Home
Forums
New posts
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Other Topics
Off topic discussion
Why Donald Trump is Not 'Red Pill'
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jean Valjean" data-source="post: 905526" data-attributes="member: 11262"><p>What about the soldier (or wingman) who jumps on a grenade? It seems like altruism but they're really just playing the long game. The wingman hopes his buddy will reciprocate the next time they go out; the soldier hopes to further his genetic heritage by keeping alive the republic that defends his family. If he happens to survive, he might get to wear a Medal of Honor.</p><p></p><p>Making sacrifices for the good of others is very red pill. Did GBFM receive any royalties in return for the labor he invested in creating and making available to us the "ONE COC- RULE" video? I think not. Trump donated millions of dollars to his own campaign, and now is refusing all but $1 of his Presidential salary. His sacrifices are appreciated by his fans. There is no contradiction between being "red pill" and offering (seemingly) selfless acts of devotion to one's family, community, and nation.</p><p></p><p>In the end, people have to take care of themselves in order to help others anyway, so the line between selfishness and altruism can get pretty blurry. Trump had to look out for his own interests first in order to build the fortune and brand that allowed him to run a campaign that wouldn't be dependent upon special interest donations. Also, even if he's criticized for being divisive now (rather than "building alliances"), he had to cooperate with (or at least buy off) mainstream politicians like Hillary Clinton until he became powerful enough to not need her help anymore. You can't build alliances with everyone; sometimes you have to say "no" (or "you're fired") to people who would otherwise get in the way.</p><p></p><p>By the way, in contrast to the OP's statement, "Because being a 'red pill' president isn't about banging hot girls, being arrogant, and expecting the whole world to sniff your piss stains," being red pill is very much about harnessing the power of narcissism to become the man whom other men want to be, and women want to fuck. Overconfidence leads to boldness, which leads to success.</p><p></p><p>As for "creating efficiency and equity in the bureaucracy," that's an impossible task, since bureaucracies are inefficient and hierarchical by their very nature. With regard to "solving complex issues that involve multiple stakeholders and interests and realizing the world and policy is not black and white," when the Code of Federal Regulations fills more than 200 volumes, I think it's fair to say that our leaders have overcomplicated things. The principles of nature, economics, and mathematics are simple and elegant, so why not morality, politics, and legislation too.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jean Valjean, post: 905526, member: 11262"] What about the soldier (or wingman) who jumps on a grenade? It seems like altruism but they're really just playing the long game. The wingman hopes his buddy will reciprocate the next time they go out; the soldier hopes to further his genetic heritage by keeping alive the republic that defends his family. If he happens to survive, he might get to wear a Medal of Honor. Making sacrifices for the good of others is very red pill. Did GBFM receive any royalties in return for the labor he invested in creating and making available to us the "ONE COC- RULE" video? I think not. Trump donated millions of dollars to his own campaign, and now is refusing all but $1 of his Presidential salary. His sacrifices are appreciated by his fans. There is no contradiction between being "red pill" and offering (seemingly) selfless acts of devotion to one's family, community, and nation. In the end, people have to take care of themselves in order to help others anyway, so the line between selfishness and altruism can get pretty blurry. Trump had to look out for his own interests first in order to build the fortune and brand that allowed him to run a campaign that wouldn't be dependent upon special interest donations. Also, even if he's criticized for being divisive now (rather than "building alliances"), he had to cooperate with (or at least buy off) mainstream politicians like Hillary Clinton until he became powerful enough to not need her help anymore. You can't build alliances with everyone; sometimes you have to say "no" (or "you're fired") to people who would otherwise get in the way. By the way, in contrast to the OP's statement, "Because being a 'red pill' president isn't about banging hot girls, being arrogant, and expecting the whole world to sniff your piss stains," being red pill is very much about harnessing the power of narcissism to become the man whom other men want to be, and women want to fuck. Overconfidence leads to boldness, which leads to success. As for "creating efficiency and equity in the bureaucracy," that's an impossible task, since bureaucracies are inefficient and hierarchical by their very nature. With regard to "solving complex issues that involve multiple stakeholders and interests and realizing the world and policy is not black and white," when the Code of Federal Regulations fills more than 200 volumes, I think it's fair to say that our leaders have overcomplicated things. The principles of nature, economics, and mathematics are simple and elegant, so why not morality, politics, and legislation too. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Other Topics
Off topic discussion
Why Donald Trump is Not 'Red Pill'
Top
