authenticity

What do you think about the charity ‘Tate Pledge’?

This post is a response to a question initially posed on Quora, and can also be accessed via “https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-the-charity-Tate-Pledge/answer/Antonio-Amaral-1“

I had to double-take on this question. “Tate Pledge”? … WTF?
Is this a reference to Andrew Tate?
Sure enough… it is!

Holy 30 Pieces of Silver, Batman!!!

I want to ignore this question from this querent because I already feel slimy. However, I think it would be a disservice to those who still can’t understand the difference between an authentic human being and the lowest of predatory and parasitic scum.

It breaks my heart that people can see this:

… and yet, NOT see it for what it is.

The branding alone screams it’s a scam. For someone desperate to repair their reputation on the level of optics, even if he doesn’t care about substance, he’s being quite moronic to dress up like a pimp-gangster and peddle himself as a caring member of a community he earnestly wishes to contribute positively toward.

Take a moment to reflect upon the title, “The Pledge of the Tate.” That’s like someone speaking about themselves in the third person while elevating their image of that person to mythical status. He’s not “just Andrew Tate,” one of the dozens of other “Andrew Tates on the planet,” but “THE TATE.” There is no need for “Andrew” because that softens the hammer of the single vowel “TATE” a bit too much for his ego to consider it worthy of inclusion in his pledge title. He is a legend in his imagination — even after being busted for sex trafficking — for dehumanizing women as vessels for his amusement.

This egotistically bloated idiot is so full of himself that he has no clue that his presentation already turns off anyone who isn’t a naive gumba incel with machismo wannabe fantasies.

What’s worse is the amount of digging to determine the legitimacy of this scam requires a whole bunch of seconds that almost add up to one full minute of research effort to dig up how much he’s willing to sink into the depths of inhuman psychopathy.

Since you asked me what I think of this, then this is what I think of this:

These are examples of psychopathic predators in our society whose aspirations for justifying their pampered existence rely on the parasitic strategy of bottom-feeding by preying on the naive sentiments of the most vulnerable in society.

These monsters should be rotting behind bars, not roaming free to wreak more havoc while destroying lives in their wake.

After having a look at your profile, Keith, it seems rather clear from a cursory glance why you might be interested in following the antics of a disgusting example of the worst of humanity, but that’s because you present yourself as someone desperate to assert your individuality without actually developing the critical thinking skills to understand what that means enough to make it manifest.

You seem drawn toward stereotypes of masculinity to promote your image, and I’m sure that works within a limited demographic, but that’s also why you’re doomed to perpetual bottom-feeding for the rest of your life.

This mindset is built upon the cynical quicksand of a misanthropic take on fellow humans with whom one wishes to engage in a profit-generating venture. There is no motivation for a real connection being sought, nor solutions or assistance offered that benefits others. It’s an egocentric view of the world that regards relationships as forgettably transactional on the most superficial levels: “Pay attention to meeeee!!!! — and give me money while you’re at it.”

This leads me to one of my biggest complaints with our currently toxic and religious-like fervour of regard toward the economic system we call “Capitalism.”

Our capitalist system of today breeds misanthropy in a race to the bottom while celebrating the most superficial of parasitic characteristics of humanity.

We were warned at the outset by great thinkers from history that we would be struggling through the late stages of a corrupted system and have now arrived at their predicted destination.

What we once championed as the fertile ground of innovation has become a stale mockery within a puerile homogeneity.

What matters is expedience over substance. The why of what we do with our lives has been distilled into achieving above minimal survival at the expense of relationship depth and community.

The sad consequence of prioritizing expedience over substance is that we breed out the requisite sensitivities toward nuance that would immediately understand that orange abomination of a homepage with Rush Limpballs overtones is a front for yet another scam by an, at best, ethically challenged sociopath.

Lacking the cultivated sensitivity required to interpret nuance correctly exposes people to con artists who capitalize on personal insecurities that have been conditioned to revere toxic role models in a sub-culture characterized by Stockholm Syndrome cases.

The odds are excellent that anyone who can interpret anything positive within the embodiment of toxic masculinity has been a victim of it their entire lives and was broken by it in childhood.

Your profile screams that you’ve been more of a victim of it than a perpetrator, but you can’t seem to extricate yourself from this toxic cognitive prison. I can see that you believe humour is how you view your access to success, and I commend you for trying to be charismatic in such a way.

Making an impression in this world is tough, primarily if one seeks to be liked, if not admired. We need that kind of reinforcement to survive. It’s an essential component within Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

Belongingness is right up there and wedged between basic physical and psychological survival. The trouble is the choice of role models one makes in one’s efforts to achieve what one aspires to.

It’s easy to see from your profile that you’re not a troll so broken as to define your existence through childish provocation, and I suppose that’s why I felt compelled to provide an in-depth answer to your question. You seem to be trying, and you deserve credit for that.

Questions like this one I’ve been answering and this one below:

…indicate to me that you’re picking your ideas from sources who are, at best, kludges, who cannot help but become toxic influences in your thinking processes. I’m not going to advocate dropping these idiots from your radar because you need to understand better where they’re coming from so that you can better triangulate your position in society. I highly recommend expanding your horizons by adding more nuanced and evolved thinkers to your information consumption efforts.

It’s easy to see by the rest of your questions that you have a sincere curiosity about the world and are not obsessed with toxic role models. I suppose that’s what gives me hope that you will rise above being swayed by or taken in by despicable monsters who present a fraudulent image of themselves to appeal to a toxic set of presumptions about personal identity that were cultivated within you by a dysfunctional society.

I wish you all the best of luck in your journey through this madhouse. I hope you improve your abilities to discern between substance and fraudulence while continuing to challenge yourself to rise above the antics of superficial idiots.

Cheerios.

What percentage of Kamala’s voters are actually just “anti-Trump” voters?

This post is a response to a question initially posed on Quora, and can also be accessed via “https://donewiththebullshit.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Kamalas-voters-are-actually-just-anti-Trump-voters-17” (complete with typos because the space it was posted in doesn’t permit edits — dang — and the reason I chose to “upgrade” this answer to a broader audience).

So, you’re trying to separate “anti-Trump” voters from “pro-Harris” voters as if that bears any relevance to this election.

You’re doing that because it’s easier for you to write off people with your go-to dismissal of “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

Do you recall how conservatives did the same thing with Bush when he lied to the American people and the world at large to justify invading Iraq and embroiling the nation in two costly wars?

“Bush Derangement Syndrome” was your go-to dismissal then.

That’s what conservatives do: invent a fake disease and accuse people of suffering from that “disease” to avoid having to deal with the very valid criticisms they have over the leaders you bend over backwards to protect. You don’t care in the least about examining, much less acknowledging, how utterly corrupt the actions or how incompetent the people you defend are.

For you, loyalty is everything… and you’re proud of your loyalty to such a degree you cannot fathom, much less accept how it’s precisely that sentiment being played against you.

You’ve been conditioned since childhood to value loyalty above all else and beyond reason.

This is not to say that your loyalty isn’t a precious sentiment. It is. It’s an essential ingredient for maintaining community cohesion. It isn’t, however, anything but a tool for people like this.

They don’t respect your loyalty or value it beyond how they can use it to benefit themselves.

The worst thing is that you don’t directly view your loyalty as loyalty to a convicted felon. You have convinced yourself to believe your loyalty is to your country. Why do you think he indulges in performative kisses of the flag if not to tweak your loyalty and use it against you?

The sad thing about your unwavering loyalty to this disloyal monster is that you’re the girlfriend in the stereotypical scenario played out by millions of teens throughout the decades.

You’re the girlfriend who’s being lied to so that he can get in your pants.

Once he’s done with you and decides there’s nothing more he can extract from you, then you’re his ex, and he treats you like he treats the memory of his ex-wife and mother of his children.

This is what you mean to him, yet you have convinced yourself that he won’t do the same thing to you. Do you know how many teenage girls follow that rationale to learn a powerful lesson in regret? Countless.

You’re so loyal that you’re willing to overlook the deaths of your fellow citizens while he generously shares equipment that would save American lives with the leader of an enemy nation.

… and while overlooking this betrayal of the American people, you still want to think of yourself as a loyal patriot of the nation you love.

You’re so lost in your team spirit haze that you want to believe the only reason he might lose the election is because your fellow citizens are suffering from an imaginary mental condition.

You have to think that way because the alternative is frightening.

If you can’t believe that “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is real, then you have to admit to yourself that you’ve been wrong about this monster for years.

You fell into a trap in which you liked what he had to say because he hates the same people you have struggled with that piss you off every day. After all, they don’t seem to respect what’s important to you.

The trouble is that they do, but they do so equally for everyone, not just the insiders or fellow team members. That’s what makes you struggle with being loyal to your team. You can’t ignore all your many reasons for doubting this man’s integrity. It nags at you from the back of your mind like a splinter.

He’s just given you too many reasons to wonder if maybe… just maybe, he doesn’t intend to deliver an America that serves your needs. He intends to deliver you like a pig on a roast to the nation’s enemies and destroy the Republic you believe yourself a patriot of.

You know what the truth is.

Everyone voting for Kamala is anti-Trump. It doesn’t matter if that’s the only reason to support her because that’s enough of a reason for millions of people who also think of themselves as patriots. You know they think of themselves as loyal patriots, too… right? Except they’re not loyal to a person but a country, a constitution, and the spirit upon which the nation was founded. Your brand of loyalty is called a “cult of personality.”

If your suspicions are correct, someone besides Trump would mean fewer votes for Kamala and a better chance for your team to win. Those anti-Trump people who can switch sides based on the quality of character representing the candidates are more loyal patriots than you are because they are patriots loyal to the country and not the personality.

Your loyalty is a fraud. It’s the same type of “loyalty” a teenage girl who is desperate to be loved will show the people they hope will love them back. Like you, she’s willing to believe anything a charming young boy with promise for a future will tell her.

Ask yourself this question: If Trump could return your loyalty, why has he done nothing to help the people who are in prison today on his behalf? Why did he not do something for the family of the supporter who was shot and killed during his first assassination attempt? Why did he not even contact the family to pass on his condolences if their loyalty meant anything to him?

The sad reality is that you’re just a box of Kleenex to him.

Once he’s done wiping himself with your sacrifice, then you’re just garbage.

Is your loyalty worth that little?

Do you know who gets a greater reward for that kind of sacrifice?

Saddam Rewards Suicide Bombers’ Families

That’s right… Islamic suicide bombers get better treatment for their sacrifice than Trump’s loyal supporters.

Are you okay with being treated with less respect than an Islamic suicide bomber?

Is your sacrifice worth the cost of destroying the nation you want to think of yourself as a patriot of?

Here’s another thought: The loyal patriots who hated what the Republicans did to embroil the U.S. in two pointless wars weren’t just temporarily reacting for the sake of team performance. They weren’t suffering from some temporary mania called “Bush Derangement Syndrome.” They believed strongly then and still believe those who sent the nation into that hellscape should be held accountable for their actions — even if they switch sides and cheer for the same team. They’re not let off the hook for the damage they did to the nation. To them, being loyal to principles matters more than team loyalty.

Loyalty to a country means holding monsters accountable for their actions, no matter how they switch gears later.

Dick Cheney announces support for Kamal Harris

That’s the difference between genuinely patriotic loyalty to a country and misguided loyalty to someone who’s using you like a teenage boy eager to get in your pants.

Is leader authenticity a matter of integrity?

The original question this article responds to in its complete format is as follows: “Is leader authenticity a matter of integrity? Should leaders behave similarly across different contexts and situations? Provide a specific example to explain your position.”

Authenticity IS integrity.

I often cringe when I read “Should” so-and-so do, be, or say such-and-such because that implies an externally imposed expectation.

One “should” do, be, or say whatever is required to accomplish or achieve whatever one seeks to accomplish or achieve by meeting externally defined expectations. That’s about it. All other motivation is derived from establishing and maintaining an inner equilibrium in which one can exist in a state of balanced compromise between the demands of the world and the needs of the self.

Authenticity is determined by a matching of one’s words and deeds. If someone is going to live an authentic life and be an authentic person, they’re not fulfilling an external expectation. They’re living in consistent alignment with who they perceive themselves to be.

Their ability to consistently maintain their authenticity while acknowledging the impact of their behaviours on others is how they are deemed to have integrity by others who make that determination about them.

One doesn’t decide to have integrity as if it’s an accoutrement to their lives. One chooses words and deeds that maintain one’s inner balance with one’s external self to be an authentic person with integrity.

A leader is just an ordinary person who lights a path or blazes a trail others can follow.

Some leaders are incredibly toxic and take people who follow them down dark paths that are absent of integrity.

I would argue that the most influential leaders we have in the world today are primarily psychopathic monsters who bleed their followers dry while being responsible for setting our world on a trajectory toward oblivion.

Followers are just as important as leaders within a leader/follower dynamic. Without followers, a leader is a solitary traveller.

The challenge we have in this world today is that those who seek leadership should have something other than followers. At the same time, too many followers must learn to distinguish between leaders who can elevate and inspire them to achieve their best and those who lead them to their slaughter.

An authentic person with integrity behaves consistently with their values across all domains, contexts, and situations. That’s what authenticity means. Be, say, and do what is right and good for you without compromising the balance permitting you to remain whole as a human being with your own functioning identity.

Integrity means others can trust you to be consistently authentic and that you will sacrifice whatever is necessary to maintain your authenticity of self.

Leadership means others recognize and value one’s consistency enough to derive value from it in whatever capacity brings them to a state of internal equilibrium.

Should followers be too broken to value integrity, so will their leaders.

Temet Nosce