What Am I

Well, that is an oft-repeated theory. Those greedy fools just love the money too much. I must say though, I'm not as convinced, and I think it's a disservice to yourselves to be so sure that's the reason.

Right, sounds like you'd fall on that end of the spectrum in terms of the debate then.

I can't believe you guys didn't notice which side of the fence Aubrey Marcus fell on. I could have told you years ago that he was leaning rightward in terms of his current political support. Same with Rogan, Musk, Friedman, Brand, etc. Here's another shocker if it's not so obvious, but Ana Kasparian is someone else who is clearly making the same move. I apologize if this post comes off as brash. I'm just surprised it was such a question, even though none of them openly stated their allegiance. It's interesting that many on this list were previously solidly on the left.

@Joshe Fair enough, good clarifications. I think I do get where you're coming from, and I empathize with your guys' plight. I'm sure the way forward for all of us together will materialize at some point.

There's something pretty interesting going on. I'm seeing a lot of conversations among Democrats where some want to look inward to see where positive changes can be made, and others seem to want to just double down on previous ways. It's quite a sharp contrast. I predict the possibility that at least some of the Dems wanting introspection may start a process of peeling off the party as well, assuming common ground and a unified strategy proves impossible. Just a thought, I could be way off.

To make sure I wasn't just misinterpreting tone or something, I checked with AI to get an objective opinion. Q: Can you please summarize this? A: The text expresses frustration and sarcasm towards young white men who feel underrepresented and want politicians to cater to their needs, despite not facing significant hardships. The author suggests that their concerns are trivial and not worthy of attention, and uses provocative language to make a point. Q: Does it sound as if the author likes young white men? A: No, the text does not convey a positive sentiment towards young white men. The author's tone is dismissive, sarcastic, and mocking, indicating a strong negative attitude towards this group. I'm sorry, I feel like I'm picking on you, but it's just something that stands out to me. For all the talk I'm seeing of winning over young men, I can't imagine it actually happening when there's an undertone of disgust to contend with. That type of thing gets expressed subconsciously, even if you don't make it apparent on the surface. They would definitely pick up on it, and I'm guessing that's what's already been happening.

If there's no sincerity, I don't think it'd work. It sounds like the Dems would continue to feel great disdain for certain members of those groups, as evidenced below:

Oh wow, I didn't realize you post in this forum subsection, Scholar. Good stuff. What's your experience with classical esoteric practices? Have you ever had success in meditation or used psychedelics? There's a process by which you can become "freed" from yourself. A type of rewiring of your identity, which breaks it away from an entanglement with your conceptual mind and into a blossoming of liberation into the part of you that's raw, unfiltered awakeness (consciousness). When you reach that state, literally nothing is wrong in the world. And to go further, literally nothing is anything at that point. Concepts lose their hold, and you become a pure expression of existence itself, as clear as glass and fully alive. It's something that needs to be personally experienced to fully grasp, like the taste of an apple. Have you ever listened to Sam Harris describe meditation and its eventual results? He may be more appropriate for you as a guide if you're into teachers who instruct from a rational viewpoint. And if you're already aware of all this, I apologize for being redundant.

Ok, so first of all, I promise I don't watch The View, lol. I just saw this clip going around, and I thought it'd be an interesting opportunity to see examples of different ways the election loss can be handled. Which method do you guys think is optimal for aiming towards future improvements?

I'm seeing more and more people recognizing the deficiency, so I bet it'll be addressed, one way or the other. lol yeah, it's interesting how that works out, where someone explicitly practicing masculinity can give the opposite vibes to a discerning individual. Rogan is way better than Tate in that respect, because Rogan just lives his life.

Yeah, but I think the problem with Kamala and podcasts is that she probably lacks the ability to comfortably put on a show and be a good guest. She very easily could have gone on Rogan, and she was expressly invited. I'm guessing her campaign thought better of it due to the risks of a poor showing. Either way, it may be a requirement going forward that politicians are simply required to be more personable. For Destiny, when I see him giving advice in weight training, finance, relationships, etc., I do think he sees himself as a bit of a role model. But you guys are probably correct that he won't reach the levels of someone like Joe Rogan. Someone who's currently unknown may need to rise up and fill that gap on the left.

Let's just hope the creation of these left-wing figures is organic. Modern people can sniff out inauthenticity so much easier these days. Even many on the left agree that Kamala's campaign had the stink of being carefully constructed, and something like that won't win hearts and minds.

I won't argue with you too much, lol. I actually like Rogan and Musk, and pretty much all the other popular figures currently leaning right. I just think both sides offer impressive characters. Probably because when it comes down to it, they're all just people. We'll just have to see where this all goes.

But I did qualify that he's not a perfect role-model for everyone. Alternatively, neither is Rogan. Everybody needs someone whose similarities resonate and help guide the path forward. Destiny has the capacity to fill a certain niche, much more so than he is currently. I'm not even technically on his side politically, and I'm still enthralled with the quality of the content. Though you may have a point that the Dems need more of an "every-man" to reach a wider audience. It's a tough gap to fill.

Well, from a more charitable perspective, Destiny is a pretty good role-model for high-intellect men of a certain temperament. Beyond championing intelligence, he also favors responsibility and well-reasoned positions. I imagine Scholar pulls a lot of influence from Destiny's way of being. I don't watch Hasan, but from what I have seen, it doesn't seem like he'd lead the youth anywhere positive. Most likely it'd be into some form of communist revolution, lol. If Destiny would soften some of his rough edges, he could take up quite a position of influence in the future.

Whether this is actually true or not, it's 100% the perception for many, and the left would be wise to pay attention to it. Probably an incredibly common theme among the youth. I think it goes along with my earlier post which pointed out young peoples' rebellious nature and dislike for assumed authority. To be honest, that aspect of spiral dynamics rubs me the wrong way a bit as well. The idea that some are simply inferior, and therefore incapable of understanding the factors that define their own inferiority. But my SD knowledge is weak as hell, so it could be a misunderstanding on my part. Or maybe I need to adjust to an uncomfortable reality.

Ah, gotcha. This is perhaps even cooler. We're brothers in silicon. That's true, our professions don't have to define us. God knows I'm into some stuff that's very much outside of computers.

This was my exact guess as to your likely profession. Very cool. Thanks for your analysis. I'm similar in the sense that I largely run off of careful observation and intuition as well. It's tricky to come up with anything concrete when human complexity is so off the charts, but there's probably a lot of truth to what you're saying.

I don't know if you watch Destiny's stream, but he's talking about doing that very thing, as well as other forms of left-leaning media. And he's working on forming coalitions towards that end.

Well, maybe you can help clarify something that I'm not getting a solid answer for, both in this thread and others. In your education in politics and history, is it the case that the differences in ideologies also seemingly split along male/female traits? It's something I genuinely don't know, but I could swear we're at least seeing some semblance of it in modern times. It's important to point out that I'm not calling men on the left feminine weaklings. That's obviously not an appropriate hard-and-fast rule, because exceptions are apparent everywhere. But is it way off to assume some kind of correlation here?

Interesting idea. Maybe upwards is the only way forwards, and we'll be in this weird sexual dichotomy split until it happens.

I wonder if it's a "chicken or egg" scenario. Is the right wing historically more likely to draw in those of masculine preference, and perhaps especially those where the masculinity has turned a bit toxic?

Yes, very strange indeed. Quite a flip. But sir, are you not aware that Kamala just had a brat summer? It's all so manufactured. The left did it to themselves, really. Young people are especially repelled by inauthenticity.

Probably true by measure of sheer volume. But in terms of its overall impact, the legacy attack-Trump media seems to be weak, and continues to get weaker.

But what's your explanation for the voting habits from the youth who aren't radicalized?