That the extreme overreaction to Andrew Tate so closely mirrors the overreaction to Jordan Peterson really exposes their detractors for what they are. The messaging from these two men could not be more different: there is really only one common message that they have both been consistent on, and it appears to be the message that upsets the regime the most: they seem to be absolutely horrified and furious that anybody would actually turn to young men and say, "You are not a piece of shit."
How does "it upsets the regime the most" apply to Peterson? The regime allowed him to rake in millions on mainstream platforms like YouTube and Patreon. Even within the framework of brainless contrarianism, Peterson never did come across as particularly threatening to "the regime" given the huge reach and profit he was allowed within the mainstream.
Tate is just the male, PUA equivalent of an OF THOT. He made a fortune pretending to care about lonely young men just like the THOTs do with their simps.
Peterson and Tate both became mainstream in spite of regime efforts to censor and suppress them, because their message resonated with too many people to keep it quiet.
You seem to be laboring under the misconception that the regime's control of mainstream discourse is so absolute that anybody who overcomes it must be a regime agent. The reason you believe this is because no voice which expresses your ideas about Jews has been able to enjoy that level of mainstream success, and you believe that you are so obviously correct that this can only be the result of a censorship campaign so efficient that it amounts to the internet equivalent of damnatio memoriae. You are incapable of considering the possibility that almost everyone outside of your stormfag echo chamber finds both you and your beliefs so repugnant that they simply refuse to engage with you.
Peterson and Tate both became mainstream in spite of regime efforts to censor and suppress them
Peterson stayed on countless mainstream platforms. You aren't contesting my claim that he did. Arbitrarily labeling allowing Peterson's mainstream access as "efforts to suppress" doesn't make it so. Your incorrect usage of words doesn't shape reality.
You seem to be laboring under the misconception that the regime's control of mainstream discourse is so absolute that anybody who overcomes it must be a regime agent.
You're putting words in my mouth now. I never said Tate was an agent of the regime. I said he was a shameless profiteer, like OF THOTs. The arguments against Peterson are also well-traveled here and are far more extensive than merely pointing out his mainstream access. I chose to highlight his lack of cancellation to contradict the BS narrative you are spouting here. It wasn't supposed to be a comprehensive case against him. That can be arranged.
The reason you believe this is because no voice which expresses your ideas about Jews has been able to enjoy that level of mainstream success
My views on Jews have a long history of being mainstream, actually. The world existed prior to the 1960s. Jew-worshipping bullshit is a recent phenomenon.
On race more widely, a majority of white Americans opposed interracial marriage into the 1990s. My grandparents were alive when nearly 100% of Americans opposed it.
you believe that you are so obviously correct that this can only be the result of a censorship campaign so efficient that it amounts to the internet equivalent of damnatio memoriae.
"Repeal the 19th" isn't exactly catching on, either. What's your excuse?
You are incapable of considering the possibility that almost everyone outside of your stormfag echo chamber finds both you and your beliefs so repugnant that they simply refuse to engage with you.
Are you challenging Peterson's own public comments about making millions of dollars off his public commentary? Are you claiming that white nationalists and critics of Jewish power haven't been censored?
Kanye West lost hundred of millions criticizing Jewish power. Peterson made millions of dollars on the regime's own mainstream platforms. You would have me believe that the former isn't a threat, but the latter is. Again, like Imp, you only apply the "regime is super threatened by this guy because it cancelled the shit out of him!" logic when it suits you.
You would have me believe that the former isn't a threat, but the latter is.
Yep. You are not a threat to their power.
Right now, simply for the purposes of this conversation, I am paying you the courtesy of assuming that you actually believe what you say you believe, although I genuinely believe most of you are feds. Even those of you who aren't, and who are actually stupid enough to unironically believe the modern world would benefit from repeating all of the ideological failures of the 20th century, contribute nothing of value to this or any other discussion that is actually worth having. Your entire purpose, whether you're aware of it or not, is to discredit forums like this one and generally undermine the quality of ideological discourse in dissident right spaces. Even those of you who are not regime agents are still regime agents. You are pathetic.
As is the case with all of the hyper-rich, most of Kanye West's money didn't actually exist in the form of material wealth, and so he lost nothing of actual value by speaking out the way he did. He's fine. All he achieved was to further prove how useless you all are.
Again, assuming you are sincere in your beliefs, what you refuse to accept is that people like me, who actually participate in spaces like this, are your next logical allies in ideological terms, but even we aren't okay with your bullshit. You are a form of discursive Kryptonite, so radioactive that you are incapable of convincing anybody who doesn't already agree with you. You can whine and bitch all you want: you will never achieve anything.
Why do you think that? I love the irony of /ourguys/ getting called feds all the time while the same people bitch that we call everyone Jews and IDF agents.
who are actually stupid enough to unironically believe the modern world would benefit from repeating all of the ideological failures of the 20th century
You don't even pay attention. We're all about ending the ideological failures of liberalism. That's why we critique it. You hate us for it because you are one. You are the ones repeating the ideological failures of the 20th century because you are the liberals.
contribute nothing of value to this or any other discussion that is actually worth having
If it weren't for us, clowns like you and Imp would have everyone here believe that Solanas invented trannies, Peggy McIntosh invented racial politics, and Jordan Peterson is experiencing brutal regime repression by being on YouTube and Patreon. 🤡
generally undermine the quality of ideological discourse in dissident right spaces
Believing complete bullshit = quality. Got it. What even is the "dissident right" to you? Is it when you stan the FOTM "populist" Republican?
Kanye West's money didn't actually exist in the form of material wealth
?????
I'm pretty sure he has a private jet, lives in mansions, etc. His access to that sort of thing is now in Jeopardy thanks to all his cancellations. Unlike Peterson, his public reach has also been extremely curtailed. What are your thoughts on Professor Griff and Public Enemy if you think West will be just fine?
Again, assuming you are sincere in your beliefs, what you refuse to accept is that people like me, who actually participate in spaces like this, are your next logical allies in ideological terms
Some of you are potential converts, not allies. If you prefer trannies over wives, pornographers over children, liberalism over nationalism, and Jews over whites, you are no ally of mine. FFS, Peterson works for Ben "I don't care about the browning of America" Shapiro, and you are trying to say you are some sort of ally.
You are a form of discursive Kryptonite, so radioactive that you are incapable of convincing anybody who doesn't already agree with you.
This is provably false. I used to have beliefs more in line with yours. Aside from me, groups like NJP, while small, continue to grow.
You haven't challenged my assertions about the past popularity of my beliefs either. You haven't challenged any of my facts. Your whole string of comments is just a childish outburst dressed up as some sort of serious critique of my world view while ironically whining about the quality of discourse. You are a childish clown.
He really sold out lately. Backing TERFs, backing "porn bad" cults and then supporting a "women's rights" war in Iran.
The message that upsets the regime the most: They seem to be absolutely horrified and furious that anybody would actually turn to young men and say, "You are not a piece of shit."
And people still doubt me on the nature of the regime.
I actually don't agree with you that there is a secret cabal of feminists coordinating a global conspiracy. I think much of our society's prioritization of women's wants and needs over men is an emergent phenomenon that can be explained largely by biology.
To the extent that there is a global conspiracy, the people behind it, who are mostly men, are absolutely happy to let feminism run rampant: partly because of its effects on reproduction, and partly because nothing scares those people more than the prospect of a generation of young men with skill, confidence and nothing to lose. They would rather have young men be emasculated, demoralized and consumed by self-loathing, too weak to mount any effective resistance.
I think much of our society's prioritization of women's wants and needs over men is an emergent phenomenon that can be explained largely by biology.
What about the sheer number of women in power, all acting to advance women's position in society?
To the extent that there is a global conspiracy, the people behind it, who are mostly men, are absolutely happy to let feminism run rampant: partly because of its effects on reproduction, and partly because nothing scares those people more than the prospect of a generation of young men with skill, confidence and nothing to lose.
Except if they were happy with the system, they wouldn't want to destroy it. It doesn't make sense to say that they want young men to be kicked down by the system because they won't resist, because nobody would resist a system that's working for them either - there has to be some level of sadism in why they are targeted so openly and obviously, and if you think about it long enough, you can't land on anyone other than women who would find that enjoyable to inflict on people.
It doesn't make sense to say they want young men to be kicked down by the system because they won't resist it.
First of all, yes it does. Secondly, I never said I believe it will actually work. Men have proven to be more resilient, and more willing to fight for their freedom, than I think the social engineering aficionados were prepared for.
I notice you don't apply this logic to your enemies. In other words, constant fear mongering about "white supremacy" and "anti-semitism " isn't evidence of us being a threat to the system in your eyes. That's just wamen playing 5D chess or whatever. It's not like brainless contrarianism is worthwhile anyway, though.
Another amusing fact about Tate is how he made bank off his "Hustlers Academy." I guess getting rich pretending to care about lonely men is only a problem when women do it.
You're far from the only person like this among "right" liberals, to be fair. There is a broad trend among these types in which they flip flop between celebrating scamming parasites out of some misguided sense of Social Darwinism or condemning the scamming parasites for taking advantage of certain pet issues in certain ways.
notice you don't apply this logic to your enemies. In other words, constant fear mongering about "white supremacy" and "anti-semitism " isn't evidence of us being a threat to the system in your eyes.
No, it isn't. Because you aren't.
You're just useful idiots who everyone hates and can be used to smear any movement easily. The misogyny card is losing power, send in the white supremacists, that way we can say being anti-woman is racist.
You are the death knell for any useful movement. When you attach yourselves to anything, it dies.
The most truthful way to prove you are worthless is to remind you that being anti-Israel is supported by The Squad™ and people constantly being up "race based discrimination against white people" on the right. Issues where women are the antagonist are barely, if ever, mentioned.
Remember that grifter, America First Legal, and how they took on the Biden policy bailing out female businesses first...by talking about the next paragraph which said minorities qualify before whites...even though women qualified before everyone.
Even when ESG is being talked about, it's in the context of the climate cult or race, even though the gender policy is the most damaging to the target group.
Another amusing fact about Tate is how he made bank off his "Hustlers Academy." I guess getting rich pretending to care about lonely men is only a problem when women do it.
I don't think he's exploiting the same way as women do. What they're using is deeply ingrained biological tendencies combined with trauma inflicted by the feminist system. He's just selling a get rich quick scam, as far as I can tell.
I don't think anyone is under the illusion that he is a good person in general, but instead operating on the logic - if feminists hate him so much, he must be someone of value.
You're just useful idiots who everyone hates and can be used to smear any movement easily.
You just got done defending finance capital in another conversation with me. I'm sure the system considers defending the global banking system the epitome of threatening behavior. 🤡
What the hell movement are you even talking about? You just sit on the internet whining about women for hundreds of days in a row. Do you think your behavior would improve the reputation of anyone associated with it? LOL
That the extreme overreaction to Andrew Tate so closely mirrors the overreaction to Jordan Peterson really exposes their detractors for what they are. The messaging from these two men could not be more different: there is really only one common message that they have both been consistent on, and it appears to be the message that upsets the regime the most: they seem to be absolutely horrified and furious that anybody would actually turn to young men and say, "You are not a piece of shit."
How does "it upsets the regime the most" apply to Peterson? The regime allowed him to rake in millions on mainstream platforms like YouTube and Patreon. Even within the framework of brainless contrarianism, Peterson never did come across as particularly threatening to "the regime" given the huge reach and profit he was allowed within the mainstream.
Tate is just the male, PUA equivalent of an OF THOT. He made a fortune pretending to care about lonely young men just like the THOTs do with their simps.
Peterson and Tate both became mainstream in spite of regime efforts to censor and suppress them, because their message resonated with too many people to keep it quiet.
You seem to be laboring under the misconception that the regime's control of mainstream discourse is so absolute that anybody who overcomes it must be a regime agent. The reason you believe this is because no voice which expresses your ideas about Jews has been able to enjoy that level of mainstream success, and you believe that you are so obviously correct that this can only be the result of a censorship campaign so efficient that it amounts to the internet equivalent of damnatio memoriae. You are incapable of considering the possibility that almost everyone outside of your stormfag echo chamber finds both you and your beliefs so repugnant that they simply refuse to engage with you.
Peterson stayed on countless mainstream platforms. You aren't contesting my claim that he did. Arbitrarily labeling allowing Peterson's mainstream access as "efforts to suppress" doesn't make it so. Your incorrect usage of words doesn't shape reality.
You're putting words in my mouth now. I never said Tate was an agent of the regime. I said he was a shameless profiteer, like OF THOTs. The arguments against Peterson are also well-traveled here and are far more extensive than merely pointing out his mainstream access. I chose to highlight his lack of cancellation to contradict the BS narrative you are spouting here. It wasn't supposed to be a comprehensive case against him. That can be arranged.
My views on Jews have a long history of being mainstream, actually. The world existed prior to the 1960s. Jew-worshipping bullshit is a recent phenomenon.
On race more widely, a majority of white Americans opposed interracial marriage into the 1990s. My grandparents were alive when nearly 100% of Americans opposed it.
"Repeal the 19th" isn't exactly catching on, either. What's your excuse?
Are you challenging Peterson's own public comments about making millions of dollars off his public commentary? Are you claiming that white nationalists and critics of Jewish power haven't been censored?
Kanye West lost hundred of millions criticizing Jewish power. Peterson made millions of dollars on the regime's own mainstream platforms. You would have me believe that the former isn't a threat, but the latter is. Again, like Imp, you only apply the "regime is super threatened by this guy because it cancelled the shit out of him!" logic when it suits you.
Yep. You are not a threat to their power.
Right now, simply for the purposes of this conversation, I am paying you the courtesy of assuming that you actually believe what you say you believe, although I genuinely believe most of you are feds. Even those of you who aren't, and who are actually stupid enough to unironically believe the modern world would benefit from repeating all of the ideological failures of the 20th century, contribute nothing of value to this or any other discussion that is actually worth having. Your entire purpose, whether you're aware of it or not, is to discredit forums like this one and generally undermine the quality of ideological discourse in dissident right spaces. Even those of you who are not regime agents are still regime agents. You are pathetic.
As is the case with all of the hyper-rich, most of Kanye West's money didn't actually exist in the form of material wealth, and so he lost nothing of actual value by speaking out the way he did. He's fine. All he achieved was to further prove how useless you all are.
Again, assuming you are sincere in your beliefs, what you refuse to accept is that people like me, who actually participate in spaces like this, are your next logical allies in ideological terms, but even we aren't okay with your bullshit. You are a form of discursive Kryptonite, so radioactive that you are incapable of convincing anybody who doesn't already agree with you. You can whine and bitch all you want: you will never achieve anything.
Why do you think that? I love the irony of /ourguys/ getting called feds all the time while the same people bitch that we call everyone Jews and IDF agents.
You don't even pay attention. We're all about ending the ideological failures of liberalism. That's why we critique it. You hate us for it because you are one. You are the ones repeating the ideological failures of the 20th century because you are the liberals.
If it weren't for us, clowns like you and Imp would have everyone here believe that Solanas invented trannies, Peggy McIntosh invented racial politics, and Jordan Peterson is experiencing brutal regime repression by being on YouTube and Patreon. 🤡
Believing complete bullshit = quality. Got it. What even is the "dissident right" to you? Is it when you stan the FOTM "populist" Republican?
?????
I'm pretty sure he has a private jet, lives in mansions, etc. His access to that sort of thing is now in Jeopardy thanks to all his cancellations. Unlike Peterson, his public reach has also been extremely curtailed. What are your thoughts on Professor Griff and Public Enemy if you think West will be just fine?
Some of you are potential converts, not allies. If you prefer trannies over wives, pornographers over children, liberalism over nationalism, and Jews over whites, you are no ally of mine. FFS, Peterson works for Ben "I don't care about the browning of America" Shapiro, and you are trying to say you are some sort of ally.
This is provably false. I used to have beliefs more in line with yours. Aside from me, groups like NJP, while small, continue to grow.
You haven't challenged my assertions about the past popularity of my beliefs either. You haven't challenged any of my facts. Your whole string of comments is just a childish outburst dressed up as some sort of serious critique of my world view while ironically whining about the quality of discourse. You are a childish clown.
He really sold out lately. Backing TERFs, backing "porn bad" cults and then supporting a "women's rights" war in Iran.
And people still doubt me on the nature of the regime.
I actually don't agree with you that there is a secret cabal of feminists coordinating a global conspiracy. I think much of our society's prioritization of women's wants and needs over men is an emergent phenomenon that can be explained largely by biology.
To the extent that there is a global conspiracy, the people behind it, who are mostly men, are absolutely happy to let feminism run rampant: partly because of its effects on reproduction, and partly because nothing scares those people more than the prospect of a generation of young men with skill, confidence and nothing to lose. They would rather have young men be emasculated, demoralized and consumed by self-loathing, too weak to mount any effective resistance.
What about the sheer number of women in power, all acting to advance women's position in society?
Except if they were happy with the system, they wouldn't want to destroy it. It doesn't make sense to say that they want young men to be kicked down by the system because they won't resist, because nobody would resist a system that's working for them either - there has to be some level of sadism in why they are targeted so openly and obviously, and if you think about it long enough, you can't land on anyone other than women who would find that enjoyable to inflict on people.
First of all, yes it does. Secondly, I never said I believe it will actually work. Men have proven to be more resilient, and more willing to fight for their freedom, than I think the social engineering aficionados were prepared for.
You're failing to take into account one very simple fact: The UK is a ridiculous place, that does ridiculous things.
I notice you don't apply this logic to your enemies. In other words, constant fear mongering about "white supremacy" and "anti-semitism " isn't evidence of us being a threat to the system in your eyes. That's just wamen playing 5D chess or whatever. It's not like brainless contrarianism is worthwhile anyway, though.
Another amusing fact about Tate is how he made bank off his "Hustlers Academy." I guess getting rich pretending to care about lonely men is only a problem when women do it.
You're far from the only person like this among "right" liberals, to be fair. There is a broad trend among these types in which they flip flop between celebrating scamming parasites out of some misguided sense of Social Darwinism or condemning the scamming parasites for taking advantage of certain pet issues in certain ways.
No, it isn't. Because you aren't.
You're just useful idiots who everyone hates and can be used to smear any movement easily. The misogyny card is losing power, send in the white supremacists, that way we can say being anti-woman is racist.
You are the death knell for any useful movement. When you attach yourselves to anything, it dies.
The most truthful way to prove you are worthless is to remind you that being anti-Israel is supported by The Squad™ and people constantly being up "race based discrimination against white people" on the right. Issues where women are the antagonist are barely, if ever, mentioned.
Remember that grifter, America First Legal, and how they took on the Biden policy bailing out female businesses first...by talking about the next paragraph which said minorities qualify before whites...even though women qualified before everyone.
Even when ESG is being talked about, it's in the context of the climate cult or race, even though the gender policy is the most damaging to the target group.
I don't think he's exploiting the same way as women do. What they're using is deeply ingrained biological tendencies combined with trauma inflicted by the feminist system. He's just selling a get rich quick scam, as far as I can tell.
I don't think anyone is under the illusion that he is a good person in general, but instead operating on the logic - if feminists hate him so much, he must be someone of value.
Thanks for agreeing.
You just got done defending finance capital in another conversation with me. I'm sure the system considers defending the global banking system the epitome of threatening behavior. 🤡
What the hell movement are you even talking about? You just sit on the internet whining about women for hundreds of days in a row. Do you think your behavior would improve the reputation of anyone associated with it? LOL
You didn't engage with anything I said...this is what people mean when they say undermining the discourse.