Emerald

If you are unable to rebut my points, then just be honest and concede. I haven't said anything particularly stage green in my messages on this thread. I was merely pointing out concrete instances of Elon Musk's dishonesty because that is the topic we're ACTUALLY debating about. But you know that you agree with me on the topic we're actually debating... and you don't want to lose the debate because you already made a big show of grand standing about Spiral Dynamics. So you keep moving the goal posts from the debate about Elon Musk's level of honesty... to what my level of Spiral Dynamics is and how I don't recognize Elon Musk's contributions because I'm stage green. But that is NOT what you and I were debating about in the first place. That's just you interjecting your opinion on Musk into the debate and moving the debate to a topic where you feel like you have a fighting chance of winning. We were debating "Is Elon Musk honest?" but you keep moving the goal post to the topic "Is Elon Musk good/admirable?" Stay on the topic, be intellectually honest, and concede that you agree with me about that debate topic at hand... instead of pretending my argument is something that it isn't. I conceded to you that con-artist isn't an apt term for him. But he does have dishonest tendencies as is evidenced. Do you disagree with the specific points that I listed in my previous posts that those are instances of dishonesty? Would you characterize Elon Musk as an honest person?

First off... that's no excuse for you to not support your claims. It's a cop out and intellectually dishonest, and I know you know better. Your argument is an authority-appeal fallacy... and you're naming yourself baselessly as the authority you're appealing to because you've watched interviews with him. Secondly, I can tell you that the things I said about Musk are true about him being inconsistent with his values... purporting to value free speech as the reason he acquired Twitter and then actively censoring voices he dislikes while bolstering voices he agrees with. And that he was also dishonest in sharing details about is trans-daughter's childhood to build a narrative that appeals to the anti-trans people he's trying to impress. Those are things that I know for sure are true. So, watching 10, 100, or 1000 hours of interviews of Elon Musk isn't going to make me see these acts of dishonesty as honesty. Also, my understanding is also that he's not the direct inventor of the innovations he's credited for. Most of his patents that his name is on are around the shape or design of the inventions. And he has people work under him to create the innovations. Or like with Tesla, he acquired the company from the actual creators of the Tesla and put it out to mass market. And I've seen this from multiple sources over the years. Though I welcome a rebuttal if you have contradictory evidence. And of course, if I watch 10 hours of Elon Musk interviews... he's probably NEVER going to mention that he's not the direct inventor because that would hurt his image and his brand. So I'm relying on you, Leo, to provide me with evidence that my perspective is as uninformed as you believe it to be.

That's not a substantive counter-argument. And it's intellectually dishonest for you to even suggest that it is. If you can't rebut my claims, I'm not going to take what you say too seriously because you can't even articulate why you think I'm wrong.

Part of the issue is that people tend to see politics only as social values, as those are the things the average person feels tuned into on an emotional level. And it can't be removed from consideration of course because human rights are wrapped up in it. But when people only have that association, it creates a situations where people end up voting against their own economic interests to 'keep the kids from being transed.'

What is it specifically that you disagree with in our discussion about Elon Musk? You're not really providing any counter-arguments. You're just saying that we're giving "low quality stage green" perspectives. But vague Spiral Dynamics grand-standing isn't going to work if you actually want to convey to us why we're supposedly misguided. You're going to need to provide a clear counter-argument to be honestly engaged with if you want me to take your perspective seriously. And I'm also pretty sure it's not your position that he's a totally honest actor. Now, I conceded with you that con-artist isn't an accurate word to describe him because of the connotations of the word being more deliberate and all-encompassing. But I have also provided you specific instances of him being dishonest. So, it isn't the most far-fetched thing when someone calls him dishonest. If you disagree... then I await a more substantive rebuttal.

That's a totally non-scientific perspective. How do you suppose that people with same-sex attractions change the hormones in their body? I can tell you that, though I am mostly romantically attracted to men... I've been sexually attracted to males and females since before I went through puberty. My 10 year old self, would even rationalize away my sexual attraction to girls/women by thinking "Maybe it's because society conditions everyone to associate sex with pretty ladies." It took me until I was twenty to be like, "Oh yeah... duh. I just bisexual and rationalizing it away." So, there was no hormone change.... nor do I know how anyone would even pull that off in your mind. It's just something that's always been there that I have the capacity to be aroused by a woman.

That's certainly true. Back then, it was right off the back of the Great Depression. So, my suspicion is that back then, people were more tuned in to specific policies because of how much they were looking to the political sphere to solve the economy crash and how influential the New Deal was. Plus, they weren't so identified with partisan distinctions between parties and it wasn't as stark of a contrast in social values. Like both Eisenhower (Republican) and FDR (Democrat) were focused on a lot of policies that would be considered economically left-wing nowadays.

He's being dishonest with that. That's true. And beyond that he has told other lies and been inconsistent in his stated values. But a con-artist has a specific connotation that doesn't quite fit his more passive brand of intermittent dishonesty. A con-artist is Trump-like where, if their lips are moving, they're lying. And it's a very active thing. And to be fair, that doesn't describe Elon Musk. Think about a con-artist as a the quintessential used car salesman archetype where the guy's name is fast Eddie, and he's always trying to pull a fast on you. Elon Musk unconsciously tricks himself way more than he consciously tricks others.

Oh no! Someone's a radical Marxist Communist who's coming to trans your kids and let migrant criminals into the country to blow Fentanyl in everyone's faces! Someone must stop this crazy guy!

I'm not saying being a CEO isn't difficult. I'm a business owner myself and I know it's difficult with a small business.... and I'm sure that it's so much more difficult when you're running a huge structure. What I'm saying is that people are largely under the impression that Elon himself is doing all the brainy science stuff because of how he presents himself. People believe that Elon is inventing all of these things. But he's not. He's using his wealth to get talented people to work under him. So, his image is one that isn't authentic. It's different than being a con-artist. But it's certainly inauthentic. And if you add on top of that he's fine with lying and being inconsistent in his values if it gets him approved of.

Fair enough. I'm not a fan of Elon Musk. I personally see Elon Musk as pretty foolish, largely because of his lack of emotional intelligence and inconsistencies. But many people see him as a genius, largely because of the image he's created for himself and because of him possessing some degree of intellectual intelligence. So, it's a pet peeve of mine that I see as dishonest and inauthentic because his image and his level of emotional maturity don't match. But you are correct, that I wouldn't call him an outright "con-artist" as it's not like the blatant lies that a con-artist tells, used car salesman style. He's not actively and constantly and deliberately trying to con people. So, he's not lying on a Trump-scale. But he definitely has dishonest tendencies that seem to largely come from his own biases and self-deceptions.... and his desire to see himself a certain way and have others see him a certain way. For example, recently he fabricated untrue stories about his trans daughter to build a specific narrative to score points with anti-trans people on his platform... like claiming that 'his son' was into musical theatre at 4 years old and would always call things "fabulous" to build the narrative that 'he' was gay and not trans until the woke mind virus came in and got 'him'. But those things weren't true and never happened. So, he's no stranger to lying. But it's definitely not deliberate or "artful" like a con-artist. His dishonest tendencies, come more from him tricking himself and bending the truth into narratives to look better to those he wants to impress than deliberately tricking others.

He definitely doesn't value saving the world. It's all about him and gaining more strength... and his supporters are just a means to an end. That's the biggest difference between him and Elon. Elon wants approval. Trump wants power.

No, he's definitely a conman too. He just often doesn't realize it because of his self-justification biases. He definitely doesn't see himself as such. He has a lot of ideals that he holds. So, anything he does that's dishonest seems to get categorized as working towards the greater good in accordance to his worldview. For example, he purportedly values free speech... which is why he claimed he wanted to buy Twitter in the first place. But once he purchased it, he chose to censor certain viewpoints and bolster others. And this is the very behavior he was supposedly against. He either is fully aware this is a lie and justifies it with his biases. Or he's unaware that he's lying. Also, before he became known as he is today... he was once known as this billionaire genius guy because that is the public image he built for himself. But in actuality his accomplishments came from other people who were the inventors... while he was the money guy because he had the wealth from being born into a family that owns an emerald mine in South Africa. For example, he didn't invent the Tesla. He just invested in the company and took over as CEO. So, his facade is that he was creating all of these technologies when he was really just the investor.

Oh come on Leo! You know you wanna our super cool club, queen!!! Fine then!!!! Just one last attempt...

Out of the 73-million kids in the United States under 18... how many kids in the US do you believe are on puberty blockers? On HRT? Having top surgery? Having bottom surgery? I'll give you a hint. It's a fraction of a fraction of a percentage point. If you want the numbers... you can check out this Reuters article... https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/

The center of the American political system and the way we think about it in the government establishment is CENTER RIGHT because both Democrat and Republican politicians serve the interests of corporations. And the partisan way that people are conditioned to view politics in terms of Democrat = left and Republican = right... favors a CENTER RIGHT perspective because there is nothing more than a millimeter left of center in the establishment. (The same is true in other countries... only with different party names.) I forget who came up with the quote, but the reality is that the American government is a lame bird with two right wings. So, from the establishment's perspective... someone in the "center" is like Joe Manchin. So, that's what the establishment and news media call a moderate.. when his views don't actually reflect the actual will of the people. But politicians whose views do reflect the will of the people are quick to be labeled a radical socialist. And the center of the populace is CENTER LEFT in their values if you poll them on specific policies and viewpoints. But most in the populace are low-information, under-informed voters. So, they will often vote along party lines without knowledge of policies. And they will take as gospel the partisan characterizations as opposed to looking at actual policy positions. And even if 70% of the American populace agrees with the policies of someone CENTER LEFT like Bernie Sanders on paper, most people will view him as a radical leftist because he has been labelled that from the perspective of the establishment. Ultimately, it has to do with people not being very well educated about politics... and low information voters being conditioned to believe that candidates that are the most in agreement with the populace are crazy liberal radicals... while the center right politicians in the establishment like Joe Manchin are the moderate normies and "the adults in the room" representing the average person, even though their views are unpopular in the eyes of the people. When in reality, all these so-called "moderates" in the establishment want to do is to cut taxes for billionaires and slash Social Security and Medicare.

That's definitely not true. I'm bisexual and probably about half of my close friends over the years have been in the LGBTQ community. And none of them nor I want to force straight people into being gay. We just don't want the government controlling us nor do we want society making it a harder place to live. This should be obvious, and I'm genuinely curious as to why it's not. Are you just sheltered and haven't been around LGBTQ people before... and you're believing people who fear-monger about LGBTQ people trying to force straight people into being gay? Or do you feel like you'd personally be tempted to engage in homosexual behavior or tempted to transition if you put your guard down and accepted the existence of gay people and trans people? Or is it another reason?

They are both megalomaniacal. But I sense that Elon has justified the lying and doesn't see himself as a conman... while Donald Trump is okay with being a conman and knows that he lies. I see Elon Musk as unconsciously being driven to being a megalomaniacal conman out of a desire to redeem himself and be validated in the eyes of others. And the lies he tells, in his mind is a sort of Machiavellian "ends justify the means" desire to be the hero in others' eyes he imagines himself to be. And if he were to see himself as a conman, he would probably feel ashamed. So, he is unconscious to it. Conversely, I see Trump as consciously being driven to being a megalomaniacal conman out of a desire to achieve maximum power and that he values power and strength over a claim to goodness and honesty (which he may view as weak and therefore bad). And he doesn't mind the lying as he just sees it as a neutral tool of power acquisition and something that strengthens him. So... Donald Trump's guiding compass is more akin to... "More power is good... less power is bad." than "Honesty is good... lying is bad." So... my sense is that Elon has lots of moral justifications for his lies that make it do all sorts of mental gymnastics to avoid seeing himself as a conman because he is motivated along a moral self-identity narrative of saving the world. And my sense is that Donald Trump knows he's lying and doesn't care. So, he doesn't need to trick himself into believing he's not lying... as he motivates himself along a warlord-ish strength narrative. And the only bad thing is weakness from that paradigm.

I love the Dark Crystal! I actually just decided to re-watch the Age of Resistance series this past week. So, I have Skeksis on the brain. Such an apt metaphor for how those with the worst impulses often make it into power... while those with the best impulses end up ineffective and powerless like the Mystics before the Great Conjunction.

This is Donald Trump when it comes to relinquishing power...

Thank you!

Is this directed to me? If it was... yes! I'd still be absolutely batty about him!

So, you don't even have kids? And yet you're making up stories in your imagination about trans people's existence being a danger to your imaginary kids? And you're also playing through a movie in your mind of dying to protect your imaginary kids from trans people? Isn't that silly? As someone who ACTUALLY has kids, the only thing that the widespread acceptance of trans people (and the questioning of the absoluteness of gender identity) has done is to make them far more kind and conscious than I was as a child to those in the LGBTQ community... and far less boxed into notions of how they should and shouldn't be based off of rigid gender roles.

How would that put the US at an advantage to measure GDP in dollars? You could convert that into Pounds, Yen, Yuan, or any other currency... and you'd still get the same proportional differential. Less doesn't suddenly become more when you convert it into a different currency.

Not true....