|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United States43960 Posts
On October 28 2016 00:06 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 23:35 KwarK wrote:On October 27 2016 22:25 biology]major wrote:
It's not that it is beyond the pale of our ability to conceive but rather that it does not come naturally for us to be intelligent in that way and so we do not respect it. Most people on TL are probably analytical and very systematic, less right brain oriented, it's just the type of crowd it attracts sorry. Alternative perspective. His business success was due to being the heir of a successful business and has been average, with some notable failures. Decisions in which he has had his hand in personally have backfired significantly while his core business keeps him afloat. His obsession with running small time scams, from claiming shit like small business recovery grants in the wake of 9/11 that were only worth thousands of dollars to trying to bully out individual tenants, have displayed an unworthy pettiness. Trump succeeds in spite of himself, not because of himself. The momentum of being born into that kind of aristocracy was so much that even Trump couldn't derail it, despite continually starting feuds with everyone he interacts with, from the city of Palm Beach to Scottish farmers to poor tenants to his own contractors, none of which represented good business. Trump was seduced by his own propaganda. He started to believe his own myth and this election is him being shown that the Emperor has no clothes. Trump is shit got it
He starts dumb fights all the time for dumb reasons and it holds back his political success, his business success and his personal success. With the number of honest dollars he already has he shouldn't need to engage in this petty small time shit to get a few more dishonest ones but he still does it. The failings of his companies mirror perfectly the failings we've seen elsewhere from him, he can no more let go and stop fighting with individual tenants than he can ignore a tweet he doesn't like while all his strategists are telling him that he needs to pivot and appear more appealing to women.
This isn't some kind of next level intelligence that somehow allows him to become rich but suck at politics. We see him held back by the same personality traits over and over in all areas of his life. Everything he has achieved he has achieved in spite of himself, not because.
|
On October 28 2016 00:20 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:06 biology]major wrote:On October 27 2016 23:35 KwarK wrote:On October 27 2016 22:25 biology]major wrote:
It's not that it is beyond the pale of our ability to conceive but rather that it does not come naturally for us to be intelligent in that way and so we do not respect it. Most people on TL are probably analytical and very systematic, less right brain oriented, it's just the type of crowd it attracts sorry. Alternative perspective. His business success was due to being the heir of a successful business and has been average, with some notable failures. Decisions in which he has had his hand in personally have backfired significantly while his core business keeps him afloat. His obsession with running small time scams, from claiming shit like small business recovery grants in the wake of 9/11 that were only worth thousands of dollars to trying to bully out individual tenants, have displayed an unworthy pettiness. Trump succeeds in spite of himself, not because of himself. The momentum of being born into that kind of aristocracy was so much that even Trump couldn't derail it, despite continually starting feuds with everyone he interacts with, from the city of Palm Beach to Scottish farmers to poor tenants to his own contractors, none of which represented good business. Trump was seduced by his own propaganda. He started to believe his own myth and this election is him being shown that the Emperor has no clothes. Trump is shit got it He starts dumb fights all the time for dumb reasons and it holds back his political success, his business success and his personal success. With the number of honest dollars he already has he shouldn't need to engage in this petty small time shit to get a few more dishonest ones but he still does it. The failings of his companies mirror perfectly the failings we've seen elsewhere from him, he can no more let go and stop fighting with individual tenants than he can ignore a tweet he doesn't like while all his strategists are telling him that he needs to pivot and appear more appealing to women. This isn't some kind of next level intelligence that somehow allows him to become rich but suck at politics. We see him held back by the same personality traits over and over in all areas of his life. Everything he has achieved he has achieved in spite of himself, not because.
I agree. Still wouldnt vote for Hillary tho.
|
On October 28 2016 00:06 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 23:35 KwarK wrote:On October 27 2016 22:25 biology]major wrote:
It's not that it is beyond the pale of our ability to conceive but rather that it does not come naturally for us to be intelligent in that way and so we do not respect it. Most people on TL are probably analytical and very systematic, less right brain oriented, it's just the type of crowd it attracts sorry. Alternative perspective. His business success was due to being the heir of a successful business and has been average, with some notable failures. Decisions in which he has had his hand in personally have backfired significantly while his core business keeps him afloat. His obsession with running small time scams, from claiming shit like small business recovery grants in the wake of 9/11 that were only worth thousands of dollars to trying to bully out individual tenants, have displayed an unworthy pettiness. Trump succeeds in spite of himself, not because of himself. The momentum of being born into that kind of aristocracy was so much that even Trump couldn't derail it, despite continually starting feuds with everyone he interacts with, from the city of Palm Beach to Scottish farmers to poor tenants to his own contractors, none of which represented good business. Trump was seduced by his own propaganda. He started to believe his own myth and this election is him being shown that the Emperor has no clothes. Trump is shit got it
That is pretty accurate. The Trump is a shady, racist, sexist used car salesman that just happens to have been born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
|
On October 27 2016 19:59 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 19:25 zeo wrote:On October 27 2016 19:23 WhiteDog wrote:
Assange must be a facist if he criticize Hillary anyway. What? You don't believe Buzzfeed? Haha buzzfeed.Oh my aching sides. Is Assange really paranoid when Clinton has literally stated she wants to drone him? Surely you can at least understand he may dislike the woman for saying she wants him dead kwizach?
Allegedly said she wanted to drone him, by an anonymous source who was allegedly in a meeting where it was said, tweeted by an organization headed by a man predisposed to think the United States wants to assassinate him.
Assange has believed that the US is out to get him since the Manning leaks. Which may or may not be true, but his fears started before Clinton.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
'can't we just drone this guy' seems to be a hillary humor moment. it's obvious to everyone that we can't just drone him. guy's in the middle of london
|
On October 28 2016 00:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 19:59 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 27 2016 19:25 zeo wrote:On October 27 2016 19:23 WhiteDog wrote:
Assange must be a facist if he criticize Hillary anyway. What? You don't believe Buzzfeed? Haha buzzfeed.Oh my aching sides. Is Assange really paranoid when Clinton has literally stated she wants to drone him? Surely you can at least understand he may dislike the woman for saying she wants him dead kwizach? Allegedly said she wanted to drone him, by an anonymous source who was allegedly in a meeting where it was said, tweeted by an organization headed by a man predisposed to think the United States wants to assassinate him. Assange has believed that the US is out to get him since the Manning leaks. Which may or may not be true, but his fears started before Clinton.
I mean, if Obama could wave a magic wand and make Assange fall over from a heart attack, I'm sure he would. But that's very different from expressing intent and desire to launch an attack on him.
Wikileaks has gone so far off the deep end lately. Just look at their Twitter feed and it feels incredibly desperate. They are not even trying to appear slightly neutral.
|
On October 28 2016 00:29 oneofthem wrote:
'can't we just drone this guy' seems to be a hillary humor moment. it's obvious to everyone that we can't just drone him. guy's in the middle of london
Also in the middle of an Ecuadorian embassy. Now there's a fun international crisis to start.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 28 2016 00:35 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:29 oneofthem wrote:
'can't we just drone this guy' seems to be a hillary humor moment. it's obvious to everyone that we can't just drone him. guy's in the middle of london Also in the middle of an Ecuadorian embassy. Now there's a fun international crisis to start.
yea it's obviously a joke if it was said. kind of like her lombardi imitation "run it up the gut" wrt sending a carrier into the yellow sea.
|
On October 28 2016 00:30 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 27 2016 19:59 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 27 2016 19:25 zeo wrote:On October 27 2016 19:23 WhiteDog wrote:
Assange must be a facist if he criticize Hillary anyway. What? You don't believe Buzzfeed? Haha buzzfeed.Oh my aching sides. Is Assange really paranoid when Clinton has literally stated she wants to drone him? Surely you can at least understand he may dislike the woman for saying she wants him dead kwizach? Allegedly said she wanted to drone him, by an anonymous source who was allegedly in a meeting where it was said, tweeted by an organization headed by a man predisposed to think the United States wants to assassinate him. Assange has believed that the US is out to get him since the Manning leaks. Which may or may not be true, but his fears started before Clinton. I mean, if Obama could wave a magic wand and make Assange fall over from a heart attack, I'm sure he would. But that's very different from expressing intent and desire to launch an attack on him. Wikileaks has gone so far off the deep end lately. Just look at their Twitter feed and it feels incredibly desperate. They are not even trying to appear slightly neutral.
Their new tendency to go full conspirationist is also a bit disturbing.
And I am still puzzled by the fact that they campaign for Trump. Assange was a leftist idol at one point.
|
On October 28 2016 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:30 Mohdoo wrote:On October 28 2016 00:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 27 2016 19:59 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 27 2016 19:25 zeo wrote:On October 27 2016 19:23 WhiteDog wrote:
Assange must be a facist if he criticize Hillary anyway. What? You don't believe Buzzfeed? Haha buzzfeed.Oh my aching sides. Is Assange really paranoid when Clinton has literally stated she wants to drone him? Surely you can at least understand he may dislike the woman for saying she wants him dead kwizach? Allegedly said she wanted to drone him, by an anonymous source who was allegedly in a meeting where it was said, tweeted by an organization headed by a man predisposed to think the United States wants to assassinate him. Assange has believed that the US is out to get him since the Manning leaks. Which may or may not be true, but his fears started before Clinton. I mean, if Obama could wave a magic wand and make Assange fall over from a heart attack, I'm sure he would. But that's very different from expressing intent and desire to launch an attack on him. Wikileaks has gone so far off the deep end lately. Just look at their Twitter feed and it feels incredibly desperate. They are not even trying to appear slightly neutral. Their new tendency to go full conspirationist is also a bit disturbing. And I am still puzzled by the fact that they campaign for Trump. Assange was a leftist idol at one point.
The radical left hates their enemies more than they love their own ideas. In cases like Assange and GH, their loathing for establishment types like Clinton appears overwhelming at times. But this is common in any form of radical thinking. It is the type of thinking that contributes to radical islamic violence. When people abso-fucking-lutely hate the opposition, it doesn't matter who you need as an ally.
|
On October 28 2016 00:38 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:35 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 28 2016 00:29 oneofthem wrote:
'can't we just drone this guy' seems to be a hillary humor moment. it's obvious to everyone that we can't just drone him. guy's in the middle of london Also in the middle of an Ecuadorian embassy. Now there's a fun international crisis to start. yea it's obviously a joke if it was said. kind of like her lombardi imitation "run it up the gut" wrt sending a carrier into the yellow sea.
Obviously a joke but still disturbing.
|
On October 28 2016 00:46 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 28 2016 00:30 Mohdoo wrote:On October 28 2016 00:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 27 2016 19:59 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 27 2016 19:25 zeo wrote:On October 27 2016 19:23 WhiteDog wrote:
Assange must be a facist if he criticize Hillary anyway. What? You don't believe Buzzfeed? Haha buzzfeed.Oh my aching sides. Is Assange really paranoid when Clinton has literally stated she wants to drone him? Surely you can at least understand he may dislike the woman for saying she wants him dead kwizach? Allegedly said she wanted to drone him, by an anonymous source who was allegedly in a meeting where it was said, tweeted by an organization headed by a man predisposed to think the United States wants to assassinate him. Assange has believed that the US is out to get him since the Manning leaks. Which may or may not be true, but his fears started before Clinton. I mean, if Obama could wave a magic wand and make Assange fall over from a heart attack, I'm sure he would. But that's very different from expressing intent and desire to launch an attack on him. Wikileaks has gone so far off the deep end lately. Just look at their Twitter feed and it feels incredibly desperate. They are not even trying to appear slightly neutral. Their new tendency to go full conspirationist is also a bit disturbing. And I am still puzzled by the fact that they campaign for Trump. Assange was a leftist idol at one point. The radical left hates their enemies more than they love their own ideas. In cases like Assange and GH, their loathing for establishment types like Clinton appears overwhelming at times. But this is common in any form of radical thinking. It is the type of thinking that contributes to radical islamic violence. When people abso-fucking-lutely hate the opposition, it doesn't matter who you need as an ally.
Well, I don't see it that way.
I remember Assange sharing the stage with the like of Zizek, who is also a figure of the radical left. But Zizek considers liberals as the big brother of the far left. Even someone like Chomsky said he would vote for Clinton.
As for GH, I think he is not reasonable, but he wouldn't actively try to make Trump wins. I actually think that despite all the hatred and the possible posturing, people like him will be a bit relieved when Clinton wins.
In Assange case, I think there has been a misunderstanding all along. He is not a leftist, he is an anarchist, and what he wants is not justice or the well being of anyone, but to blow the whole thing up. He sees Trump as the worst thing that can happen, so he roots for him. In that respect and for completely different reasons, he has a convergence of view with Putin (who I believe thinks that Trump will be disastrous for the US and therefore good for him and his dream of a restored imperialist Russia).
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it's not really hate, but the type of goal sought. a radical vision that has total transformation of society as a goal is usually also one that sees a macro level order as radically evil. for leftists, it may be corporate capitalism, for democratic revolutionaries, autocratic power and so on. only strong idealists develop these strong hates from ideological vision.
|
On October 28 2016 01:01 oneofthem wrote:
it's not really hate, but the type of goal sought. a radical vision that has total transformation of society as a goal is usually also one that sees a macro level order as radically evil. for leftists, it may be corporate capitalism, for democratic revolutionaries, autocratic power and so on. only strong idealists develop these strong hates from ideological vision.
Well it depends also a bit what you really want.
I used to support the idea of the revolutionary left, as I thought that capitalism was simply not viable and that reformism was doomed to fail, but I always considered the moderate left to be people with the same goal but a disagreement on method. I think that's the case for most of the far left, and again I would quote Zizek, who actually considers that liberals need the brotherly help (that's his term) from revolutionaries.
I think when your worst enemy is someone who share most of your vision but not completely, you have lost yourself.
But then again, Assange is a different kind altogether. Sandernistas, even the most anti-Clinton ones, want the best for America, even if they are imo, unproductive. Assange is an enemy of America, and just wants to harm its institutions as badly as possible.
That's a completely different story.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 28 2016 01:06 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 01:01 oneofthem wrote:
it's not really hate, but the type of goal sought. a radical vision that has total transformation of society as a goal is usually also one that sees a macro level order as radically evil. for leftists, it may be corporate capitalism, for democratic revolutionaries, autocratic power and so on. only strong idealists develop these strong hates from ideological vision. Well it depends also a bit what you really want. I used to support the idea of the revolutionary left, as I thought that capitalism was simply not viable and that reformism was doomed to fail, but I always considered the moderate left to be people with the same goal but a disagreement on method. I think that's the case for most of the far left, and again I would quote Zizek, who actually considers that liberals need the brotherly help (that's his term) from revolutionaries. I think when your worst enemy is someone who share most of your vision but not completely, you have lost yourself. But then again, Assange is a different kind altogether. Sandernistas, even the most anti-Clinton ones, want the best for America, even if they are imo, unproductive. Assange is an enemy of America, and just wants to harm its institutions as badly as possible. That's a completely different story.
it's kind of like ideological tunnel vision. if you see the world in terms of grand ideological systems, then a moderation may simply be enabling evil, by assisting the system's survival.
placing the destruction of the enemy system above improvement in actual lives is a cognitive feature of deontic morality. a lot of attention to information of the consequence kind drops out, and instead we deal in morally charged properties.
not all of the far left is of this camp, the hardcore ideologues are, but the more practically minded and less theory-addled can still fall under bias in a different but more pervasive way.
basically this is a prior bias of intentions that makes people interpret the action of moderates in a very negative way. the moral contamination flows from Character, which is basically an understanding of a person's fundamental motivations. once the character of a person is thought to be corrupted, his or her actions become suspect.
this kind of thinking explains a lot about why basically good natured and good intentioned americans adopt a radical evil view of hillary clinton. the character attacks reallly do stick, especially negative ones. obama and his neoliberal ways is another familiar target.
but the left is equally vulnerable. we have our demonic characters around too. some are genuinely that bad, like cruz, but i have to recognize the basic cognitive process as similar.
i suggest joshua greene for more on the dual process of ethical thinking.
obviously i'm not saying one should reject idealism and so on, but be clear about the blindspots.
|
On October 28 2016 00:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:30 Mohdoo wrote:On October 28 2016 00:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 27 2016 19:59 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 27 2016 19:25 zeo wrote:On October 27 2016 19:23 WhiteDog wrote:
Assange must be a facist if he criticize Hillary anyway. What? You don't believe Buzzfeed? Haha buzzfeed.Oh my aching sides. Is Assange really paranoid when Clinton has literally stated she wants to drone him? Surely you can at least understand he may dislike the woman for saying she wants him dead kwizach? Allegedly said she wanted to drone him, by an anonymous source who was allegedly in a meeting where it was said, tweeted by an organization headed by a man predisposed to think the United States wants to assassinate him. Assange has believed that the US is out to get him since the Manning leaks. Which may or may not be true, but his fears started before Clinton. I mean, if Obama could wave a magic wand and make Assange fall over from a heart attack, I'm sure he would. But that's very different from expressing intent and desire to launch an attack on him. Wikileaks has gone so far off the deep end lately. Just look at their Twitter feed and it feels incredibly desperate. They are not even trying to appear slightly neutral. Their new tendency to go full conspirationist is also a bit disturbing. And I am still puzzled by the fact that they campaign for Trump. Assange was a leftist idol at one point.
Being as paranoid as Assange (and he has good reason for it) for as long as he has been locked up does strange things to the mind. Pretty sure most people would crack and go crush under that pressure
|
My issue with Obamacare is that it makes health insurance into something that is no longer properly called insurance. it's simply a healthcare system. I'm fine with alternate health care systems; it's just no longer properly insurance.
I'd be fine with trying single payer, I find there's a good case to be made for it;
I've devised a small-government form of single-payer that uses some of my perspective of what conservative beliefs is (undoubtedly somewhat off from what actual conservatives would think)
|
On October 28 2016 00:20 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:06 biology]major wrote:On October 27 2016 23:35 KwarK wrote:On October 27 2016 22:25 biology]major wrote:
It's not that it is beyond the pale of our ability to conceive but rather that it does not come naturally for us to be intelligent in that way and so we do not respect it. Most people on TL are probably analytical and very systematic, less right brain oriented, it's just the type of crowd it attracts sorry. Alternative perspective. His business success was due to being the heir of a successful business and has been average, with some notable failures. Decisions in which he has had his hand in personally have backfired significantly while his core business keeps him afloat. His obsession with running small time scams, from claiming shit like small business recovery grants in the wake of 9/11 that were only worth thousands of dollars to trying to bully out individual tenants, have displayed an unworthy pettiness. Trump succeeds in spite of himself, not because of himself. The momentum of being born into that kind of aristocracy was so much that even Trump couldn't derail it, despite continually starting feuds with everyone he interacts with, from the city of Palm Beach to Scottish farmers to poor tenants to his own contractors, none of which represented good business. Trump was seduced by his own propaganda. He started to believe his own myth and this election is him being shown that the Emperor has no clothes. Trump is shit got it He starts dumb fights all the time for dumb reasons and it holds back his political success, his business success and his personal success. With the number of honest dollars he already has he shouldn't need to engage in this petty small time shit to get a few more dishonest ones but he still does it. The failings of his companies mirror perfectly the failings we've seen elsewhere from him, he can no more let go and stop fighting with individual tenants than he can ignore a tweet he doesn't like while all his strategists are telling him that he needs to pivot and appear more appealing to women. This isn't some kind of next level intelligence that somehow allows him to become rich but suck at politics. We see him held back by the same personality traits over and over in all areas of his life. Everything he has achieved he has achieved in spite of himself, not because.
I can't understand his mentality. If you have fuck you money why would you bother with any of the stuff he bothers with? It defies logic. I'm so rich I don't have to care what you or anyone on the planet thinks of me. I can ignore all the peasants and their stupid petty problems and live my perfect life, untouchable in my ivory tower, but instead.... I'm going to pick fights with everyone over the tiniest pettiest minutia. I'm going to feed into all these things that literally can never benefit me only hurt me. I don't get it man. But I guess there's nothing to get, at this point there's no way he can be making a conscious effort to do it. Its a mental defect in the man he can't help. If he could actually do something about it and stop he'd have to have done it by now but he obviously doesn't have the ability to stop himself from jumping into the mud and being petty as fuck.
|
On October 28 2016 01:29 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:20 KwarK wrote:On October 28 2016 00:06 biology]major wrote:On October 27 2016 23:35 KwarK wrote:On October 27 2016 22:25 biology]major wrote:
It's not that it is beyond the pale of our ability to conceive but rather that it does not come naturally for us to be intelligent in that way and so we do not respect it. Most people on TL are probably analytical and very systematic, less right brain oriented, it's just the type of crowd it attracts sorry. Alternative perspective. His business success was due to being the heir of a successful business and has been average, with some notable failures. Decisions in which he has had his hand in personally have backfired significantly while his core business keeps him afloat. His obsession with running small time scams, from claiming shit like small business recovery grants in the wake of 9/11 that were only worth thousands of dollars to trying to bully out individual tenants, have displayed an unworthy pettiness. Trump succeeds in spite of himself, not because of himself. The momentum of being born into that kind of aristocracy was so much that even Trump couldn't derail it, despite continually starting feuds with everyone he interacts with, from the city of Palm Beach to Scottish farmers to poor tenants to his own contractors, none of which represented good business. Trump was seduced by his own propaganda. He started to believe his own myth and this election is him being shown that the Emperor has no clothes. Trump is shit got it He starts dumb fights all the time for dumb reasons and it holds back his political success, his business success and his personal success. With the number of honest dollars he already has he shouldn't need to engage in this petty small time shit to get a few more dishonest ones but he still does it. The failings of his companies mirror perfectly the failings we've seen elsewhere from him, he can no more let go and stop fighting with individual tenants than he can ignore a tweet he doesn't like while all his strategists are telling him that he needs to pivot and appear more appealing to women. This isn't some kind of next level intelligence that somehow allows him to become rich but suck at politics. We see him held back by the same personality traits over and over in all areas of his life. Everything he has achieved he has achieved in spite of himself, not because. I can't understand his mentality. If you have fuck you money why would you bother with any of the stuff he bothers with? It defies logic. I'm so rich I don't have to care what you or anyone on the planet thinks of me. I can ignore all the peasants and their stupid petty problems and live my perfect life, untouchable in my ivory tower, but instead.... I'm going to pick fights with everyone over the tiniest pettiest minutia. I'm going to feed into all these things that literally can never benefit me only hurt me. I don't get it man. But I guess there's nothing to get, at this point there's no way he can be making a conscious effort to do it. Its a mental defect in the man he can't help. If he could actually do something about it and stop he'd have to have done it by now but he obviously doesn't have the ability to stop himself from jumping into the mud and being petty as fuck.
As you said its mental disorder. He cant help it and because its a total belief in his own self image its really hard to make him see the problem and get professional help for it.
|
On October 28 2016 01:29 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 00:20 KwarK wrote:On October 28 2016 00:06 biology]major wrote:On October 27 2016 23:35 KwarK wrote:On October 27 2016 22:25 biology]major wrote:
It's not that it is beyond the pale of our ability to conceive but rather that it does not come naturally for us to be intelligent in that way and so we do not respect it. Most people on TL are probably analytical and very systematic, less right brain oriented, it's just the type of crowd it attracts sorry. Alternative perspective. His business success was due to being the heir of a successful business and has been average, with some notable failures. Decisions in which he has had his hand in personally have backfired significantly while his core business keeps him afloat. His obsession with running small time scams, from claiming shit like small business recovery grants in the wake of 9/11 that were only worth thousands of dollars to trying to bully out individual tenants, have displayed an unworthy pettiness. Trump succeeds in spite of himself, not because of himself. The momentum of being born into that kind of aristocracy was so much that even Trump couldn't derail it, despite continually starting feuds with everyone he interacts with, from the city of Palm Beach to Scottish farmers to poor tenants to his own contractors, none of which represented good business. Trump was seduced by his own propaganda. He started to believe his own myth and this election is him being shown that the Emperor has no clothes. Trump is shit got it He starts dumb fights all the time for dumb reasons and it holds back his political success, his business success and his personal success. With the number of honest dollars he already has he shouldn't need to engage in this petty small time shit to get a few more dishonest ones but he still does it. The failings of his companies mirror perfectly the failings we've seen elsewhere from him, he can no more let go and stop fighting with individual tenants than he can ignore a tweet he doesn't like while all his strategists are telling him that he needs to pivot and appear more appealing to women. This isn't some kind of next level intelligence that somehow allows him to become rich but suck at politics. We see him held back by the same personality traits over and over in all areas of his life. Everything he has achieved he has achieved in spite of himself, not because. I can't understand his mentality. If you have fuck you money why would you bother with any of the stuff he bothers with? It defies logic. I'm so rich I don't have to care what you or anyone on the planet thinks of me. I can ignore all the peasants and their stupid petty problems and live my perfect life, untouchable in my ivory tower, but instead.... I'm going to pick fights with everyone over the tiniest pettiest minutia. I'm going to feed into all these things that literally can never benefit me only hurt me. I don't get it man. But I guess there's nothing to get, at this point there's no way he can be making a conscious effort to do it. Its a mental defect in the man he can't help. If he could actually do something about it and stop he'd have to have done it by now but he obviously doesn't have the ability to stop himself from jumping into the mud and being petty as fuck.
since when are people logical?
also, much as armchair diagnosis is bad, we can point you to a potential diagnosis if you want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
