How to Win at the Dating Scene and Reproduce.

Hey Everyone and thanks for reading:

Now first let me apologise for not posting for a very long time. I know my fans are hellbent on following what I say and this is how it's going to go down.

I thank you for that:

I haven't updated my blog for some time and I am flattered at the response I've had from the posts I made some years ago now let me get into it. I was thinking about how I used to feel as a young man in England who was not an athletic type or a ''Jock" as they say in the USA. There were boys at school who were oblivious to their air amongst the other boys and the girls therein. There were also boys who felt and were treated with utter disdain amongst that crowd and I found this to be quite unkind and unfair at that time.

The Columbine massacre boys were fiercely jealous of the jocks and confused about how to interpret their burgeoning sexuality and their reception with the women in their school year. This hierarchical confusion drove them to go on a massacre in the school since they were Doom players and spent an enormous number of hours playing that game (didn't we all).  The explanation is quite simple to us: These boys were likely raised in a pro spanking household and their fathers worked in the weapons industry. That is my view. Their whole childhood was tainted by weapons and violence from the way their family supports themself right through American gun culture and a daily diet of first person shooter action online.

When I was at school I was blessed with a stable family life and school life. In those days it was wired into my brain that women were superior to men and that if you were less than the best then no woman would ever have sex with you.

All of my childhood I somehow had it wired in my mind that I was a worthless human being because I wasn't sexy. I wasn't 'hard' (whatever that means) I was Mr. Average. I was crap at football, crap at running, crap at most sports. I was skinny.

When I left school at 16 I loved it because I felt that I was released from the binding scrutiny of my forced classmates and could live anew amongst people I never met before. This was true and my college life in 1995/7 was great. 

I was happy to smoke and drink as much as I wanted but the one chasm that could not be filled was the sexual variety. Make no mistake: I was DJing and had some great nights filled with all sorts of things but not that.

I know how it feels to be a man who is intelligent, qualified and able bodied but ultimately ON THE MOTHERFUCKING SCRAP HEAP.

So how did I fix this?

No, I'm not going to give you a story about how I had some freak occurrence or whatever, no.

I went on a holiday with workmates to Thailand and we went there to drink and party and have fun. I met my wife there during that trip and I had something to work with right there.

The beauty of Thailand is that the girls approach the men and not the other way around. This is very good for successful men who hate the British dating scene and are lacking in self confidence as a result of feminism. They can be brought out of their shells. A lot of men including myself were not accustomed to being treated with adulation by young girls. To be approached and shown interest by these girls was incredible.

What I did from this revelation in Thailand is to marry a girl who actually wanted to be with me and we are now approaching our 10th wedding anniversary.

We have a beautiful son together and we work together to achieve a common goal.

I can honestly say that without the influence of my wife who I met in Thailand I would have been permanently disabled by lack of self confidence through spiteful feminist mental hangups that were transmitted to me via mainstream media and my own interactions.

The trouble with the dating scene here in the Western World is that womens' standards are too high when they are at peak sexual market value. They know the welfare state will step in and pay for their heedless behaviour and the results of their actions so they choose the good looking guy over the level headed provider. They don't need to put as much effort into selecting a partner who will stick around and provide for the family during pregnancy and child rearing. The welfare state has turned children from a liability to an asset. When women know they will get paid more benefits for having more children and their actions no longer have the traditional consequences, only the thuggish brutes and the idiots get to have sex with them when they are at peak sexual market value. 

In the Far East the tables are turned back to a traditional setup where there is no state to pay for these women and they are reliant on their husband, family and local community to support them during their child bearing years. A bad choice of partner results in social ostracism and a top quality husband is no longer possible if she has another man's children in tow. For this reason women in the Far East generally select a professional man of intelligence and average looks over the dimwitted bulldogs that get so much action back home.

It's a much more level playing field in the real world when the welfare state is not interfering with the natural order of things. Male sexual market value is turned on its head in the West because of the things I mentioned earlier.

A female has peak sexual market value (SMV) between 18-27 but a man peaks a lot later when he has a proven track record of earning potential and mental stability. Women of peak SMV, if they want a husband of equal age need to take a gamble on the future of that man because the younger they are, the less of a known quantity they are. They have the highest earning years in front of them and so an educated guess needs to be made that they will stick around and reach that professional goal in the future. 

This is why women who previously bypassed these older men of lower physical appearance clamour around once they've passed peak attractiveness because their priority is to have it both ways and acquire a man who will pick up the tab for their past and pay for another man's children. This is the product of the liberal left destroying and discouraging marriage. They tell women it's fine to wait until you're 40 to have kids. The fact is, yes it is possible but egg quality has dropped away significantly by then and so has physical attractiveness. The left wrongly says women can have a university education, a fully fledged career and also be a good parent but this is false. It is not more important to answer phones in an office and have business meetings than to raise and nurture the future generation of your own family and civilisation. Motherhood is the number one job and should not be spoken about as if having a career is superior to motherhood and full time parenting.

Wherever the state interferes, expect it to nosedive. Single motherhood is one of the biggest threats to western civilisation today and it is almost never discussed in a frank and honest way in the mainstream.

Thanks for reading and I hope this provokes some interesting new thoughts for you.

Remembrance Day

Facebook is full of gushing sentimentality for the armed forces. There is almost a built in safeguard in the makeup of most Brits of post World War Two heritage to inhibit or prevent any form of criticism of the soldiers that came before them. There is also an argument that the actions of the soldiers allowed us in the modern day to voice their opinions in the first place.

All such arguments have been trotted out time and time again. I understand them.

What I want to know is how can those that are still enveloped in the matrix still be able to say these things and can do so with little or no sense of irony or criticism?

It is not realistic nor provable to say that there would be no freedom of speech in a world where Hitler won the war.  Exactly how many individual variables are you prepared to demonstrate with non existent or presumptuous evidence before you are off on a limb of stupidity?

These things look great when a dick head says, "where's your evidence?" from a crowd. I'd like to know where his evidence is as well.

The point of World War Two and One, the Vietnam War, Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction and 9/11 is that the whole thing is built on a monumental LIE.

WW1 was easy to get support for because the mainstream newspapers had a captive audience of followers. They were God fearing church goers anyway that made it a piece of cake. They were bred to believe that God was on their side and that was all there was to it. Utterly devoted to the figurehead of the state the monarch who essentially did nothing.  All those poor wise men who objected to taking another man's life were discredited as cowards or simply shot by their own people as deserters. Disgraceful. Where did "Thou shalt not kill" fit into this?

WW2 was much the same as above. There was little in the way of TV or radio but the radio that was there was already being used to broadcast rousing reports of victory and propaganda that demonised one race or people against another when it suited them. The stupid citizens still ended up sniping on one another for daring to question the system in place but, hey, religion was still strong and churches still full.

As far as WW2 is concerned Germany was a broken economy and there was no way they could go from a depression to being a world dominating threat in such a short space of time without any external help. George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush was amongst the key players who built up the Nazi war machine. So here we see that the USA build the enemy up to then try and knock them down.

So, I don't blame the people who join the armed forces. I feel sorry for them.  They don't realise how utterly hopeless their situation is and, no, God is not on your side or anyone elses.  There is no evidence of the existence of a God; Biblical, Quaranic or otherwise. What there is evidence for is that the ruling classes are brainwashing and manipulating the media, the people and the soldiers themselves to make sure that they go to their £18k a year bullet in the chest job believing that they are right and that by shooting someone else's husband or son is just a job.

This is my Poem for Remembrance day:

Never forget.

Never forget the innocent civilians who died during the wars.

Never forget the civilians that were not killed but their lives or mental health was destroyed by their experiences during the wars.

Never forget the people who were injured but not killed during the wars.

Most of all, never forget that all the wars that ever were created were created out of greed and delusion. The so called "leaders" that started these wars were not getting their hands dirty. They were just advancing their careers. They are the aristocratic bloodlines of old that are completely devoid of any remorse, empathy or compassion. These politicians and monarchs are heartless killing machines that don't give a shit about the soldiers and their families.

So let's remember the victims alive and dead but let's also understand that bombing our fellow humans for any reason is unacceptable and education and awakening from delusion is the only way to bring about peace.

Awaken! Awaken! Awaken!

Why Conservatism is the Natural Way.

Greetings and thanks for tuning in.

What would the perfect world system look like?  In terms of politics we have a traditional choice of the left versus the right.

In Buddhism we have the Four Noble Truths.

In nature we have survival of the fittest and natural selection, right?

The way to be true and honest to oneself is to deal in facts and testable truths; not opinion or that which can be subject to interpretation.  It's only through letting go of predetermined beliefs and ideas and being open minded can we learn about or see reality clearly.  The way to approach this topic is to just see.

The left wing or Communist position is that everyone is equal and is in open opposition of peoples' diversity of views, abilities and lifestyle choices. We can observe this in North Korea or Cuba.  Everyone must be identical.  This obviously flies in the face of the way things are in reality.  Straight away we have an un-natural, artificial way of life that is in direct opposition to reality.  It is from this starting point we must look at our own Labour and Liberal Democrat parties here in the UK.  They are both centre-left parties.  It takes a keen eye to pick out these differences when we're dealing with centre this, centre that politics.

The right wing or Conservative position is that everyone is individual and has their own personality, ideas, beliefs and abilities.  We are all different.  The right wing model encourages independence and self determination. The individual is at liberty to create their own success or failure through their own actions and the way they conduct themselves in the world.

In nature we can see that the animal and plant kingdom is based on the success of individual species over the environment and their rivals.  There is no intervention from another artificial body that evens the balance and supposedly makes things fairer for one species over another.  That would be the left wing way: Such a shame that these poor gazelles are killed and eaten by the cheetah.  Let's fit the cheetah with bells so that the gazelle can hear them approaching and get away quickly!  See how silly that would be?  At once the natural way of things, the balance is disturbed and no longer in tune with the way things are.  Is it a good thing that the gazelle gets away and the cheetah starves to extinction?  What effect would artificially over populating the land with gazelles have?  This tinkering with the natural order of things is quite dangerous.

In the human world the same system is at work.  Survival of the fittest is the natural way of things.  When we artificially boost up a weak part of society we are in direct conflict with reality.  This is why the welfare state must be dramatically reformed so that only the truly deserving receive help.  Those that through targeted assistance can become independent again and not reliant on the state.  Keeping massive populations of the useless and economically inactive people who all crave and desire more and more food and riches is immoral and a real disservice to the taxpayers that support them.

It is indefensible to believe that we should allow this system to continue and I'll explain why:

Looking at the first of the Four Noble Truths we see that it is true that suffering exists.  This is not a supernatural belief is it?  Everyone is subject to suffering and dissatisfaction.  There is no denying that there is not a single person or alive that has not or will never experience dissatisfaction or suffering.

The second Noble Truth is that this suffering is caused by desire and aversion.  Like and dislike, grasping on to that which is not permanent or lasting.  This is the natural human disposition whether we like it or not!!

When we apply this to politics in the real world we can conclude that the only way to real happiness is to find a way to alleviate this problem.  How do we find lasting happiness?  Ask yourself this.  Based on our current understanding of observing the purity of the animal and plant kingdom and how they operate how do we achieve this?  Do we see animals exhibiting gluttony and disproportionate levels of greed when compared to the others?  Not usually.  That would lean me to the belief that they are living correctly and in tune with the way things are and humans are not.  It is very rare or perhaps never before witnessed to find an animal in the wild that is obese and consumes more than is necessary to live a normal, healthy life.

Humans always have a community spirit.  They are sociable creatures by default.  This has nothing to do with religious indoctrination whatsoever.  The cavemen were community oriented.  They also helped each other for the common good.  They were compassionate in the same way as we are today.  Just because somebody is a right winger doesn't make them any less compassionate or generous.  It means they have a more pure and natural generosity that shines through when they see a deserving person in need.  People will always donate to a worthy cause and not an unworthy cause.

The position we have in a left wing country is people that are supported by the welfare state and not encouraged to better themselves.  The weak are allowed to prosper and by that I mean pull down and hinder the progress of the host country.  The way to tackle this is either to a) make them so successful that they can support and fund their own thirst for riches and gadgetry or b) educate them to understand that ultimately their quest for hedonism and material possessions is misguided.  It is not a problem (at least for the host country) if a rich business man lives a rich lifestyle since he is earning it by his own skills and talent.  This is not an issue.  But.........

Both the middle class family and the underclass family need to understand that their only path to lasting happiness is to extinguish their desires and reduce their consumption of non essential things.  When you understand that cigarettes, beer or a new car do not bring any real contentment then true freedom can begin.  It's ironic really.  Only through letting go of things do we get true happiness.  To educate yourself out of craving will deliver real happiness.

In Britain we should be allowed to be more responsible for our fellow man and the welfare state should be dismantled and converted to a charitable model.  The deserving will always find a way as is true in the natural world (and we all live in the natural world whether we believe it or not!)  Instead of a hardworking family being forced to contribute through taxes to the welfare system and subsidise an army of the undeserving, we should reduce taxes for the hardworking and make work and self determination pay.  This is the right wing way.  The left want to increase taxes on the successful working man to keep somebody else on their sofa.  This is completely unfair.

The Communist system being in conflict with reality really boils down to this:

In order to make a flat socialist system work we would first have to create a population who have no sense of greed or want.  Zero cravings or desire would have to exist voluntarily otherwise dissatisfaction would result out of being denied the right to better oneself or be more successful than your neighbour.  A left wing system would therefore stifle competition amongst people and progress in science and medicine would be slowed down dramatically.  Progress only comes when people are allowed the freedom to get creative and go where their imagination leads them.  

Regarding charity and compassion this is not an on/off issue as some left leaning people will try and make out.  We do not need to be forced to help someone in genuine need.  A conservative country will naturally be charitable and compassionate.  This is morality is built in to us from the start.  You can call it moral instinct if you like.  It is not planted there by religion or teaching.  Even ants will carry the wounded back to the nest.

Anyway this has gone on long enough.  I leave you with this thought: If communism and left wing politics was the best way for mankind why has it failed and is still failing the countries who embraced it?

Byyyeeeeeee!!!!!

George Orwell Will Be Right.

This morning I woke up to the news that the Labour Party want to ban smoking in cars carrying children. Straight away I picked up my iPhone. It's Facebook and Twitter time. 

"I am an ex smoker but this banning smoking in your own car when driving is yet another erosion of our freedom. No, no, no!"

"If they get away with banning smoking in cars they'll be round your house setting up social services cctv monitoring your parenting and making sure you "remember to tell your kids to vote Labour.""

Now admittedly at first I misunderstood the report and thought they were saying banning all smoking in private cars. The actual report was only cars carrying children. My opinion on this is mixed. Now I don't dispute that exposing children to tobacco smoke has some level of effect on them but that's just it.  I stop at 'some level.' In the same way as climate change apologists try to blame all human activity for these changes, so there is this same thing happening with smoking. They try and make it a black and white issue where it is most likely many shades of grey. I accept that smoking is harmful to health but exactly how harmful is the amount of smoke in a room in a house or a car travelling with the window open a crack?

A large percentage of adults of the age of 30 and above grew up successfully with smoking parents at home and in cars and I think any harm is minimal indeed. Is it really necessary to erode peoples' personal freedom for something that isn't really particularly harmful? This law would be more damaging to the liberty of the British people than the minimal harm it is supposed to stop. Imagine if you went to hospital with a ingrowing toenail and when you woke up they had amputated your leg just below the knee? A bit extreme, eh? That's how this proposed law feels to me. 

Parents should rightly refrain from smoking in the car when children or anyone who objects is present out of compassion and courtesy. My problem is that they want to enforce it by threats of punishment. This should be advisory only. Bearing in mind that smoking goes hand in hand with rebellion I think this is yet another Labour big brother law that will do nothing to prevent somebody who already has an ignorant and selfish attitude to life. How many people do you see talking on handheld mobile phones whilst driving even though it is supposedly banned and illegal?

I remember when they banned smoking in pubs we were told that they did it in Ireland and business wasn't affected. We all said pubs would close and they said no they wouldn't. Who is right now?

If they allow these types of laws to go through eventually we will be living in an Orwellian surveillance state where there will be CCTV set up in all homes with children living there. Faceless operatives will monitor everything we do at home and vet it against government guidelines. They will promote the policy on TV saying things like:

"CCTV has been proven to be one of the best sources of evidence in recent times."

"Remember folks: CCTV footage can also exonerate you from alleged crimes so it makes perfect sense to have your home monitored by our team of experts."

"If this policy saves one life it'll be worth it." - This most damaging and nonsensical phrase would then be switched back on to any protesters with this straw man argument:

"...so you are happy to see children being abused and wives beaten with their assailants getting away with it are you?? Answer me!! Are you in favour of domestic violence? Yes or no!!?!?!"


Soon there will be soundbites on television news of ordinary apathetic voters who have gotten used to their cameras in their homes. "Well, it was kinda weird at first but now we hardly notice it. Besides, if you don't do anything wrong you've got nothing to hide, have you?"

Get yourself a copy of 1984 and read it because that is where a centre left government will take you. George Orwell had a decent stab at the date but he is a lot closer to the truth than you may think.  

"Tony's" Computers

I remember working for "Tony's" Computer shop back in 2001. I was there for about 2/3 months. The story went like this:

It was about March / April 2001 when I left my employment with the first computer shop I worked at. I had been there since late August 1998. We were a decent outfit and I was pleased that I offered an honest service rather than simply extorting customers who knew no better. If a problem could be rectified without the need to spend money I would give that advice. It meant they'd trust me and return when a bigger job came along. This was my formula and it worked. I remembered taking custom away from "Tony's" Computers after they reported to me that they had been ripped off.

I was working at a pub between these two jobs and enjoying what I was doing there. One day I decided to pay a visit to "Tony's" Computers and had a discussion with the owner, "Tony," about my history at a rival business and the possibility of working for him. It was a key conversation in my life as I recall and one of the times I really put myself across confidently. I handed my notice in at the pub soon after and it was a real shame to let that bar job go since I was growing into it. I started working for Tony around August time of 2001 and it started out not too bad. I had a lot of advice to give and saw major problems with the business from after the first week or two. Looking back this was where my problems started. He didn't really want someone who could transform the operation into a successful one. There was one other employee there beside Tony who I will call “Nigel.” Nigel had been there a lot longer, maybe 2 or 3 years, and Nigel had the sort of thinly veiled disdain for Tony that one might see in a long suffering married couple. When we went up to the workshop in private he unloaded his frustration on to me similar to how Victor Meldrew on One Foot in the Grave might. I quickly saw why.

We would work 10am – 6pm Tuesday – Saturday. I drove a 1984 brown Mini 1000 at that time which I parked behind the shop. Tony drove a red VW Golf with a disproportionately large double exhaust pipe that made it sound like a tuk-tuk. A fitting vehicle to a man who existed on so many levels in life; some real and some not so real. We would go into the front of the shop, Tony would lift the shutters and we went in through the front door. The first port of call would be the back kitchen where tea would be made. A stainless steel teapot with a flippy lid was used with three tea bags to deliver our eye opener after the journey to work. The back kitchen also housed a small lavatory and a back exit door leading to the unremarkable and neglected yard so contrasted by the presentable frontages of the High Street businesses. We converged earlier on Tuesdays because we were required to participate in one of Tony's so called “progress meetings.” A vacuous event where we would sit at the back desk of the shop with notepads and the boss would demand to find out why we haven't figured out a way to make him a millionaire. This type of information he hopes to garner from two men who are paid the heady sum of £700 by cheque once a month. I had already discovered this guy was unwilling to change his way of working, therefore without taking the first step to allowing me to help him there was nothing I could do to help. This made the whole purpose of my being employed a waste. My message during my interview was that I can transform the business into a trusted one through delivering honest customer care. Days were filled with myself, Tony and Nigel being on a cyclic rota of working the front end of the shop, the back end of the shop or the first floor workshop. The upstairs was a mess. Shelves stacked up with empty retail boxes that needed to be thrown away. How would I ever achieve that if I was not allowed to change anything? What was I here for? The actual mechanics of the upstairs workshop was simple. Regardless of the competence of any owner / boss the PCs themselves would always work, fail and be fixed in the same way. This was the straight forward part. One of my friends whom I met in the first shop and still see today, “David,” also frequented this shop whilst I was here and we had some enjoyable exchanges whilst I was working there. The most notable of these was one morning when myself and David were stood in the front of the shop floor talking when a disgruntled customer came in. He demanded to speak to Tony and after a short while a scuffle broke out in the shop. David always was a hands on character and stepped in to help slamming this guy up against the a display board on the wall that had assorted items hanging from hooks. He told him to get out of here because he “didn't want anyone getting hurt.” A nice way of handling the situation and off the customer went but not after scooping a large quantity of CDROMs onto the floor smashing at least one in five. Good old David, I say. Naturally I was was quite taken aback by this incident and it started me wondering why this never occurred in my previous shop. Maybe because I didn't fleece the customers? Was it because I did an honest job? Yes. The training from Tony regarding how to work the front shop floor “sales” was as follows: “Don't do NOTHING except concentrate on sales,” said Tony. Being a disobedient gobshite “shirt” I disagreed. Was this what I came to the business for? To sell things to people regardless of whether it was suitable or necessary? No way! So this pattern continued for the weeks and months I was there. One day I was upstairs in the workshop when I heard about a plane crash in New York. I was surprised and this news turned out to be my discovery of the 9/11 terror attacks. Now we know where I was at the time it was taking place. Another time not long before or after then another ruckus started down in the shop whilst myself and Nigel were working upstairs. Another angry customer set upon Tony and this time with no David to step in! Oh dear. We stood together listening to the affair unfold like a excerpt from Rik and Ade's 90s sitcom “Bottom” complete with shrugs and cringes as the thuds and smashes were heard coming up from below. When it all went quiet we came down to see what happened and there he was. Tony with bloody nose dabbing with handkerchief but vehemently chastising us for not coming down to defend him. I mean what are we paid all this money for? Ha ha ha!!! Do you really want us to answer that question?

One day in September or October of 2001 I walked into another inane so called “progress meeting.” Except this time I was met with a broadside of criticism from Tony for failing to deliver the promise of business transformation. It was between 09:30 and 10:00am that morning and a pleasant autumnal day at that. Realising like I had a while previously that this man had no intention of taking any advice and, moreover, did not even capitalise on a defection from a more successful and popular rival business, I had one option left: I walked calmly through the back kitchen area, opened the door to the back yard, got into my brown Mini 1000 and drove back to Woolston.

Musa Basjoo Cuttings

Regarding the banana plant cuttings on the 26th of August, they turned out to be too small and went brown and died. Will try bigger ones next year if can.  It is true that they ought to be at least 2 feet tall before they are separated.

A note on morality.

I’ve been watching “The Atheist Experience” a lot on YouTube which is a show made by the Atheist Community of Austin in Texas. It is a live phone-in show and I highly recommend it. The majority of callers are either atheists themselves in various stages of de-conversion from a theistic religion (usually Christianity) or they are Christians who frequently attempt to justify their faith in God. A topic that often comes up is morality. The Christians will often ask how people would live morally and do the right thing without their religious beliefs. They think that the reason that they don’t just do whatever they want with no remorse or guilty conscience is because they fear the consequences from a supernatural source. This does not stand up to scrutiny however when we analyse it. If morality is determined by what a God says is right or wrong then theoretically it is possible for bad things to become moral. For example, if God decided to make rape a moral act then would it then become ok to go ahead and rape someone? If your moral compass comes from God’s word then surely you would have to accept it at face value. If God decided it was acceptable to steal then would a Christian start stealing? Of course not. So what is stopping an atheist from raping or stealing? The answer lies in human nature. Morality is an instinct based on compassion for others. We don’t break into peoples’ houses and take what we want when they are out because we understand what that must feel like for them. Humans can “put their feet in someone else’s shoes” as they say. I wouldn’t like it if that happened to me so I don’t do it to others.

The problem with a moral code built on a foundation of belief in the supernatural is that you really need to understand the Bible in great detail in case someone tests you on it. If you live by your own common sense, compassion for others and appreciation of the way things are then you simply draw upon your own personal experience if someone asks why you do (or avoid) what you do.

I’ve been looking at various sources on the Internet regarding morality in Buddhism and in some cases they would seem to steer me towards the law of karma. Karma is cause and effect and this is indeed a fine place to begin when dealing with decisions regarding right and wrong. The intention behind your actions is what decides the results of those actions or words. This makes sense.

Some sources I’ve looked at recently say that Buddhists believe the mind continues after the body dies. Another source said that after your body dies your cravings come back and are reborn in to some other body in the physical world. I personally think this is impossible to prove and is another example of theories that are not possible to prove. I wonder why some Buddhists feel the need to introduce the existence of the soul (or a similarly un-proveable version of a soul) into the religion. It is impossible to prove that anything continues after a person has died. Where they got this information from baffles me. But look at this connection:

If you teach people that the mind builds up good karma by living a moral life and that karma is transferable beyond this life after death, does this not remind us of theistic religions?

Be good, kind and believe = heaven

Be bad, selfish and disbelieve = hell

Likewise:

Be good, kind and build up good karma = good rebirth into better situation or no rebirth (nirvana)

Be bad, selfish, materialistic and build up bad karma = bad rebirth as animal i.e. dog.

This is, in my view the reason why some Buddhists still believe in this. Threatening someone with posthumous punishment in order to keep them in line should never be accepted in Buddhism. It cannot be proven to be true and therefore should not be part of it.

If I became a monk I would make it quite clear from the start that I reject anything that relies upon belief without evidence but am quite enthusiastically in agreement with the teachings of the Buddha. In any case, suppose that karma really did transfer to another body after death and it worked in exactly the way that these teachers explained... If that were true then I would still get a decent rebirth because my ability to build up good karma would not be affected by my disbelief in the system itself. That is the best part. We learn that through compassion and working to reduce suffering to ourselves and other beings is the route to lasting happiness. With kind and well intended actions and words we find that same kindness returned to us in other ways. This is the karmic cycle that we can trust since the benefit to ourselves and the outside world are visible to us and can be observed and enjoyed.