Consept

Yeah good analysis, hes basically a more evolved version of Robinson in that he can appeal to moderates more and he doesnt have as checkered a past as Robinson. His communication is a lot better and his anger is either better hidden or just less than Robinsons. He doesnt care about the other nations in the UK, most English politicians dont which is why there was such a big rise of the SNP and the devolution of Wales and Scotland. I agree with your analysis in terms of him feeling a sense of superiority and being 'right'. I havent watched the video but i assume Peterson soft balled him. Its interesting but not surprising that Peterson is giving a platform to these characters. Petersons understanding of British politics is severely lacking, he went on Question Time last year and was completely ill informed about everything. I dont know why we think that if someone is good in one field he must be wise in all fields. He is an accomplished psychologist but his views on politics are not necessarily better than the next man, however hes positioned as if it is. Anyway back to Farage, Id be interested in your analysis in this interview where hes put under a bit of pressure -

Its interesting you picked up on the deceptiveness, he does basically have Nazi ideology, the party i mentioned BNP believe the whites are superior, dont believe in race mixing etc. The claim that he really just cares about the kids is nonsense, because if that was the case why just focus specifically on it happening in the muslim community, it happens more generally so why not focus on all child abuse? The senior member of his EDL party is currently doing 17 years for grooming and sleeping with a 10 year old but Robinson doesnt come out and condenm them - https://politicsandinsights.org/2018/05/29/the-edl-have-paedophiles-in-their-ranks-but-tommy-robinson-evidently-doesnt-condemn-them/ There have been other instances of members in his party getting in trouble for these types of crimes as well. So when you consider that, is he someone against child abuse at any cost or is he someone against muslims at any cost? I do find it fascinating the idea of trying to come across reasonable whilst simultaneously inserting your rhetoric in. This is what you talked about with the submissive hand gestures, hes trying to get across that hes the innocent and always being attacked, whereas if it came down to it he would be the one leading a civil war attack against muslims.

Tommy Robinson essentially started out as a thug, went to prison for assaulting a police officer and then joined a far right political party. At the core he is anti-muslim and wants Britain to be for white anglo saxon people only, this is his purpose and what drives him. The first party he joined BNP had this as their key pledge in their manifesto - "At current immigration and birth rates, indigenous British people are set to become a minority well within 50 years. This will result in the extinction of the British people, culture, heritage and identity." So this is the fear that the far right has and this is what Robinson is fighting for. The issue with muslim rape gangs is not one to be dismissed so its not that hes wrong about it but to use that as the main point against immigration is extremely reductive and it plays on the fears of white british citizen. He uses this point to make a overall point about muslims taking over the uk. The police should crackdown on rape gangs part of the reason they dont is because of the persecution muslims have got from the far right especially since 9/11, makes them reluctant to come across as persecuting them further. But reducing an extremely varied group of people to their absolute worst minority is extremely disingenuous. It would be the same as taking the statistic that most pedophiles are older white men and saying all white people are bad and we should be scared of them because of it. Hes also funded by the pro-Israel far right orgs, this is because they realise that people listen to him and because of his anti-islam stance it aids their goals without them having to get directly involved. This happens with a lot of big internet mouth pieces, where they get funded to further their causes. If we break it down his main goal is to keep Britain white, the main threat to him is Muslims coming into the country, he is very smart and knows how to reach people emotionally and stoke up fear and hatred within them. What he tries to do is come across reasonable so that he can reach moderate people as if he said everything unfiltered the general population wont engage, which is basically the case now, although he has got some moderates on board. What could be interesting is that a lot of red pill, right guys are now muslim, however traditional far right is dead against islam, so im not sure how thats going to pan out but we will see. (btw i do understand that the trauma he experienced when he was young does explain a lot of this, he has a lot of hate within him)

If youre the only one thats drunk in a group you look like an alcoholic, if youre the only one sober you look like a party pooper

Dogs are really amazing, always in the moment whatever theyre doing and when they show affection its so real, all this makes it harder when they inevitably pass on. As you say he will always be with you and you will always have those experiences even just the mundane day to day. Sorry for your loss and admire the gratitude youve shown despite it

It's the same as in any large organisation, they'll be people that commit crimes covertly, the government is not immune to this and never has been, its just human behavior. The question is whether its trending better than before, which it probably is but there's still a long way to go

Its funny that 'winning' a debate for US president is just sounding somewhat coherent

I think Trump has really thrown a massive spanner into American politics, the only reason the dems feel like their only option is Biden is because of Trump. If the republicans put out a new younger candidate, theres no way the Dems wouldve stuck with Biden. I feel sorry for Biden because from his perspective hes just defending his country from Trumps madness, but hes obviously not in a fit state to do it, it feels like your ageing grandad just trying to get his words out. On both sides there will be people that will never vote for trump or never vote biden, regardless of this debate, so its whether the undecideds get swung either way. But genuinely i cant believe the state of this election, im in the UK as well which has been a shitshow the last few years, but America is on a whole other level.

The below vid isn't game related, but it just shows the perseverance and just willingness to do whatever was needed to achieve a goal. I don't even think this guys that funny but I love his attitude and dedication, its really inspiring

'Most' people can see Tates negative and positive traits on this forum and wouldnt follow his criminal behaviors. The issue is that most of his followers can not and he can and regularly does take them down the wrong path. So he is technically a role model, the definition of role model literally being someone to imitate, as people do look up to him and imitate him, but he is a terrible role model as he has led people in directions where at worst theyve ended up in trouble with the law and at best probably just lost some money. What seems to be the confusion is the difference between saying someone is good role model and saying someone should be studied objectively. For example we could say that Hitler was good at engaging people and look at why without taking his rhetoric on, this is possible however i wouldnt advise using it to other people as it involves a lot of manipulation and deception. I would say its only really good from an inquisitive standpoint but I wouldnt actually want to adopt any of the behaviors. I see Tate in the same way, as in its interesting to see why he is so effective at grabbing peoples attention but i wouldnt look at him or suggest him as a role model for vulnerable young men, I think he will cause more harm than good, this has been proven consistently if you look at actual evidence of war room chat logs or people who have come out and talked of their experience of the war room, where they say Tates word was treated as gospel and noone ever disagreed with him and did anything he said. Theres a story where Tate said most people couldnt sit in their bathroom for 12 hours and lots of the followers just did it. So you can put your head in the sand and say yes everyone can seperate the good and bad but in practice it just doesnt happen, if it did you wouldnt get cult leaders. Its the same with Trump, most of his followers dont even accept that he can do any wrong, im pretty sure if he killed someone at his rally on camera theyd still back him. So obviously they are not looking at him objectively, this is why thee people are terrible role models. If your general point is bad people can have some effective traits then yeah no one will disagree, but being a good role model is something else.

Its kinda like saying teenagers cause more problems than toddlers, why cant we just stay in the mindset of a toddler?

I would argue it is rational and objective not to follow him, when looking for people to follow you would look at the fruits of their advice and where that has gotten them. Being Tate has landed him several investigations into his behavior, to the point where hes not even allowed out of the country hes living in and when he does finish that case the UK have lined up a trial for him as well. All of his assets and everything he has achieved is purely through manipulation and criminal activities. OK yes there is some drive to be able to be a successful criminal but again this wouldnt be enough to say that hes someone that should be followed or would help a vulnerable person. Keep in mind, as I know youre stuck on this narrative, im not making a moral judgement on what hes done, im just saying his advice will lead to the circumstances that hes in. Its the same reason why i wouldnt advise a young person to listen to a drug dealer, a pimp or a cult leader, the outcomes for those that follow these types of people is usually not good. This would be a rational perspective, an irrational perspective would be believing that following someone like this would not lead to negative outcomes, this has been proven repeatedly throughout history, Nazis, Jim Jones followers etc. Even following people who promote get rich quick schemes (which Tate also does) will leave you loosing money. No one is perfect but Arnie and Bruce Lee were not actively trying to recruit people and get as much money from them as possible, as well they werent literal criminals. Its not about the numerous bad things hes done, of which there are many, its the fact that his rhetoric leads people into worse situations. He actively tells people not to study or get a job and just join his hustlers university where they can learn how to do get rich quick schemes whilst giving him money. This is not rational or objectively good advice. Im not taking it personal or serious but yeah youre probably right

Whats the point though, why not just follow someone who has the will and is healthy? Psychopaths may have lots of will to take over the world but in reality we should defend vulnerable people against them, not encourage them to be listened to. Look what happens when they get power and get people to follow them, it didnt work out well with Hitler.

OK so i get where youre coming from. So if we say that he has a cheaters spirit which requires ambition and a will to win by any means necessary, then i dont think this would be great for vulnerable young men to emulate. Reason being, it will mess them up in the long run, it doesnt actually develop any real skills aside from manipulation and cheating and the chances are they will get caught out, if not by a friend then worse by the law. This has already happened in his war room chat logs there are plenty of young men who describe how theyve manipulated women to work on webcam, some even talk about violence and show pictures etc. This means that they could actually wind up in a lot of legal trouble. If his cheaters spirit is taken into the world it may grant them temporary success but thats about it, as well it definitely wont give them any kind of spiritual growth. The other thing is that Tate is a manipulator and he is manipulating his audience, even know hes doing a pump and dump scheme for a meme coin, promising his followers theyll be rich if they buy in. So to say that someone like Tate should be giving advice to vulnerable young men is basically saying wolves should be in charge of lambs. In a way i get what you mean but i just dont think the good points can be separated out by the type of people that follow him, its pretty much all or nothing, he sets this dynamic by calling them brokies etc. He basically taunts them that if they dont follow him theyre a loser, which is something youd see in cults. Someone who is able to see through an ignore all the 'bad' stuff, probably wouldnt follow him in the first place. In general following a criminal is not going to give you good results, I know lots of ex-criminals who have done their time and are now excellent role models, but they have been through a whole journey and advise young people not to go down their road. Someone like Tate has actively encouraged others to do exactly what he did, which got him into the predicament hes in now.

Again i think you miss my point. Your point as i understand is that Tate has a strong fighting spirit which benefits young men, he does some bad things but it doesnt take away from his fighting spirit. You think that my point is that Tate does bad stuff so im ignoring his fighting spirit and just hating him blindly. This is not my point, what im saying is that he doesnt have a fighting spirit, this is evident because he cheats and takes shortcuts as well as manipulates people to get what he wants. If you want to call it anything its a cheating spirit, which is antithetical to a fighting spirit because it is the avoidance of doing the hard work in favour of the quick fix. Theres maybe something there in his relentlessness and willingness to just completely screw people over, but i wouldnt call that fighting spirit and definitely wouldnt say its something to be emulated for young people. Its kinda like if were playing chess and I cheat by using an engine, you can say that I found a way to win, but im not actually better at chess than you, I didnt fight to get the win I just took a shortcut. Yes its effective in the moment, but obviously it doesnt work long term as Tate is finding out now and how chess champions find out eventually when they get caught.

You miss my point, I'm not saying having a fighting spirit is bad or that capitalism is bad, I'm saying Tate doesn't have a true fighting spirit. The reason I got into specifics is to demonstrate that he puts out the appearance of a fighting spirit but doesn't actually live it. Therefore his advice of 'by any means necessary', parading as a warrior spirit is actually very bad for young people as it will lead to more problems than it solves and doesn't actually hit the root of the problems they have, it just pretends to and takes their money and attention in the process. There's plenty of examples that can be incredibly beneficial for young men, Tate is not one of them.

Heres a counter argument to Tates 'fighting spirit'. I agree that Tate has a certain drive for money, fame etc but it appears that this comes from a deep insecurity ie he has some deep, baked in issues that lead him to needing this worldly accomplishments. Now this isnt necessarily a negative in of itself, as theres probably many people have started with an insecurity and grown themselves in positive ways and maybe even gotten over their insecurities. However with Tate, he wants the fame and money regardless of what it takes to get there, he has no problem with exploiting others and manipulating his way there with shortcuts. Now you can say that he has a fighting spirit because he wants to get there by any means necessary but i dont believe these methods indicate that, i think to the contrary he doesnt have the fighting spirit to actually do it, he just wants it, and so he has to come up with ways where he doesnt need to put in the work but can still get the success he craves. For example with his webcam business, taking morality aside, he couldve had a legitimate webcam business where he paid the girls fairly and put in the hard work to recruit girls in legitimate ways. Instead of this he manipulated the girls so that they were in love with them and thought he was with them and then got them to work in his business, with various methods of coercion and control. This is not a fighting spirit, this is weak and manipulative. As an analogy, its kinda like saying, if we were in a marathon race and halfway through I ordered an uber which took me 10 miles and then i got out and finished the last couple of miles of the race. You could make the argument that i had that fighting spirit because i found a way to win but it wouldnt be a great argument. If you wanted to actually be a great winner my advice would most likely not make you a great runner although I could give you advice on how to cheat and win. This crosses over to Tate as his actual workout advice is terrible, he tells people to eat whatever and train for like 20 mins. His business advice is much the same. In reality what he does is setup the expectations and the wants of his followers but coupled with lacklustre advice on how to actually get it. Hes now promoting a meme coin where he tells his followers that if they get on board they can make millions, he showed screenshots of big transfers from accounts, which it has been exposed by those in the crypto space are just bot accounts. So again its the same bullshit, get rich quick schemes. My prediction is most of his followers will lose out and he will gain. None of this is fighting spirit, fighting spirit is someone who keeps going even when the odds are against them and does the hard stuff. Maybe somone like David Goggins, this is not Tate.

I think Latin culture in general theres a machismo element where its expected for the guy to pay for everything. In your case as a gringo thats heightened even further. If you were in western europe or the states there probably wouldnt be too much of an issue with what happened but i think in south America youd most likely get a reaction like that. I also dont think youd be seen as beta to do it, however that would depend on what the vibe was etc they can still definitely take advantage you

I think in all the examples you gave it was you approaching girls, sometimes they can be overly 'mean' when they think that the guy is going to be too forward. If you ask most people objectively without approach aspect i think youll find not many, if any would call you fat and ugly. Theres obviously something going on with your approach or the vibe youre giving of but i dont think it would be purely physical. Even literal fat and ugly people wouldnt get called fat and ugly that many times.

I never really get when someone living a certain way of life prescribes that way of life for everyone else. In our current society you can live as traditional family if you like or you can live single or polyamorous or whatever. The idea of the traditional family (2.4 kids) as we know it only really began to come in, in the 1950's before that children would be sent away to work from a young age. This idea of family that with have is really a relatively new concept, its almost a fantasy that has not really existed in the history of humanity, where there is such wealth that the mother can focus on raising children and the father works and provides for the whole family. Its almost an experiment which didnt really work as it limited the options of women and put people in positions they didnt necessarily want to be in. That being said it was probably a well needed step in terms of what came before. I think when people bring it up now, its seen through rose tinted glasses at a time in history where everything was 'perfect', white picket fence life. The reality is that not everyone could have it comfortably and even within it there wa a lot of repression and unhappiness.

Truly loving yourself is the answer to 99% most of life's issues. The reason why people can't do it is that their belief in needing to be something or needing something is stronger than their belief in loving themselves as they are. In this threads example, the incel believes that once they get sex, girlfriend, relationship etc, then they will be worthy of love. They come to the conclusion that they are not able to get these things and are therefore unlovable. If they gave themselves unconditional love, none of this would matter and counterintuitivly they'd be much more likely to attract someone. But when in that state its hard to switch mindsets, because they're beliefs reinforce the outcomes that happen. So because they are bitter and have a certain world view that women are only attracted to certain guys which doesn't include them, they no longer try to engage and if they do it's coming from a negative place, this then creates their reality that women aren't attracted to them.

Trump wasnt sure about declassifying the epstein files, whats also crazy is fox didnt show the full response -

Yeah it's next level compared to guys honestly

I've met a few people on the forum over zoom, it's interesting because it takes all the bullshit that comes with semi anonymously posting and just gives you the real stuff. People are very different in person, me included.

Dont think anyone said that, my position is definitely its not fine for people to be racist.