|
South Africa127 Posts
Gentlemen, forgive me while I cover the first topic, then bring about convergence with Andrew Tate.
A few years ago, on impulse I posted something.. it was a short blog-burst entry, rambling something meaningless about Doom and Starcraft.
the miscellaneous waffle can be seen here
What prompted me to do that on a sudden inspiration, is better known to me now.
What I was trying to say would be better expressed with the phrase : Diablo VS Starcraft.
Starcraft is a world where every event, entity and power can be traced to Scientific measure. While Diablo is a world where magic and ineffable forces & powers effect the world, and all the entities thereof.
Since Doom is a game that involves Hell, a place in itself of superstitious dimension, I was simply wondering while blowing away Imps with a chaingun : Is the same world of the Marine fighting Zerglings?
I'd like to now introduce the recent Apotheosis established around this new Andrew Tate Character. I'm even remarked that at least 2 of my most level-headed friends - whose business was never stylized to be ambitious or hedonistic - have become taken in by him..
one of them have even paid for his course, saying in a satisfied tone "He's invested in him"
(!!!)
Now.. given the rift I drew between Starcraft and Diablo, or Doom, for the current matter..
Is this Andrew Tate a gestalt entity, whose sum total of all his parts makes him something complete and unaccountably powerful?
Or can he be atomically broken down and so we can proceed to debunk him?
Like understand him, and comfort ourselves with the feeble verity of sober analysis
I am, of course, aware of this here being mere intellectualization - that being someone using their mind to escape reality, via over-thinking.
  
|
How are psykers scientific? Starcraft just like warhammer and doom is science fantasy. Kerrigan literally transforms into a glowing angel figure based on psycic powers? at the end and beats the final villain with kameha.
|
South Africa127 Posts
@Archeon
well done.. I'm glad you grasped everything said!
Actually I kinda forgot about the Ending of Lord of the Void.. excuse me, 'Legacy of the Void'.
Yes and no.. Kerrigan can still be traced and atomically broken done in some way..
VIZ. Kerrigan had some ineffable power unleashed, that caused her to resonate with a heavenly light.. since her powers went back to the Xel'Naga - an ancient people forged in the beginning of Time & Nature while the forces of nature were in its primordial incipiency.. etc
But in Diablo.. an angel - let's say those High-angels
They seem to be like a Gestalt Entity..
They are what they are - and can't be broken down to things like their Heart, Blood-stream, DNA, environment, lifestyle, background and history..
Ok so this Andrew Tate person..
Really I am trying to map out HOW and WHY he has become such a sensation. He's being consumed as an aspirational product by at least 2 of my friends.
They're stylizing themselves around his example and think he's gonna lead them to some profound end result.
Lemme tell you that these ain't empty words.
Actually, on Saturday night I went for casual drinks with a 3rd friend of the same ilk. When exiting the club to proceed to the car, the homeless folk loitering outside the bar tried their usual luck asking us for 'Bread'
The friend replied aloud derisively "Yes.. Jam, peanut butter? what would you like"
It seemed done in cheerful spirit, before an audience who'd find it playful.. yet something in his confident stride suggested that THIS example was nothing more than one whose character's been stylized by something.. something that sounds like a wealthy self-entitled bulldozer
THEN later he said something out the car window, to a group of students who easily could've been branded as 'radical', due to their garb
He said something I don't care to recite.. it was harmless and not offensive, but the phrase was nothing more than a clichè.
It contained 1 or 2 buzzwords.
So, this Andrew Tate guy can be summarized by a few buzzwords. One of them definitely being 'Masculinity'.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Don‘t know where this trend came from that men have to be swole, emotionless machines of discipline, but it‘s an annoying way (when you surf shorts and stuff) for a bunch of self-marketers to compete for attention. When you realize that, it takes the interest out.
Props to them if it incentivizes self-improvement in others but the motives are as most driven by egotism and greed and cater to bored young audiences.
Otherwise they‘d improve themselves quietly and not attach their faces to a giant megaphone with the help of similarly inclined somethingsomething-males in search for clicks while there‘s folks around who do manual labor but never get talked about and still contribute more.
Just being whatever the situation requires you to is solid and boring advice. I‘d say that being formless is the strongest option as you can shape expectations and own behaviour at will.
Don‘t need to support or antagonize the type either way. Both benefits them.
Hard to not be hypocritical about the topic when we‘re throwing opinions about it as well.
|
South Africa127 Posts
Well said Vivax..
a giant megaphone..
that's exactly it.
I actually took a moment to watch the first 25 minutes of an epic 5 hour interview of Andrew Tate.
To my surprise what he says makes alotta sense
He said that TikTok is inspiring ADD, or ADHD.. basically a hugely short attention span within the people using it.
Because they swipe, and swipe, unsatisfied with the first 2 seconds, then proceed to watch something that lasts about 15 to 60 seconds.
...I can't believe I never correlated that.
He also said The Establishment doesn't like him, cos the demographic that listens to him are guys between the ages of 18 to 25 - And those are the guys that if they need to go to war, they'll need them.
And yes, Vivax - it sounds like solid, boring advice
to be quiet and go unnoticed
I think that's what that Art of War book talks about - Energy Distribution
Something like, celebrating victory after a battle entails drinking and energy expenditure of health in itself
yeah so the imagery surrounding Andrew Tate, is very loud and a real urban cliche..
he looks sooo seedy and rebellious.
a clip flashing of him exhaling a cigarette, I mean.. he's not Jim Raynor or that ex-cop guy in Resident evil 4!!
it's easy to give guys on advice on how to be successful, if you're already distinguished and established..
but they seem to think that that imagery can be applied to them over night
Doesn't matter how successful you are, you still gotta take the playing-field into account
Actually last night my 2 mates invited me out to some techno-music event, in the industrial zone..
some suitably dingy venue was rented out for the occasion.
Being the designated driver I was sober and able to take in the scenery..
Leaning against the wall at some point holding a can of Energy Soda, lemme tell you that all individual wealth & success is completely undistinguished against that onslaught of darkness, flashing lights, repetitive music, booze and smoke.
I can't believe I paid 350 credits to get into that place!!!!
And yet every atomic-bacterial-chemical particle of my being demanded that I must and wanted to be there..
the graceful slim slender figures of female silhouette moving in accord with the sound emanating thereto..
the sociability that ensued..
But watching Andrew Tate is not gonna increase my chances of success, where upon I ask one of those girls to come back to my place, and help me do a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle
|
There‘s nothing that made him more special or talented at conveying a certain set of values save the folks he knew that allowed him to put himself out there.
(I‘d add that you could say that about a lot of profiled people, it‘s mostly exposure and then eloquence and one could push even a person with no actual highly developed skillset into positions of power, nepotism almost seems ingrained in human nature)
Merely as a statement of fact if correctly deduced from my assumptions, not because I lean on him in any particular way. I don‘t see a necessity to judge him for what he does rather than imagine the process that made him a public figure of sorts on social media.
The idea is a good one if the approach is to turn social media into a megaphone that is able to take the role of a streetworker to a successful extent.
So being politicized or driven by monetar interests (alone) doesn‘t help with that.
|
South Africa127 Posts
so.. that's basically that..
the shape of society in this 21st century:
sort of dismantling this character, Andrew Tate, whose influence has sort of established him self as a guy semi-worshiped by guys around the globe.
We sort of see that these days, so long as there's an aureole of wealth surrounding someone, they can say anything!!
yet that seems a bit too obvious.. I think the wealth has to be flanked by other key ingredients too.
the audience has gotta forgive me if I say things, so vividly obvious, that the concrete reality of its supposed accuracy, seems like I'm using weaponizing 'truth'.
It seems stupidly obvious to say : The stock market can be changed with a single twitter post.
Or... the news media has so much power they can change the global-mood with one broadcast
Do we have time to go into another issue? and I beg the audience to remember, that I'm not looking at the mechanical workings of all this stuff..
I'm trying to look at the underlying currents within the minds & bodies of the people - the current that's running through their nervous-system and bloodstream
Let's talk 'bout Bill Gates..
It's amazing how much distrust and dislike that guy's managed to elicit.
I'll tell ya all now I cannot bring my self to resent the guy who brought me Windows 95!!
Yet he's despised daily, due to the fact that he rubs shoulders with left-wing media and politicians.
Is that activity not merely the workings of a great politician? What fool would risk to distinguish their self as Right or Left midst such an extreme polarity?
And I'll never forget that exchange between Ben Shapiro and Andrew Neil..
the former, single-handedly vaporized his entire career in that clip, cos the latter demolished him with one question he couldn't gracefully answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
