Consept

Yeah you might be right, I think she did Howard stern which went OK but generally it seems like her team either didn't think she'd be good on those shows or underestimated their importance. Obama prob would've done well on them, but it is a new thing and presidents previously have never had to be personable in this way. The dems are way behind on this though. His advice isn't really specialised but it's not bad advice, it's just basic. I think young men need the whole masculine package to actually get motivated. There could be guys that move into that space, the left definitely needs it, as the right have painted them, quite successfully as pussys. Imo if you're following someone for your masculinity you're probably not that masculine, it's an interesting paradox

I agree authenticity is key to connect with people in politics. I've always believed that and was usually put off by politicians inability to answer simple questions. I wouldn't say Kamalas campaign was terrible but I don't think she had great strategies to reach certain demographics. Her not doing a lot of podcasts was a really bad oversight on her part. Realistically that's where you reach people these days, at least young people anyway. Trump understood this well and even though I don't think he anything really meaningful the whole campaign, he was still in the right places and reached people where they were at. I also think Destiny's strategy for this is top tier as well, the amount of reach he's had in the last year or 2 has been phonemonal. But I don't think he really sees himself as a role model, although he does have a lot of male followers but he doesn't position himself as someone to follow.

Destiny only really works with people who value truth more than personality, achievements etc. Not that he's always right but he prioritises the search for truth, with research etc. But if you're looking for a cultist type leader he wouldn't work. Hassan is just as bad as those on the right but just in a leftist persona. It's a tough one the left really need people to up their game because this alt right pipeline is like a cancer

I agree with you, there arent really strong male role models on the left. What I've noticed about men and boys on the left is that they really want someone with what they see as an ideal life to emulate and listen to. What's funny is it's not really what a traditional man would do, you wouldn't follow another man completely like that, you'd have your own sovereignty. Also another factor is that a lot of the right wing manosphere are grifters, so they will just tell guys what the want to hear, hit pain points etc and fleece their followers for money (tate, fresh n fit etc). So even if there are positive people on the left, if they do have integrity, it's very easy for them to get drowned out. Curiously I think rsd Juliens content atm is exactly what we're talking about could help people, even despite his history. But look at the difference in his reach since he changed from hard-core pick up to the self help stuff he does now. I actually think it's a really hard task to have integrity, compete with those that don't and be widely popular. The devil is always more alluring. Dems also being out of touch, missed out on collabing with the few guys who are on the left, even political guys in the left on youtube. This is something trump did very well in terms of his podcast appearances.

Trump was smart in terms of his podcast appearances though, appearing on rogan as well as neck boys, adin Ross etc would've done him a lot of favours with young men especially

He is terrible don't get me wrong, but if your democratic structures can survive it you will be stronger for it. I do agree though in terms of war in the US it's almost like they cosplay internal civil wars because they've never really been attacked from the outside. Obviously Europe has been in two world wars in the last century, which was an insane threat on people's way of life and the results of the led to the EU and relative peace in the region. It's an interesting observation the the US has just never really had something like that, they've always been the big power. So almost like this situation has manifested because of their hubris and not being able to recognise historic patterns that didn't happen to them, but that would be the case for any country in that situation. It's kinda like the rich kid that thinks he's a tough guy but has never been to the hood. The thing is whatever existential threat that could cause change could there even be? It's not like anyone would invade the US, Trump is a massive test but actually Putin is pretty big, he is basically at war with the US but it's a war of infiltration and agitation , most dint even realise what's going on to learn lessons from it.

Yeah not being conscious of it makes it so hard to address, you convince yourself there isn't any issue or you just need to get this, achieve this to be ok. It's tough. Sorry I don't think I was that clear in what I was saying, I agree with you in that you have to embrace your feminine side as a guy to be completely free, because as you say they aren't going away and also they fully round you as a man. What my point was, which you may still disagree with, is that let's say a boy grows up with a single mother, she encourages feminine side etc sometimes it can happen where she may demonise masculine qualities or if the boy is in liberal spaces they may demonise being a man or masculine. So the boy then could repress their masculine side and not properly express it. I have seen this in a lot of guys and weirdly these guys are also very liable to go down the redpill rabbit hole and blame women. Yeah for them Tate represents their idea of what freedom as a man looks like. But when I look at him I actually see someone he's completely trapped in ego and persona, he isn't free at all because without all his so called accomplishments, he's nothing. But he resonates because he gives them an easy way out of all the stuff we've discussed, even if it loving vicariously through him

The problem boys and men face is that theyre told from young they have to be 'men', if theyre not men theyll be disrespected, they wont get female attention etc. But also theyre not told how to be men in a healthy way, theres a lot of dads not being around or if they are around not being a positive influence. So when these boys get into the world they extremely easy to manipulate and corrupt, all you have to do is present them with some kind of macho masculinity and acceptance and its a wrap. But however the survive this psyche, deep down they truly believe they arent shit, thet dont want to face this and so its easier to scapegoat and blame others. I do think this issue is societies failing, men have been left behind for the most part. On the flip even if a boy grew up and embraced his feminine side, most likely he would demonise his masculine and supress that which is also not healthy, men are rarely encouraged to just be themselves, probably the only ones that are, are gay boys if they grow up in an accepting environment.

Hes not even allowed out of his house

@Emerald Very interesting insights When Trump won in 2016 I was shocked but I also found it hard to like Hilary, although I wouldve voted for her if I was American. Reason being I felt the system just wasnt honest, it felt like people were putting on an act and trying to just keep the status quo despite the multitude of issues like crazy military spending, impoverished areas not getting good education etc. Obama was a good leader but i felt he was hampered by the system and also being a democrat and keeping donors happy. Bottom line something did need to change in politics, was Trump the best way to shake things up? I mean it wouldve been nice if there was another way but this seems to be the way that presented itself. What we can see Trump does well is bring a plain speaking (even if it is incoherent) being himself persona, at least thats how people take him. I think with establishment politicians, they do lack a real human connection. On the other side AOC is very good at connecting with people and i think that is because shes grown up in her area, not rich and just a normal (but quite brilliant) person. This is the shift politics needs, it needs normal but brilliant leaders, deeply entenched politicians with poitical families like Clinton and Bush are just not gonna cut it anymore, people want reality, even if its just a feeling of reality. So whatever we want to say about Trump, politics will not be the same after him and politicians really need to learn from that going forward.

I would say though I'm a fairly masculine man but and so I find myself in discussions with other guys, friends or otherwise where even if they dont outright support Trump theyll say a lot of stuff that I would say is kinda anti-left, anti-progressive, its pretty frequent actually. I dont mind holding my position and i think i argue it well, without getting emotional or anything like that. But I can imagine that within a group of guys lets say they all think anti-left it would be very hard for one of them to stand up and counter that and seperate themselves from the group. I actually think this is a big factor because a lot of the times in groups of guys, especially young guys they tend to think in the same way, moreso out of fear of being outcast from the group.

Scott Galloway talks in some depth about this on this podcast -

This is a major flaw of democracy, if someone isn't educated on how democracy and government even works how can they really know what they're voting for? This doesn't mean that they shouldn't vote but there needs to be some kind of education around this, otherwise manipulation is always going to happen from either side because the rewards are so great. If Trump says tarriffs will solve everything for those that don't know all it means is everything will get more expensive or won't even make sense to import. I don't believe if people are worried about things getting more expensive that they would vote in an idea that makes things more expensive.

To have a discussion on either side there has to be an effort to agree on a shared reality and so good faith is needed. Now there's definitely bad faith on the left but I don't think it's anywhere near what it is on the right or more specifically maga. Reason being they have to operate in delusion because Trump doesn't make sense outside of the delusion he created. For example if you asked anyone before Trump ran the first election, 'should a convicted criminal be able to run and be a good choice for president?' I guarantee no one would say yes. They espeicially wouldn't say yes they were republican and it was about a dem. If you also asked would someone with several traits of a facist leader be a good president again they would say no. So these are concrete things that they would outright reject in a leader. However when it comes to discussions here and elsewhere, they revolve around excuse making on one side and then trying to prove he is actually these things on the other. They might say 'well he was unfairly targeted and prosecuted' or 'he's not a facist in the strictest definition'. All of this is pointless if you can't recognise the delusion in the first place. What could be interesting conversations are 'could facism be a good thing if done in a certain way?' or 'what appeals about facist leaning leaders to the everyday voter? The truth of the matter Trump appeals to people and surprisingly people on this forum, that doesn't make those people bad but it's curious why they think someone like him is a good solution. Is it that he has convinced them or as they might like to believe, they're playing some kind of 4d chess game that led them to decide he was a good choice?

Thanks Really I think the facist talk is valid in terms of tracking what he might do. If we're being real he does have facist traits, at their worst and given absolute power we have history of what can happen. This isn't to say that he'll do what Hitler but we can look at the effects of shutting down media or being ultra nationalist and the other traits that have been brought up. It definitely has value if we talk about it honestly. I agree if we use it as a dismissive insult it's useless, but if we delve into the actual meaning a d history of facism it makes a lot of sense in the context of Trump