Alex4

Don't you think those are values that stage green people should have?

Meditations every day of the week. I'm not saying it's better, but I need the message to be clear and direct.

Nobody here is denying that part of his message is valid, but why not listen to non-toxic orange influencers? Seriously, you have Leo’s videos that can motivate you way more without poisoning your mind. I get what you mean about sticking to just the motivational message, I’ve done the same before, listening to red pill content to boost my confidence with women, thinking I could filter out the nonsense. But before you know it, that toxic message seeps into your brain in ways you don’t even realize. No man, I don't envy him, I can assure you. I can envy 1000 other people but not this character.

And then once those celebrities come to power and realize that their magical solutions don’t work or are even inapplicable, they will say, "Oh, I miss those good old days when we had professional politicians dedicated to politics." And the cycle will repeat itself. At least I hope the next wave of professional politicians will be less corrupt; that's something that can't be denied to the populists. By the way, Leo, your prediction is already coming true. In Spain, there’s the 'Se Acabó la Fiesta' movement (translated as "The Party is Over"), led by Alvise, who gained popularity on social media and has a large Telegram channel. He created a party, and gained enough votes to enter the European Parliament in the last elections. Some of his message is valid, such as the call to end corruption, but he also adopts the typical rhetoric of the far right.

I've watched this video along with some of his other content, and he is a total scam. While there's some amount of truth in his message, there are far better orange type role models . Much of what he promotes is toxic.

You weren't following politics out of laziness and a fear to have opinions on controversial topics. There are a lot of moderate people out there who don't vote for these reasons, and that's one of the reasons why the far right is on the rise.

Thanks, man. My suspicions were heading in that direction. It's true, we shouldn't be swayed by just a few nice motivational quotes. I'll watch the documentary tonight!

In my opinion, it's okay if prostitution is legal and regulated, as long as the woman is making the decision consciously. Though, I don't hold this opinion firmly and I’m open to changing my mind. At the end of the day, it’s her body, and I don't think having sex with a client is harming her. That said, I do find it degrading—I'd rather have my daughter work 12-hour shifts in a factory than have sex with strangers. That being said, people who support an outright ban should be fully aware of the collateral damage that could cause—more desperate men not being able to get sex, which could lead to more harassment and assaults on women.

You don't need to watch the news regularly to become polarized. What these people precisely need is to consume high-quality sources. In history, there are numerous examples of wars that have started solely due to rivalry between two nobles. While 90% of the population couldn't even read.

I think Kamala did a solid job.

I will give the guy a chance, is there some video you recommend? I saw a clip a few days ago where he was going off on YouTubers who move to Andorra to pay fewer taxes, saying they had a scarcity mindset for wanting to go to an isolated place just to save a money. The guy just went full circle defending taxes If you watch telecinco you are a solid orange hehe, just joking

I'm from Spain and I've heard negative opinions about him. From the few clips I've seen on TV, he seems like one of those influencers who takes advantage of immature middle-class teenagers. But to be honest, I haven’t watched his content myself. I’ve already seen a lot of stage orange content from his predecessors.

Hey man, let me give you a quick rundown of my story, in case it helps. My father always pushed me to be good at math and to pursue a career in engineering. So, I signed up for industrial engineering. The first year went terribly, and even though I thought I could eventually pass (if I put in a lot of years and effort), I would’ve ended up being a mediocre engineer. So, I lowered the bar and switched to international trade, which still had some math but more at my level. I graduated 4 years ago and things are going great. I’m good at what I do, and I actually enjoy it. I don’t make as much as an engineer, but I’m happy. And after working for a few years, I’ve realized that the degree you choose isn’t that important. Looking back, I would’ve studied history (because it’s my passion), and if I didn’t find anything in that field, I would’ve done a specialized master’s in something like international business, international relations, or supply chain management. Please do not commit suicide over this.

He would try to guide the United States towards stage green. You can take Denmark as an example of how it would look like.

I don't like it when tourists are attacked, it is very hypocritical because we're all tourists at some point. That said, I get the complaints, though in my opinion, it's not typical tourists but rather wealthy expats and other rich folks who don't mind paying rent that's equivalent to a full Spanish worker's salary who are causing the housing bubble. I think we should fight for higher wages and try to match the rest of Europe because I doubt northern Europeans will stop coming. If you've got money, Barcelona is a great city to live in.

You answered your own question. We act robotically when we're angry. But I believe we do have some capacity for choice (distinguishing us from animals that have none), and to some extent, spirituality involves being more present and expanding that capacity.

I'm from Barcelona, and I can assure you that the locals haven't turned anti-immigrant. What we do have is an anti-tourism movement, especially against those who rent out apartments without a license. Even so, I'd say it's a movement that's louder than it is large.

Exactly. We chose to have sovereignty over our opinions and judgement, and now we’re learning to deal with the consequences. Still, I think it’s a necessary stage in human evolution.

My take is that they defend unlimited free speech as a cover for their racism, transphobia, homophobia, and so on. I think it’s in response to stage green, but I haven’t really thought it through. Anyway, in many cases, they only support free speech in theory and when it suits them. It's a twisted situation where conservatives are hijacking a right they historically haven't helped to achieve, just to defend the current (or previous) status quo.

He’s not saying we should go back to the 1950s. I think Leo is pointing out the dangers of liberalism. Just look at any field or activity, and you'll see thousands of totally contradictory opinions, some come from ignorance (most), and others from bad intentions. Nowadays, any fool can grab a camera and start talking about politics, spreading false information and hate. You need to have a damn clear head to avoid falling into toxic traps nowadays. At least in a theocratic society before the 20th century, there was little dissent within a community. When you hear elders speak, they often say that communities used to be more united. Even if part of that unity was based on ignorance, it helped prevent internal conflicts.

MIght this be a case of german rigidity? Following the law (probably a new one) meticulously and applying the corresponding penalties without caring about how it might be pissing people off?

Leo is Actualized you peasants.

Me too. The world does not revolve around the United States (which, by the way, also has high crime rates).

I find the penalty disproportionate.

They are concerned about falsehoods that are spread freely on the internet, which is a valid concern. Conservatives should agree on this and not be stubborn as a mule. Some of these falsehoods, even if they seem harmless, can lead to real violence. The debate should focus on how far we should go with these limits to ensure that the majority of people—who don’t engage in harmful practices or spread hate speech—don’t have their ability to share their opinions restricted. I know choosing an arbitrator for this can be very controversial because both sides will think the referee has a hidden agenda (which could be the case but that's what checks and balances are for). Still, I believe setting some limits is better than allowing harmful content to be spread freely.