Alexop

One month until parliamentary elections in Sweden. I am a member of the social-democrats (center-left) and we are the most popular party by far in the polls. A few days ago the fucking Greens had the amazing idea to come with the coming statement: "we can take many more refugees". I am pretty sure this is going to cost us a few points, because we are planning to collaborate, of course, with the 2 smaller left parties (the greens and the left party). After all of what happened in Sweden, with all the immigration chaos and people panic voting massively for the far right, just because this topic alone. Now comes these fuckers with this stupid statement. I cannot stand this virtue signaling anymore. These idiots do not meet the refugees, they live in in gentrificated areas and only meet white leftist people but complain about us not taking care of the refugees. Bitch, why aren't you living in the same neighborhood with them? why aren't you befriending that poor guy who came from Syria here? Oh, you have different values… These unnuanced statements are clearly leftist populous bullshit. A nuanced statement about immigration would be something like: “we will see what comes in the future. if 2 million refugees come to europe, we won't be able to take too many of them, because we already have big political and logistical problems based on not properly integrating the people who we already took in. We will have a generous work based immigration, to keep the economy going. We need that because the Swedes are not having enough children. But refugees are a complicated issue that we have to approach with caution right now.” But of course they don´t say it like this, their voters base are the Greta Thunberg “I block the roads if you don´t do what I want” type of people. Who do not want to accept reality. The far left small parties are surviving based on being radical and challenging the norms much more the the status quo. because the nuanced position is taken by the social-democrats. And they are not those sold-out , watered down soc-dems, they are pure leftist blood.

yea that is fked up mate... I hope you will change that some day

We can make a minority government or ally with one block or the other. But no chance to make the wokies collaborate with the bourgeoisie. Especially after they worked close with the far right. It is not 1960s anymore. We have a very divided society. You can clearly see how people gather around their distinct values. Spiral Dynamics Blue, Orange and Green.

greens focus more on the environmental issues and immigration, V are describing themsleves as "the anti-racist, feminist party". It is mostly the focus that makes them different. V can come with good stuff sometimes, like taxing the rich more, building state housing etc. But they attract all sorts of weirdos and extremists in their party. They can exaggerate with their identity politics of course. All the children who finish gender studies, diversity studies or some shit like that, go into their Young Left, which is their young under 30 division. Their young division is openly marxist and very confrontational. they even shouted police hate speech at a pride event. They are the type of people who can become more and more extreme if they gain too much power, that is my biggest concern about them. Because that is their niche. Attracting passionate, vehement voters who want change now, in 2 minutes.

we basically have two options: collaborate with the woke left parties or collaborate with the Orange Moderates. The second option might make for too little progress, especially in regards to the economy. The first option might enrage the conservative voters and our popularity might suffer. The thing is that people vote on vibe. if we present a loosy-goosy hippie vibe, then the serious people will feel reluctant on voting for us again. If we compromise too much with the neo-liberals, we might not fix the economy, which is shit right now. We have enough of the Orange shit, we have the highest number of billionaires per capita in Europe. Housing is a nightmare. Private schools taking unlimited profits from the public budget. The welfare system is going down etc.

https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/sweden/ S is us, the normal left. V is the woke left. MP are the greens. M are the Orange neo-liberals that are in power rn forming a coalition with SD. SD is the far right anti-immigration party. They exploded in popularity after the refugee crisis when Sweden took waay to many of them, creating segregation and gang violence all-over. Just think about it. In the hippie Sweden, a far-right Trumpist party reaching 20%. And in this political nightmarish situation, these green fucks are sayign that shit...

Definitively. And interpreting any bad behaviour as a problem of your past.

Yes, but those biological inclinations can make people to unconsciously adopt values or choose people that they might not even want. For ex. choosing a partner because others tell you he or she is a good fit for you. Or to unconsciously choose a person just because society programmed you to think you like that person.

the way people choose their partners.

Yup. I mean those 10.000 serious people and all we know about the universe until now... all the planets and galaxies etc. makes for a strong case. There is basically 0% chances that only humans made it to this level of intelligence in the whole universe. There are just too many stars and galaxies.

@Leo Gura so at some point, if there are too many "mature" witnesses, we can begin to trust their word, even to a legal trial degree? For example: if enough "mature" people witness that a woman was raped by X, then we can send X to 20 years in prison based only on that? I don't say that you are wrong or so, and just believing in aliens is not as serious of a thing as potentially destroying the life of a person. I just want to raise this ball, that if we don't have a so called in legal world: a "beyond a reasonable doubt" proof, we cannot be 100% sure. In the same way mob justice can happen, mob ontological commitment can happen.

I mean yea, they are less nerdy. They spend less time in their head and more in the present. My ex literally fell asleep while explaining Spiral dynamics to her. But does that make them less developed or less mature?? Relative to what? I mean they observe so much stuff because they are so present, and observation can be a very stong tool for understanding. They are also very responsible in my experience. Especially after they have kids. And if assuming responsibility is not maturity, what is? And we judge them based on how well they function and understand the techno-patriarchal society we built. But who says this is the only way to live well? Living in your head exposes yourself to many delusions. And that is not intelligent, that is stupid. You try to understand the essence of a hand through math and chemistry. She tells you: let that nonsense aside and just observe it's majesty. Your hand is fucking magic, nerdy idiot.

Some things are so obvious that you have to be a scientist/rationalist to not see them. You tell them: look at your hand dude! Look at a cat! Can't you see the infinite intelligence of it? Can't you see that such a cool thing cannot happen out of randomness and idk.. natural selection bullshit? Your hand, your cat, is your best poof that you are so fuckiing wrong about reality. No need for double blind studies and scientific "proof". Your FKING hand is the best proof. Had a discussion with two of such people yesterday. You corner them with these arguments and then they back off and say: well we don't actually know what is behind all this intelligence. Aha! Then why the fuck you got so triggered when I raised this ball? Maybe because I shook you reality a bit, maybe I made you doubt your world. "Science will figure this out in the future". Your sure? How? What are you going to measure? What variables are you going to isolate? In don't even need to change my consciousness state and experience something else in order to see how wrong they are. I can logically prove to myself from this normal state how wrong they are. These are very smart people with whom I am talking. People who read 200+ books. That is what amazes me. And they come with good arguments based on their worldview. If everything you know is logic and rationalism, then they are aces of it. But in the same time they are wrong, they are laughably wrong. It is like being so good at chess that you beat everyone, but the answer to your search is not winning at chess, it is letting go of chess and looking at your hand.

I would call them magicians. Whenever they appear, all the women disappear.

I mean it is all butterflies until one poke another's ego. But yea, you're right. If they agree on the subject it is usually ok. Echo chamber online interactions are ok 😂

Leo had to ban lots of trolls and weirdos in order to reach this level. Most online interactions with people are slightly above trash. Because there are no consequences when you are online. This shows me how animals we still are as society. We only behave when there are consequences. LOL: 1000 posts. Yay! Finally, after 8 years here.

Nerdiness is the quality of having a deep, passionate, and single-minded enthusiasm for intellectual, technical, or niche subjects. Can't a deep enthusiasm about non-formal thinking and spirituality be seen as nerdy?

@Natasha Tori Maru we love you ❤️ you do a great job! We just try to figure out this complicated subject, and sometimes we fail at it. It is the one subject the almost nobody gets it right. Nether the conservatives nor the progressives. I am a progressive, but when I see how miserably progressives fail at this subject, at building good men and implicitly hurting women, I get mad.

Good one. I somehow get it but it still is a problem. When he comes with that claim, he might have a very nuanced take on it. But It is a problem because when another guy who trusts him sees that short comment, he will take it as it is, black and white, without the hidden nuances. And he will parrot it further ideologically, dealing damage.

I don't need to read any text to realize that my hand is magic. It is just an empirical deduction

I think your short comments about controversial topics can be harmful. They remained imprinted in my brain and made me rethink my reality. Comments like: "women should leave this shit aside and just be cute"; "women just won't accept they are wrong" etc.. I think when you make such bold claims, they have to be done in a long video, not short comments. With lots and lots of disclaimers, nuances and "but Leos".

Yes but if you frame it like: "women are shallow and immature but you still have to respect them"... on a philosophy forum, that leads into treating them in a special way, which is kind of suboptimal. Because then women here would be like: "yeah, I am a woman, they know that and they just hold themselves back". The thing is that I don´t really experience this shit in my real life. IDk where you guys spend your time but I meet many mature women and many immature men. Women who understand advanced shit like social constructions but also being soft and feminine. Women who trust my lead, women who surprise me with very intelligent remarks, even philosophical remarks... the only suboptimal thing I observe them doing is not properly filtering through men and picking a good one in an efficient way. Although that can be challenging and I might be wrong. Immature people are immature. Women being less autistic and socialized towards consensus, if immature, they will be drawned towards toxic femininity and wokism. Men if immature, because they are more autistic and socialzed towards competition and hierarchy worship, they wil be drawned towards right wing extremism and libertarianism. Just because we have an autistic paradigm bias and a woman comes here with another perspective, does not make her immature and us more "mature". I see lots of paradigm locked men who whine about women being paradigm locked lmao.

Same in Sweden. This is why I am like "HUUh?" when I hear people whine about women being immature. Women are substantially better at almost anything(except maybe programming and engineering/construction shit) than men here. Men don´t properly develop in these scandinavian nanny societies. We just have to verfy for ourselves everything. It is very tempting to just believe Leo, and I think his short comments here about women and more are making people to form wrong opinions, including myself. I won´t believe anyone saying something about this topic without tons of proof anymore.

Very well framed! We guys do a poor job integrating women in our circles. I might´ve also said stuff that landed badly for women here. Sorry if so! IDK what to say about this stuff that very mature women are unattractive, because somehow they are masculine. I know that even Leo said it, but I don´t really experienced it in real life. Developed women can turn their masculinity and femininity on and off, like a superpower. Like: now I lead, now I follow. In fact nowadays, I meet more mature women than men. They are playful and fluid but also smart and logical when it is required. Never felt like loosing attracton when they challenge me with a more "mature" masculine vibe. It is like a shit test. If i pass it, I win their respect and they chill out in their feminine side and all good. If they constantly challenge my lead because they want to actually lead, that is something else. Those women are either not for me or not as "mature" as it seems.

"we have top people working on it" LMAO. @Leo Gura give them poor guys a helping hand.