is DEATH. Religon thrives on fear, but it thrives on fear of death in general so I think if you take some time out to ponder on this the seed I'm trying to plant will well be on it's way to holding some root. Here's an idea to look at death: Close your eyes think about where were you 100 years back! Try to move your hands and breathe then. Of course you think it sounds silly but that's just what it is; you did not exist 100 years ago and neither did you body or your mind which controls it. And think of 100 years from now—yep, it's the same, you just won't be here. Back to where you were—to nothingness, and not in some buddha spiritual (now that they have hijacked these terms too) sense but in actual nothingness.

Relationships

What is most interesting to me is guys in fucking early 20s year olds wanting loyal, monogamous, serious relationships—fuck! I mean these are guys who just turned 20 and have a "GF" they say "I love you" to every night. From what little male biology I know, this is the age range where you want to swim your way through as much cunt as you can but what I see is "couples" who hangout out like buddies and tag each other on disneyesque crap like this on facebook.

Spend your 20s as a single MAN and the majority of your relationships with women should be of a fuck buddy dynamic, hone your skills for this, it is the only way you can learn about women and eventually know what you want and expect from a long term partner (if you go down that road). Oh and it's fun!

Whenever I bring up an idea like this I get "You're just desperate", now I'm from Mumbai, India and I'm pretty sure guys don't talk like this in the western world since they start fucking at 17, so it's really something to think about how this has entered the vocab here. What this really is, is an rationalization to not confront the fact that one simply doesn't have that kind of options and skills with women like I am advocating here. Along with that, feminism, religion and the Indian culture is definitely to be blamed.

Let's go bullet points on this:

1. Feminism has convinced guys today that becoming friendly, comfortable and caring is the way to get into and keep a relationship. This is what leads to "friends first" approach and trying to prove to the girl how he is not like the "other guys" who just want to get laid.
2. Feminism with its "respect women" slogans has filled guys with so much shame, they now believe that pushing for sex in a relationship is wrong and if they only give it more time and reach an emotional compatibility with the girl she will initiate sex "at the right time when she's ready".
3. Most guys are just filled with deep anxiety when it comes to showing sexual interest in a girl. Hence when they see they're getting anywhere with one girl they don't wana "rock the boat" and do anything stupid to not fuck it up. The scarcity mentality takes hold of them to counter which they buy into the soulmate myth and Oneitis.

Workout

"There are two kinds of pain. The sort of pain that makes you strong, or useless pain. The sort of pain that's only suffering. I have no patience for useless things."

—Frank Underwood, House of Cards.

I don't want to tell you to workout so that you "stay fit" or because you can "be healthy" or "live longer" (what are you gonna do living for long anyway?) or not get type-2 dibeties, those are all "right thing to do" answers, like when girls tell you all they want is a 'nice guy'. Fuck that.

Do this for POWER. Picture a situation in which a really ripped guy walks into a room vs a thin tall or a fat slob walking into a room, who do you think immediately commands respect? Who do you think intimidates (yes intimidate is what i mean) everyone? The one with the fucking 6000000inch belly fat, dark circles, a puffed up face due to drinking daily? The thin tall guy with arms like fucking noodles? Or this guy?

Evolution has programmed us to notice when someone really ripped crosses your path, just as it has programmed our dicks to start reacting when katrina kaif is on TV and to turn into a steel rod if she's sitting on it. In our hunter gatherer days Achillies physique would signify strength and neo cortex would very well hold us back from fucking with him because it wants us to survive, while that threat no longer exists the psychological intimidating effect still does.

And this will help you all the more with the step 2 above. On whose dick you think evolution has programmed katrina (or all of them) to sit on?

Read

"Reading improves your vocabulary and increases your brain cells" is the usual trite fed to kids, no wonder only a miniscule percent of the population reads. Of course now you want to tell me about how many copies of harry potter soldout or scoopwhoop's web traffic but simply put those things should not even be considered as reading.

Here too the usual doing the "right thing" reasons are given to get people to read, as a result of which people who read scoopwhoop at work go all " i love to read " in their heads.

This is the most powerful medium to gain knowledge, ideas and understand the world. To understand the intricasies of all existence and live a life completely aware of them. See where I am going here, I'm going towards POWER.

Here are the books you should be reading—we'll keep it simple first, start with The Road Less Travelled by M.Scott Peck and then move on to Atlast Shrugged by Ayn Rand. More suggestions in a later post.

Feminism's war against men

Penile guilt

So these four Indian men have admitted to be ashamed of having a penis. Chang even wishes he was a woman! They are apologising to the feminine for the all the rapes and patriachy by men, thus taking the notion of collective guilt to new heights. But hold on aren't these the same people who tell us how "all muslims are not terrorists and islam has nothing to do with terror" and how terrorism is just a few individuals misusing a "religion of peace", all this even when few people having ever suggested all muslims are terrorists, most have called for criticising islamist doctrines which truth be told is the case with all monotheistic religions: violence, conversion, conquering are just the characteristics.

The same feminists who talk of individual actions in the terror discussion have decided that in intergender dynamics all men are always guilty and that collective responsibility should be the norm. Doesn't matter how specific a case of rape it is, all "men are pigs" and all of us are rapists as well. Once someone yelled on TimesNow that "this nation is at war with women". We'll see who has waged war further in this post. And they're not likely to apologize for it either but rather proud of revenge. Let's go in to details.

"Promises"

India has a very special law which states if a man promises marriage and has sexual intercourse with a woman and later the relationship sours and breaks-up that would be rape! Read it again. The woman can literally file an FIR against you for rape and throw you in jail, such is the power granted to them by laws which feminists have pushed for. Of course it goes without saying there's no inverse here for the man, the woman can break off and the man can do nothing about it. Many women across the country have used this as a tool to force marriage and revenge. The courts have taken note of this misuse of law but still there's no debate being pushed for, neither by the media nor by the political class for the former, women are the prime consumers of media, advertising, cosmetic industry while for the latter the women have become a considerable votebank.

Let's devote a little time to understand why this law is outright stupidity. In course of relationships, couples do make certain committements and "promises" but as is human life, circumstances change and relationships come to an end. Feminists who are blinded by revenge against men for patriachy of the last thousands of years want to paint this with the brush that "men fool and use women" for sex. Certainly that happens and it happens both ways, the laws have no role to enter personal relationships like this and the interference has just played into the hands of really broken women who use it for personal vendetta.

On top of that the very feminists who want women to be "independent, smart and forward thinking" also want to depict women as naive and innocent children who just fall for "promises" and follow you to the bedroom. They want to change the horses mid race to suit their agenda. As we shall below how the champions of "working and career oriented ambitious women" want to arm women with laws to destroy men financially in event of a divorce.

"women don't want your money" (just 50%!)

So women are postponing their divorce proceedings to avail our government's charity to them in event of a divorce by seizing away the man's 50% inherited wealth. Here's what one woman waiting for a divorce has to say in DNA:

Divorce lawyer Mrunalini Deshmukh says a few of her female clients, especially those from affluent families, are adopting the wait-and-watch approach before rushing for a divorce. “They stand to gain a lot more from the husband’s property if the Bill in its current form becomes an Act,” she said. “You hurt the person where it hurts him the most, and money plays an important role.”

Firstly let's bring up alimony for a sec, it's weird that only the wife gets the alimony. And what's interesting is the subconscious unspoken rule in culture to never point it out, the man doing so is "not man enough!". HAHA! look at how they set the game and make the rules too.

If fact the feminist movement scoffs at men for paying on dates, it's almost an insult to these women—"you can't buy a woman's love", "women can pay for themeselves", "i don't need a man to pay for me", "i don't want your money I got my own!"..oh the list just goes on. And today every women's organisation supports the bill to rip men off and destroy them financially in event of a divorce. And here's the sweet taste of revenge:

no sorry?

Also note there's no pre-nuptial agreement system in India as in the west. In today's feminist poisoned environment a pre-nup is your best bet against ending up on the street because the girl "just didn't feel in love anymore" or "you weren't the one". If you are an educated man in urban India, there's a high chance you will marry an educated woman and that my friends is all the more risk, of course on this they will throw the "men are scared of powerful independent women" feminist meme at you which of course is a strawman, but yes when the woman has the legal power to cheat on you at work, then initiate divorce and take half of what you own (or even inherited if the new law becomes a reality), scared you must be. The educated empowered women have long been the foot-soldiers of feminism, all you have to do follow their facebook status updates for all videos, memes and more of how women are empowered. In the end the culture today which is effectively teaching girls straight out of school "to divorce him right there and find happiness" and "never compromise on your happiness" marriage seems nothing less than a bad investment.

Of course I hear a lot many "this is just paranoia, it would never happen to me"..which I do grant is the right attitude to have in life regarding such awful calamities like an deadly earthquake/ a hyper-feminist wife/GF but at the same time I think it was Sheldon cooper who said "everyone says it'll never happen until it does".

And if and when a prenup system is ever proposed be prepared to hear them yell on the TV about how "anti-women" the law would be. The usual last resort then is taken in the "child care" argument. A childcare fund can be easily setup between the couple and an amount can be calculated for it, it is no argument to handover 50% of inherited wealth to the wife! And since child custody is one of the most important issues in an divorce, it's all the better to settle them in advance.

In the next part we will look at feminist narratives like "thousands of years of patriachy" and who these feminists really are and look deep into the ideology itself.

Hating Ideas

if the majority could have its way

People are scared of ideas and I mean have serious contempt for them, of course when you bring up something complex like politics, religion, marriage they will join the conversation and act like being really interested in the discussion which if you really notice is just an impulse to give out an opinion, and god help you if you take it on its face value and make the mistake of thinking that the person wants to discuss the issue and state a counter point. In your defence it's true you can never be sure about who is genuinely interested in discussing an idea as you are but if this position the best bet is to just nod, agree and move the topic sports and movies!

It's for good reason that many "talking to people" books advice never getting into an argument or broaching up hard topics in a conversation (follow it). But like I said, most of us really interested in ideas bring them up believing in the fallacy that "this is obvious, everyone gets it" (they don't). Also this says something about the majority of the population from the fact that anything complex which requires hard thinking has to be shunned from the social sphere.

Hating books

When you hate ideas, books are an natural enemy, of course if your reading list sticks to the currently best-selling crap then everyone's at peace with you. You violate that principle and see how people just wait for you to burn. Recently someone gave me her pearls of wisdom of "never reading philosophy and psychology..it'll change you and you will judge people". Interesting, here's someone terrified of ideas because they "hurt you and your brain can't handle". I expect someone to jump up with "HA! see you are judging people in this post itself"..well sad to break it to you everybody is judging everyone all the time, there's just no escaping that.

So if you are into reading philosophy and have strong views about the role of religion or relationships/marriage or how the government should function in human society or even so much as criticize their tastes in movies a bit too harsh then you are going to be very disappointed. People will nod and give opinions (mostly subjective feelings) which is just their solipsistic thinking of "I know stuff too". Here's how Robert Greene puts it:

Law 38:

Think as you like but Behave like others

If you make a show of going against the times, flaunting your unconventional ideas and unorthodox ways, people will think that you only want attention and that you look down upon them.  They will find a way to punish you for making them feel inferior.  It is far safer to blend in and nurture the common touch. Share your originality only with tolerant friends and those who are sure to appreciate your uniqueness.

Don't be so sure of the "tolerant friends" either. As already mentioned everyone is prone to solipsism i.e. to take things in a personal, subjective stride and evaluate them on how it makes them feel. If only this solipsism is kept in check by a constantly conscious effort to strive for objectivity, is any discussion possible. You will have to be a judge to figure out who is ready to put in that effort of striving for objectivity around you. 

Consciousness > Introversion and Extroversion

A few years back that someone told me "we're both INTPs" on whatsapp. Now it's always fun to hear someone's idea about yourself, isn't it? And there I was on an internet spiral, the next half hour was then spent reading all about INTPs, the myers-briggs test and the 16 or so personality types myers-briggs identifies. While reading the INTP profile, I remember "how fuck did they figure all this out about me" going in the back of head constantly. Go through the comments on one such forums and you'll get a many "It's so weird to see someone else completely figuring you out!" 

Here's an INTP profile summary:

As an INTP, your primary mode of living is focused internally, where you deal with things rationally and logically. (goose bumps begin)

INTPs value knowledge above all else. Their minds are constantly working to generate new theories, or to prove or disprove existing theories.

The INTP has no understanding or value for decisions made on the basis of personal subjectivity or feelings.

For the INTP, it is extremely important that ideas and facts are expressed correctly and succinctly.

They are likely to express themselves in what they believe to be absolute truths. Sometimes, their well thought-out understanding of an idea is not easily understandable by others, but the INTP is not naturally likely to tailor the truth so as to explain it in an understandable way to others.

The INTP is usually very independent, unconventional, and original. They are not likely to place much value on traditional goals such as popularity and security.

They love new ideas, and become very excited over abstractions and theories. They love to discuss these concepts with others (the others don't!).

And finally,

Their natural drive to turn theories into concrete understanding may turn into a feeling of personal responsibility to solve theoretical problems, and help society (unfortunately it starts with those around first, mauling their cosy little existence of self-deceptions, illusions, automatic respect etc) move towards a higher understanding. 

Feel like a beauty pageant winner already—finally somewhere someone probably half way around the world "gets me". Thank you, thank you carl jung..(tears rolling).  Also good to know I'm not completely insane, phew!

After this I found susan's TED talk on introversion and her book quiet(which I didn't bother reading). I realised the introversion extroversion debate is quiet hot on the internet with mostly introverts being portrayed as some sort of victims with articles like "things not to say to introverts" and non-stop barrage about how the introvert brain just seeks stimuli in a very different way than an extrovert's does.

True, introverts can have a hell of a time reading how religion (along with many other things) was just an mechanism to control people (crimes and otherwise) in the ancient times since in the absence of CCTVs cameras and 24-hour emergency services a supernatural cop keeping watch all the time got the job done (perhaps not so well, that's for an different post!), or how India could have easily been a first-world rich and prosperous country if it weren't for the scumbag today glorified has "architect of modern India" or get a sweet boner looking at an infograph which puts events in an timeline right from the current moment till the big bang.

While their counterparts—the extroverts are busy discussing MTV roadies, splitsvilla, bigboss and talking about a live sports match on their facebook wall, you read it right—not in the chat but on the fucking wall commenting back and forth while uploading in another tab the 200 pics they took while at the cheapest pub they could afford last weekend!

So yes the brain stimuli part is all correct but the thin line when such generalizations begin to fail is dropping an very important aspect which is—(drumroll please)—consciousness. Which means humans can take charge and change and learn stuff. This annoyed Ayn Rand too: 

In psychology, one may observe the attempt to study human behaviour without reference to the fact that man is conscious.

The damage begins when an introvert reads his own personality like this, he might just set it his subconsciousness that this is "who he is", and whole process is set in the reverse so next time when he is at a party he doesn't even make an attempt to talk and rationalizes it with the "I'm an introvert, this is who I am, it's ok" recorder constantly playing in the background. The horoscope columns in newspapers or anywhere else work in this similar manner, you read it first and then your mind tries to connect what you read with your actual circumstance and you get the "this kinda connects with my situation" feeling. Your brain tries to fit what you read into your life and the introverts might just make the same mistake about fitting into the personality type box they read.

As mentioned above Man is conscious. In fact it's all the more rewarding if the introvert goes out of his way and decides to be Dale fucking Carnegie. Agreed the culture is more leaning towards "how you say it (and how you look!) triumphs what you say" philosophy which is just because majority of the population is the sensing type who are just feeling their way through life. So it's just obvious how powerful one can get if he has got both the how and what figured out.

Extroverts on the other hand are not going to be much impacted by what is written about them as they're hardly likely to ever read it in the first place being as busy as they are reading their facebook wall and buzzfeed. If you are one and you got to this line then pat yourself on the back and go pick up a copy of Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.

So it can be very helpful (and fun) to know and understand yourself in this dichotomy but ultimately consciousness triumphs and you can always learn a lot from the other side.

Christian Tricks Or Tricked Christians?

This started with the Modi vs Rahul debate (people are still having those!) on a guy's wall who wrote the following status update: 

Like always it took the turn to the communal vs secular land and someone said the following:

Now the comment in the above screenshot is actually true, there's a sect of christianity by the name jehovah's witnesses out on the streets of Mumbai armed with the-only-book-they've-read (bible!) to stop you and tell you about the world coming to an end, how you can be prepared for the same if you follow their favourite-and-the-only-book-they've-ever-read which has all the answers. These morons are also known to reject blood transfusions because god says so. But all that aside.

Since these people stop almost anybody right busy roads they mostly come across Hindus (putting marathis, punjabis all under one umbrella) because of course that's the majority in Mumbai. And it's natural that if you are a believer in a certain faith you would get upset on some random guy shoving his book in your face and telling you that's the real thing and not the one you've been into (now the fact that all are equally and absolutely wrong is for a different post). So kapadia getting upset and making the above comment was totally legit. 

What's interesting are the christian responses to it. Take a look:

It has always been a disturbing fact that there young people on this planet with 24/7 internet connection, who can read english, are decently smart people mostly graduate level educated and still actually fucking believe in a GOD! I mean all this information literally at your fingers and you still get up on sundays (or as per your day) to pray. Fine. 

Institutionalized religions especially monotheistic ones have some "chosen ones" (priests and nuns!) some among them running massive conversion campaigns in third world countries like India. While its bad enough that people believe in a god, it's an absolute fucking disaster that they can't even call on the BS that is being fed to them by these "chosen ones". 

Any person of average intelligence must agree that stopping people on the road and promoting your religion (while simultaneously degrading theirs) with the sole intent of getting them to convert to it is beyond ridiculous.

I expected at least one christian to come along in the comment thread and say: "Yes that's wrong, tell them to fuck off!" but you have the picture above. So are these young people so brainwashed? Instead of staying on the topic and coming up with one rational thought and making a point or even just saying they don't want to talk about it and moving on they go on with "Jesus will bless and forgive you" and "you'll know one day" the latter one is an outright threat, which translates to: The devil's going to peel off your skin in hell.

Here's how they would play, given a harder set of questions:

Q:The bible says the world is 6000 years old (right after the wheel was invented..!) that's absolute rubbish you know right?
Ans: you know not what you say, jesus will bless and forgive you!!

Q:Jesus was probably a normal man with some really good thoughts and ideas and later the miracles got added to his life story and the whole myth came in to being, like the books on Shiva have come out—The immortals of mehua. The theory is "" what do you think about that?
Ans: yes please say what you want, jesus will bless and forgive you!!

Q:How can they claim the bible to be true? No body has any proof anyway, miracles? seriously?!
Ans: you don't get it now, one day you will (in hell? wow so forgiving of you!).

Makes me wonder if these are just christian tricks to avoid arguments (because they have none) or tricked christians so brainwashed with dogma that there's no point of return. And sadly and unfortunately it seems the latter.
 

Automatic Respect

Respect must be earned, not given.

Your elder brother - bhaiya, sister - didi, the brother's wife is bhabhi and they all have to be addressed as "aap". This is so engrained in the Indian culture that there's probably a term for all these relations in most Indian languages as well. It doesn't just end with terms, an elder's views and ideas all must be revered as well and without argument or even an inch of doubt — be it about international politics, bodybuilding, god or life on mars for that matter. The interesting part is that most people are aware that their elders are mostly wrong and the elders are aware that the juniors hardly take anything they say seriously or act on their advice but both the sides play their part in keeping up the act. Talk about a room of naked people all complementing each other on the beauty of the other's garments. I call the whole act an expectation and fulfilling of automatic respect.

The guy can't marry his girlfriend because of his mother's wishes but the mother also wanted him to have nothing to do with girls in the first place and just be a virgin, which the mother already knows isn't happening but she continous "have nothing to with girls" advice anyway. It's almost as if there's some psychological payback in the mother's head for just giving out the "correct" advice, knowing all fully well it's most probably not being followed and knowing all the more well never to bring that up. The son totally knows his mother is well aware of what those hours of phone calls are all about. Both parties keep the automatic respect act up and going.

Take the daughter who gets home new clothes, new shoes, is on the phone most of the time but the parents act like it's the tooth fairy and that one line advice of staying away from guys is dished out every once in a while.

Grown up adults hide their cigarrette packets from one's parents who obviously know the person smokes. Granted one doesn't have to literally blow smoke up anyone's face but the whole act of covering up such completely trivial things as a teenager would is silly at best.

Religions have been expecting AR since the begining of time. All religions and everything related to them has been automatically put out of purview of rational discourse and questioning. The usual excuse given is to prevent "hurting sentiments and feelings" but here too it's interesting to note that only the "religious feelings" are given this priviledge. Take for example politics, economics or any other field into which people invest a lot more emotionally than in religion but feelings and emotions here are just not given this protection at all.

Another certain type of AR dynamic I have observed is when a rather heavy topic of discussion is broached up in a group setting and it soon becomes obvious that only one or few members actually know the ins and outs of the subject and the rest are just chimming in to give an opinion and sound smart, the ones with the know-how usually sense an uncomfortable feeling going forward and stating any facts at all, just so as to protect the egos of those dishing out nonsense.

The purpose of writing this is to foster some thought as to why are people so scared to point out something which is wrong and retrograde to their own elders or disagree with them. One doesn't have to be a dick doing this but just politely disagree and put forth your point the next time your someone tells you about "India being the greatest country" or that the west has no morals. 

Violence on Our Streets

don't you just walk away when they say things?...remember that.

After recent rapes, eve teasing, some incidents of racial teasing(not sure what else to call it) have brought back the discussion on "what would you do if.." you are witnessing a crime like this. And now there are YouTube videos faking scenes in which a girl is getting raped in a closed van with tinted windows which is just recorded voices, a north easterner being called "chinki", "chini" and gauging the response of the passers-by. As expected very few actually stand up to the criminals and the video tells us in bold letters "Indians are cowards" or at least that's the implicit conclusion. One of the film makers also enlightens us that "people are scared of getting in trouble with the police" which is the main reason for no one standing up to help their fellow men.

Try putting yourself in one such scenario and see if the "fear of the police" is the only thing keeping you from standing up to criminals. There are some more fears at work here - the fear of a broken jaw or of get your guts ripped out. And these seems lost to these "social experiments". There is this huge context-dropping as Ayn Rand would probably put it at play in these short films.

#1

Take the scene of a north easterner being bullied by a man. They want you to believe that it's going to be a nice dude in jeans and glasses softly defending and even trying to convince you (in english) of his right to call someone "chinki". The Nido incident in Delhi, it were four or more men at a pan stall who beat him with sticks rods till the end for "standing up" to them. All they want is you to stand up to the man. Now—is the man is armed? What's his physical strength? What's yours? How many are they? How many are you? What if he breaks your jaw at the first slightest provocation or stabs you? No answer. You must stand up or you are a coward is the judgement they want to pass.

The Psychology of The BAN

ask why?

                                      
 "Good the dance bars were banned, it saved so many families!"

"Nonsense!! all those girls lost their jobs for no fault of theirs."

" their jobs??!! . .Screw them yaar.. married men were throwing their hard earned money on these girls destroying their own families"

"That's an emotional response, you think banning will make people any more responsible? They lose control it's their fault, their problem .. top of this what is the bar's fault, you really think banning has stopped dance bars? It's just driven an entire legitimate business underground like with gambling, prostitution, drugs. This has just increased corruption in the police force and corrupted otherwise moral and honest officers because there's only so many assaults your morality can take..."

"noway those men lose control and get addicted to these dance bars and splurge money on drinks and visits..gambling is also destroying lives as people lose control and gamble their entire wealth away and ruin families"

"exactly.. "their money....their wealth..they earned it"..why would you want govt to play nanny here? It's for the families and those people to take responsibility and not be stupid about what they do..and again do you really think banning has done anything? NO! again it's driven the whole legitimate enterprise underground and now mafia controls most of it as the govt, law enforcement none can regulate or monitor it because it doesn't exist on paper. Legalizing all of it will create jobs, give govt revenue in taxation, govt agencies can regulate it, keeping the mafia out and most of all I don't even want to give you these justifications. I and many others can control our gambling like we control our drinking, gambling or visits to the brothel and would rather appreciate the govt keeping out of our lives and let us have fun!"