questionreality

Or a grand delusion, in which you are ego-tripping big time, and don't even know it

It's not just controversial - it is gross and in bad taste. Not something you would expect to see at the Olympics. Take a look at the comparison between 2014 Olympics opening ceremony in Sochi and in 2024: Can you see the difference and what actually looks classy?

He blew them out of the proportion on purpose - to make a point overall of the trend he is noticing. Unfortunately, if you been too influenced by the "progressive" ideas, and are in the "progressive" bubble, you will not see what he is talking about. While I agree with you he has a strong pro Russian bias, he still makes solid points which progressives fail to see.

He claims that he is a conservative now and that he changed - so I take his words at face value and yes, I do think that his response is genuine. And I do like his response - I mean it makes sense on some levels, as I personally didn't like the olympic ceremony either.

I will post here 2 interesting perspectives on the opening ceremony from one Russian writer (Dmitry Gluhovskiy - progressive) and a response of a popular intellectual blogger, with sarcasm (conservative): Dmitry Gluhoskiy ( he loved the ceremony and attached the picture with transgender): https://x.com/glukhovsky/status/1817577342195179702 "Today's Europe is much more united around and based on the values of progress, enlightenment, humanism and the idea of the value of human rights than on the values of religion, which has made great efforts to stop progress for centuries. If Europe still defined itself through religion, Europeans would have an average life expectancy of 25 years, like in France before the Revolution, the population would be generally poor and illiterate, and any attempt to introduce scientific thinking and instill in people the value of their lives would lead to accusations of heresy. Long live enlightenment, long live progress!" And response from Nikolai Sobolev, blogger, translated into English: "The writer Glukhovsky* is an excellent example of an intellectual who is thoroughly imbued with rationalistic and liberal propaganda. How does this manifest itself? A person sincerely believes that there is some kind of linear “progressive” development - moral, like the generally accepted stage-technological one. And the countries that are the most economically developed, at the same time, according to the logic of such “thinkers,” are pioneers not only of technological, but also of moral development. These countries, based on this popular point of view, show us, the entire human civilization, a “natural future” that cannot be overcome and bypassed. Here, we need to be progressive, that’s the only way. In feathers from the ass, for example. Morality, like iPhones, you know, evolves. Here, the 18th century - then all sorts of stupid Kants could write nonsense about the moral imperative, be inspired by Christ’s “Sermon on the Mount” and all sorts of evangelical nonsense. What fools! They didn’t understand life. Now, for example, in the 21st century, their truly smart, civilized followers no longer stoop to talking about morality, ethics and God. All this primitiveness and tales of old people from the past will be rejected extremely “progressively” in favor of human freedom from everything that can fetter violent orgasm and public ejaculation. Another thing! Progressive. After all, who ever said that, for example, you can’t have sex with dogs? A disgusting anachronism. Yes, and those same pedophiles, of course, did not choose their hobbies. You need to be understanding. A terrible existence determined their consciousness; how can we reject Nature itself, right? People are not to blame. Condemnation of any form of natural deviation is a barbaric rudiment and a relic of the dark past. Acceptance, assimilation of any deviation with the public display of genitals to hundreds of millions of people (at the Olympics, jokes aside, one transgender person set his balls on fire) is the only true path available. This is human Progress. You are crouching, twisting your nose, you don’t understand, but Western European civilization and the writer Glukhovsky have finally realized that any such crazy thing needs deep penetration and active popularization. Well, religions, all these commandments, the moral law... everything is relative. Today we want with a dog, tomorrow with a turtle. On the stage. There is no God, no one is watching. We killed him and put a transgender guy in a funny hat in his place. Lol. Another child is nearby so that he progresses faster in the right direction. So that pharmaceutical companies can quickly squeeze the progressive person of the Future out of his puny little body. There will be no conclusion. The only sad thing is that too often apparently smart people turn out to be absolute idiots. And I’m not talking about Kant now."

Not all of the athletes. And this doesn't change the fact that Russia who was expelled from the games, and countries like US was allowed to, is a hypocrisy at it's finest. Also, why is Israel allowed to compete?

This is false equivalence. Claiming that the earth is flat and that you are the most conscious and the wisest person are not in the same category. Again, there is a big difference in thinking you are the best at particular niche, where there is a quantitative measurement (such as sports, finance, etc) versus positioning yourself as the most conscious and wisest human on planet. If you don't see the difference, then I cannot explain any further than that. As @Bobby_2021 and I have already pointed out, he will make all sorts of political predictions and statements, and when he is wrong, he will just say "circumstances have changed". As I said before, he also almost never admits that he is wrong (in anything). So if he made the wrong prediction, it's not that he made a mistake, it's just the circumstances have changed. The reason I am bringing this up, is that it's an occurring pattern that those with eyes opened already have seen for years.

Just because one is able to produce videos like this, does not mean that they have deeper understanding than almost everyone on the planet. I am not denying that he has a lot of knowledge and intelligence - but as a rule of thumb, the wisest people never claim that they are the wisest. It's incredible that majority of his followers are not able to see the absurdity of such statements.

I cannot believe what I read, I had to read this 5 times. What makes you think that you have better understanding of politics than almost everyone on the planet? Politics is not even your main domain. The problem is that you don't actually hold yourself accountable, and just brush off being wrong with circumstances changing. People who are actually wise and conscious, don't usually make such statements. In the past you claimed to be the most conscious human on the planet and that you reached the highest levels, and now this? If you are serious and truly believe this - then you have to be delusional. How do you not see the problem with such statements?

We are not talking about spirituality here. We are talking about politics and the probability of a certain candidate winning. Are you sure that you are posting in the right sub? If this "work" that you do, does not make you more humble and makes you think that you know better than everyone else in every field - then you are doing the wrong kind "work". There is a clear difference between giving authority to others and being a total delusional, full of ego, arrogance and thinking that you know best. If you do the right "work" for long enough, you will see the amount of ego tripping majority of so called "gurus", including Leo do. Pride goes before the fall - remember this.

What makes you think that in this field you have higher intelligence and higher competence? What makes you think that you always know best? Your condescending attitude towards others (ex: depraved bookie), and the amount of arrogance/ego that you display is surprising to see, given that you been doing this "work" for so long.

The point is people pull out odds out of their ass but usually don't bother to put their money where their mouth is

My point was, that the odds that you came up with are exactly reverse opposite of what the bookies are giving. So if you truly believe what you are saying, it should be a very +EV bet for you. In general, I would not argue with the bookies, the vast majority of the times they are proven to be correct. Follow the money as the old saying goes.

I am glad to see that not everyone on this forum is anti-Trump and just repeats the MSM narrative

If you truly believe those are the odds, then you should bet a good amount of money on Kamilla, you would be printing money.

Where do you get those odds? According to bookies it's actually the other way around, Trump is a 60 % favorite to win the election: https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics But you also some years ago said that Trump has no chance of becoming president, correct?

So are you suggesting to do what the bolsheviks did in Russia? Perhaps study history and understand the danger of leftwing Marxists and the damage that they have done. What was done at the olympics is a disgrace and I myself am not a conservative, nor a Christian.

I myself am not a conservative and consider myself a liberal, but this was just purely disgusting to see. This is when I can really understand conservatives who call this type of stuff "satanism". These guys are clearly pushing their agenda down everyone's throats and people are just not going to have it

Yes! This is a must, I really hope that it happens. Not to mention, it would give his audience an exposure to your YT channel, a win-win

While war can land on any president's term at any moment, there are different probabilities to it. While 4 years is a small sample size, it still says something in the limited amount of information that we have. Trump is a negotiator and while he was seen as Russia's agent (failed Russia gate), this is one of the factors that could have prevented the war from happening. Why do you take Trump's rhetoric of being a dictator for a day so seriously but other rhetoric of his you just dismiss as lies? You really can't have it both ways. Also, knowing you - if the roles were reversed and wars would have happened under Trump's presidency, you would be saying the exact opposite. Putin has proven time and time again that you cannot trust anything that comes out of his mouth. Did you forget when before the invasion he was asked if he was going to attack Ukraine and he kept denying this for months? I find it hilarious that you actually believe Putin's narrative - perhaps if you actually followed Russian politics and knew Russian language, you would know that it's a load of BS.

I am not saying that was the only reason that he didn't invade Ukraine, but the fact is he didn't. 4 years of sample size is more than good enough, given that the US presidential term is only 4 years, and we need to go off something. The idea that he was trying to come to some diplomatic arrangement is pure speculation on your part, we don't know this for sure. You need to give the credit where it's due - while Trump was president there was no wars.

@Leo Gura @aurum How come Putin did not invade Ukraine while Trump was president, but invaded it under Obama (Crimea) and under Biden? We have 4 years of sample size of Trump presidency, but for some reason you guys tend to ignore this and come up with your abstract theories Also, Trump is more likely to finish the war and have them make peace, rather than have the war prolonged with more lost lives and more American tax dollars going to the war.

As in comparison to Kamala Harris LOL? Kamala Harris would be perceived as a joke by Putin, who are you kidding?

Respect in this context means not to be perceived as someone who he can easily run over, someone who can be unpredictable and can take bold action if needed. For someone like Putin, it is actually easier to deal with Biden's administration than Trump's - because you actually never know what you can get with Trump, it may backfire at any point.

That's not what he said - he meant for dealing with ruthless leaders like Putin you need a guy who Putin will respect and will not perceive as weak. Not everything comes down to childhood trauma as you think - sometimes things are way more simple than that.