Andrew Tate Arrested

[Nilsi]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Pyramids were not built by slaves. Not sure that cathedrals or Parthenon was either.

Not all ancient structures like the Pyramids of Giza, the Parthenon, and cathedrals were built by slaves. Some were built by skilled workers and craftsmen who were paid for their labor. However, it's true that in some cases, forced labor was used, particularly during times of war or as a form of punishment. For example, it's believed that some of the workers who built the Pyramids of Giza were conscripted laborers. However, the exact nature of their labor and status is still the subject of much debate among historians.

From ChatGPT.

Regardless of which structure was built by whom, you get my point, no? - in any case it were the peasants that built this as monuments to the king/emperor/ruler's power.

Edited February 5 by Nilsi

[Nilsi]

Saying that Andrew Tate doesn't care about his followers is like saying Elon Musk doesn't care about the minions that build his rockets - it's obvious they are not philanthropists and just need manpower to actualize their vision; whether that vision is compelling to you or not is a different matter.

As far as exploitation goes, I wouldn't be so quick to throw this word around. The only people that got exploited in Tate's scheme were the guys that got seduced by the camgirls - a rather negligible sacrifice, if you ask me.

[StarStruck]

@musicandmath111 watch this. Don’t be a SD green hippie. 
 

 

[Consept]

4 hours ago, Nilsi said:

Saying that Andrew Tate doesn't care about his followers is like saying Elon Musk doesn't care about the minions that build his rockets - it's obvious they are not philanthropists and just need manpower to actualize their vision; whether that vision is compelling to you or not is a different matter.

As far as exploitation goes, I wouldn't be so quick to throw this word around. The only people that got exploited in Tate's scheme were the guys that got seduced by the camgirls - a rather negligible sacrifice, if you ask me.

The crucial thing is what are the main drivers and what is the end goal of a person. In Musks case he wants to advance the world in what he believes is the best way, electric cars, rockets etc. He's obviously not doing it for the money as he's already got more money than he could ever spend and also there would be much more easier ways to make money than what he does. He does want power and influence but that's more likely to allow him to complete his goals. 

With Tate if you look at all his interests there is no higher goal it's simply to amass as much money and power as is possible. So when you say 'actualise their vision', that is his vision. That's fine if people want to support that and help him do that, but the whole point is that he is manipulating people because he makes people think that he does care about them when in actuality manipulating people IS how he's achieving his goal. He needs them to follow him and he also needs their money. 

This has been a constant through his life. The cam girl business is literally him pretending (as he himself says) to love women and then manipulating them to make him money, which he gets by manipulating guys to fall in love with the girls and then using more manipulative tactics to milk as much money from them as possible. This is exploitation on exploitation, this is Tates true skill and this is what amassed his fortune. Why would he just stop at that, he's using those some skills and using it on a different demographic, young men. He's giving them exactly what they want and getting as much money as they can give, its the same thing. Musk is not even close to this, people work with Musk knowing upfront what he's trying to do, whether he's a good boss or not is another question, but Tate is completely different

 

 

[Carl-Richard]

17 hours ago, Nilsi said:

I don't understand his conversion either. That's when he broke character and surrendered his will to power - which is a shame.

Maybe his jail sentence is God's punishment for him chickening out? 

He isn't concerned about being edgy 😉 He is all about the Chess moves.

[Danioover9000]

@StarStruck

5 hours ago, StarStruck said:

@musicandmath111 watch this. Don’t be a SD green hippie. 
 

 

   I AM BERSERK, I AM LOVE, I AM FIGHT:

 

[Nilsi]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

He isn't concerned about being edgy 😉 He is all about the Chess moves.

He might not have been conscious of his Nietzschean metaphysics, but with his conversion he certainly surrendered them.

Im sure he did this to appeal to the Muslims and position himself as their posterboy, but this was ultimately a self-destructive move; hes now in a moral schism and doesnt really know whats up and down anymore. He could have died happy without ever bowing to anyone, but this ship has now sailed.

I dont think hes faking it btw - he might have had a vested interest in his conversion, but his faith seems to be genuine.

Edited February 5 by Nilsi

[Nilsi]

4 hours ago, Consept said:

With Tate if you look at all his interests there is no higher goal it's simply to amass as much money and power as is possible. So when you say 'actualise their vision', that is his vision. That's fine if people want to support that and help him do that, but the whole point is that he is manipulating people because he makes people think that he does care about them when in actuality manipulating people IS how he's achieving his goal. He needs them to follow him and he also needs their money. 

Beauty is a higher goal. An artist actualizes "their vision" - do you call that selfish and degenerate? Or could it be that this is actually a noble pursuit?

We can discuss how much should be sacrificed in the name of beauty, but if we can not agree that art is not limited to a canvas, this conversation will go nowhere.

You think Im joking, but Im not.

Everyone is quick to surrender beauty in the name of ethics, but consider the opposite and everyone loses their shit.

Of course the ideal is to find a synthesis between both beauty and goodness and Im open to that possibility, but you will  always face crossroads in life where you have to make triage decisions - but you dont want to contemplate that of course.

Edited February 5 by Nilsi

[Danioover9000]

@Nilsi

13 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

He might not have been conscious of his Nietzschean metaphysics, but with his conversion he certainly surrendered them.

Im sure he did this to appeal to the Muslims and position himself as their posterboy, but this was ultimately a self-destructive move; hes now in a moral schism and doesnt really know whats up and down anymore. He could have died happy without ever bowing to anyone, but this ship has now sailed.

I dont think hes faking it btw - he might have had a vested interest in his conversion, but his faith seems to be genuine.

   Still questionable if he's faking this conversion to becoming a Muslim. Even though it depends on stages of development, cognitive and moral development, personality typing, ego development, states, life experiences and other lines of development per area of mastery and life, and the ideologies indoctrinated into you from birth and upbringing. Andrew Tate's ego development seems like an Opportunist, and that ego type will say and do anything that is deceptive to manipulate and leverage any benefits to their self interests first and foremost, damn the others.

   Andrew Tate is now mostly untrustworthy. If he feels fine abusing and pimping young women for his OnlyFans biz, and scamming men, there's little moral integrity. That's it.

[Jannes]

8 hours ago, Nilsi said:

Saying that Andrew Tate doesn't care about his followers is like saying Elon Musk doesn't care about the minions that build his rockets - it's obvious they are not philanthropists and just need manpower to actualize their vision; whether that vision is compelling to you or not is a different matter.

As far as exploitation goes, I wouldn't be so quick to throw this word around. The only people that got exploited in Tate's scheme were the guys that got seduced by the camgirls - a rather negligible sacrifice, if you ask me.

What is Tates "higher vision” lol ? He doesn’t provide value. If anything he provides negative value. The guys that follow him become ignorant retards and the guys he exploits become bitter and resentful. 

[Nilsi]

1 minute ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Nilsi

   Still questionable if he's faking this conversion to becoming a Muslim. Even though it depends on stages of development, cognitive and moral development, personality typing, ego development, states, life experiences and other lines of development per area of mastery and life, and the ideologies indoctrinated into you from birth and upbringing. Andrew Tate's ego development seems like an Opportunist, and that ego type will say and do anything that is deceptive to manipulate and leverage any benefits to their self interests first and foremost, damn the others.

   Andrew Tate is now mostly untrustworthy. If he feels fine abusing and pimping young women for his OnlyFans biz, and scamming men, there's little moral integrity. That's it.

The point is that he wants to offload his conscience to some other - God - instead of keeping his eyes on the price; more power.

So which is it now? God is dead, or no? You cant have it both ways.

[Nilsi]

3 minutes ago, Jannes said:

What is Tates "higher vision” lol ? He doesn’t provide value. If anything he provides negative value. The guys that follow him become ignorant retards and the guys he exploits become bitter and resentful. 

What value does a work of art provide? Or a novel? Or philosophy? Or a movie? It inspires you, makes you dream and makes you feel emotions you didnt feel before. This is why exceptional people are an end in themselves; precisely because they are so unusual and rarefied.

[StarStruck]

@Danioover9000

[Carl-Richard]

36 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

He might not have been conscious of his Nietzschean metaphysics, but with his conversion he certainly surrendered them.

To be truly selfish, you cannot give yourself to any one philosophy. That would be to give yourself to something outside yourself. If Tate is truly the power God, he would switch the moment it becomes pragmatic to do so.

[Consept]

14 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

Beauty is a higher goal. An artist actualizes "their vision" - do you call that selfish and degenerate? Or could it be that this is actually a noble pursuit?

When i mention Tates goals, im not guessing, he himself will say that his aim is to conquer as a king did in days gone by, he will say that he does want to amass as much wealth and power as possible. In of itself theres nothing wrong with this he is free to go ahead, I might think its shallow or not a deserving purpose, which actually i dont really, but if i did i would be free to think and make that judgement as i might hold higher pursuits more worthwhile. 

Now if we can agree that these are Tates goals and you can call the idea of achieving them beauty if you like, as in its beauty to set a goal and achieve it. Then really you can put any achievement or any individual goal that is achieved in this same bracket, despite the consequences. So for example if im a serial killer i could say there is beauty in me going out and killing 100 people, which is also fine but as you say there is a trade off for the beauty which is the loss that is incurred. This is similar with Tate, if his goal is to achieve money, power, status and he hurts numerous people along the way I would 100% be willing to sacrifice that beauty for the people that hes hurt. 

For me its not even about 'goodness', Tate doesnt have to good, but what i would label not good is the negative effect he has on people which is calculated, manipulative and deceptive. To me he is a con man, in that he promises much, while taking your money and not really delivering, yes there is an art to that, but lets call it what it is. Also its easy to talk from a distance and pontificate, if you were affected by Tates actions, lets say your sister fell in love with him and ended up doing cam girl work which she later regretted or when you were young and vulnerable you scrapped together 5k to do a course with him that didnt actually get you anywhere you wouldnt be saying 'yeah i was just a necessary sacrifice in the art of Tate getting rich'.

You also might say that all these people he gets money from chose to give it to him on some level, which is true, but then that is the genius of Tate and what all con man do, they offer you your wildest dreams, for the cam girl its to fall in love with a strong man and make money, for the men that pay for cam girls its sex/love with a beautiful girl, for the young men that follow him its a strong father figure and a way to become rich and strong themselves. These are all people in need, Tate has an intuitive knack for indentifying these needs, pretending to fulfil them and taking as much money from them in the process. It is art but not an art that should be encouraged and celebrated. 

[Nilsi]

6 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

To be truly selfish, you cannot give yourself to any one philosophy. That would be to give yourself to something outside yourself. If Tate is truly the power God, he would switch the moment it becomes pragmatic to do so.

If he's just faking it, yeah. Maybe you're right.

But it would be a better story if he couldn't handle the pressure anymore, gave up his divine claim to power and then got sacked by the "matrix" for it.

Edited February 5 by Nilsi

[Carl-Richard]

@Nilsi

Is Nietzsche's concept of power holistic? Because if it's not, it will fail to address human needs. Examples are things like self-determination theory's "autonomy, competence and belonging", or Plato's "man-lion-beast", or Freud's "id-ego-superego", or the biopsychosocial model, or the triune brain. Models with three parts are usually the way to go ;D 

[UDT]

@Nilsi If he does not go to jail, he is still rich and has even more attention on him so that only helps him in the long term.

[Nilsi]

42 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

@Nilsi

Is Nietzsche's concept of power holistic? Because if it's not, it will fail to address human needs. Examples are things like self-determination theory's "autonomy, competence and belonging", or Plato's "man-lion-beast", or Freud's "id-ego-superego", or the biopsychosocial model, or the triune brain. Models with three parts are usually the way to go ;D 

Nietzsches conception of power is more akin to Freuds Libido or Platos Eros - kinda.

Its fundamentally about asserting your vision of the world and doing so increasingly effective - he would have no problem with you asserting your version of "autonomy, competence and belonging;" he would however have a problem with you hesitating to do so, because of ethical quandries.

Its important to get that he wrote his philosophy for kings and emperors, not for peasants; and did so mainly as a reaction to moral universalism. He was not interested in creating a philosopy that could work for everyone; thats the whole idea behind the Übermensch - the exceptional man whose ends justify all means. The peasants have to follow the categorical imperative, of course, or all hell breaks loose.

Edited February 5 by Nilsi

[Carl-Richard]

@Nilsi

Unethical behavior makes satisfying social needs difficult.