https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NKHdLqaRQY
Quote from: pr126 on December 14, 2017, 09:09:41 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NKHdLqaRQY
Are you red-pilled, pr?
I think pr126 was basically born "red pilled".
It has taken me decades, most of my life, to overcome the Matrix ... the Matrix is human culture. Whether government agencies, like in the dystopian novel, 1984, control the culture, aka "the narrative" or not ... even a spontaneously generated narrative, is just collective insanity, it is Tulip Mania all the way down.
Religion and politics are part of human culture. They are part of the Matrix. So politics is implicitly "blue pill" as is religion. A few of us by mutation, accident of birth, circumstances of development or the dint of due diligence, realize that the culture is a part of the problem, not a part of the solution.
However, it is not possible to be apart from culture ... so there is no solution ... just managing the disease. I choose to manage my disease ... the medicine I take is a "red pill".
Red pill originally just meant being aware of knowledge that the average person was not aware of. In recent years a subset of that type of knowledge has made the term specific to itself.
The question is, who here is colorblind?
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on December 14, 2017, 05:45:09 PM
The question is, who here is colorblind?
Why would you want to be? Would you want to be tone deaf? How about totally blind and totally deaf? The desire for personal purity ... is paranoid and selfish.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 14, 2017, 09:40:07 PM
I actually am, irl
BTW, I like your avatar of the woman in orange.
Real inability to see color ... would see things as transparent, not just colorlessly White ... that is the problem with defining political colorblindness ... it simply assumes that everyone is White, middle class and usually male (some dominant norm). Most non-White folk don't agree with such values, and half of the world is women who don't agree with men at all. The average African isn't White nor middle class. And they don't like African-Americans ... because they are American. Egyptians for instance, even after thousands of years of direct experience, still discriminate on the basis of skin color ... the lighter N Egyptian vs the far S Egyptian (Nubian). Liberalism only happens in sub-cultures that are sufficiently wealthy, educated and cosmopolitan. Poverty, ignorance and provincialism works against that.
I found the video to be informative and entertaining. The presenter was able to articulate the "red pill" perspective in a way I could understand and I loved how he composed the video. I agree with some of his points and appreciate some of his concerns, particularly the problems associated with the public's increasing distrust of the media and of the left's attempts to silence people who don't subscribe to their values or narrative. I do have some questions that maybe the "red pill" members on this site could explain:
1) One of the most watched and powerful news networks is Fox News and they don't subscribe to the narrative of "the elites," so is there really a unified narrative presented by the mainstream media? For example, topics like immigration, race and transgender rights are hotly debated in both the mainstream and alternative media. (FYI, at my gym the news televisions are always set to Fox News. I don't know if this is because of the owners or the patrons.)
2) The presenter repeatedly says that red pill people are discussing "reality" and the elites are speaking "nonsense" but isn't the "reality" described by the red pill people simply a different narrative? One group says there are multiple genders and one group says there are only two. Each side can argue this point, define and re-define the term gender and discuss roles, norms and identities, but neither is "reality." The red pills people don't appear to be presenting "truth" but an alternative narrative based on different values and supported by select data. It is unclear from the video whether the presenter acknowledges this.
3) Is the mindset of the red pill people really that different from those on the far left? Both are dissatisfied with the people they perceive to be in power. Both feel alienated, think their narrative is "reality", are concerned about culture (particularly gender roles), engage in political protests, are subject to conspiracy theories and think there needs to be a revolution. Both sides of the horseshoe seem to be singing the same tune, just different lyrics.
4) If red pill people are concerned about "reality" why do they focus on the left and ignore the religious right, whose beliefs are based on faith and not science? The left may control the humanities departments of major universities and some media outlets but I would argue the religious right in the US is currently more powerful than the far left. The religious right currently runs religious schools and universities across the country and are pushing to move their agenda into public schools. They run religious television networks, own media outlets, and run political lobbies including the NRA. Members of the religious right are being given control of government positions by Trump and Pence and Christianity is essentially a prerequisite for being elected to any political office in most areas of the country. Red pills people focus on "the Matrix" of the mainstream media, or of Islam, but seem unconcerned about the Matrix of the Christian right.
I am not sure if the Christian Right is as much of a threat as Islam is world wide. ( I live in the U.K.)
Here in Europe Christianity is fading into insignificance but Islam is becoming a problem due to mass immigration.
The media and the authorities are firmly on the side of Islam, and dissenters are “firmly discouraged†to voice their opinions.
IMHO this will not end well.
Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 15, 2017, 01:11:01 PM
I found the video to be informative and entertaining. The presenter was able to articulate the "red pill" perspective in a way I could understand and I loved how he composed the video. I agree with some of his points and appreciate some of his concerns, particularly the problems associated with the public's increasing distrust of the media and of the left's attempts to silence people who don't subscribe to their values or narrative. I do have some questions that maybe the "red pill" members on this site could explain:
1) One of the most watched and powerful news networks is Fox News and they don't subscribe to the narrative of "the elites," so is there really a unified narrative presented by the mainstream media? For example, topics like immigration, race and transgender rights are hotly debated in both the mainstream and alternative media. (FYI, at my gym the news televisions are always set to Fox News. I don't know if this is because of the owners or the patrons.)
2) The presenter repeatedly says that red pill people are discussing "reality" and the elites are speaking "nonsense" but isn't the "reality" described by the red pill people simply a different narrative? One group says there are multiple genders and one group says there are only two. Each side can argue this point, define and re-define the term gender and discuss roles, norms and identities, but neither is "reality." The red pills people don't appear to be presenting "truth" but an alternative narrative based on different values and supported by select data. It is unclear from the video whether the presenter acknowledges this.
3) Is the mindset of the red pill people really that different from those on the far left? Both are dissatisfied with the people they perceive to be in power. Both feel alienated, think their narrative is "reality", are concerned about culture (particularly gender roles), engage in political protests, are subject to conspiracy theories and think there needs to be a revolution. Both sides of the horseshoe seem to be singing the same tune, just different lyrics.
4) If red pill people are concerned about "reality" why do they focus on the left and ignore the religious right, whose beliefs are based on faith and not science? The left may control the humanities departments of major universities and some media outlets but I would argue the religious right in the US is currently more powerful than the far left. The religious right currently runs religious schools and universities across the country and are pushing to move their agenda into public schools. They run religious television networks, own media outlets, and run political lobbies including the NRA. Members of the religious right are being given control of government positions by Trump and Pence and Christianity is essentially a prerequisite for being elected to any political office in most areas of the country. Red pills people focus on "the Matrix" of the mainstream media, or of Islam, but seem unconcerned about the Matrix of the Christian right.
The pill is culture. There is no escaping that. Just because I can see thru SJW rhetoric, doesn't mean I am not a fool on other things. And I actually like some SJW rhetoric, I can appreciate their idealism, however impractical it might be. And the idea of liberty is ... pretty much a meme, a myth. A good one though.
QuoteThe media and the authorities are firmly on the side of Islam, and dissenters are “firmly discouraged†to voice their opinions.
Dissenters are perfectly free to voice their opinion; I myself hold alot of reservations about open immigration.
It's xenophobes and racists who are asked to kindly fuck off because... well... they are as antithesis to Western ideology as fundamental Islam is.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 14, 2017, 09:40:07 PM
I actually am, irl
Yeah, me too--but of the red/green type. I became aware of it when I was administered the color test made up of circles and then asked what number I saw. I still think they were joking--there were no numbers. Anyway, I often get red/green mixed up and see brown and red as the same. Drove my second grade teacher nuts. She did NOT like brown leaves apparently--or green bark.
Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 15, 2017, 01:11:01 PM4) If red pill people are concerned about "reality" why do they focus on the left and ignore the religious right, whose beliefs are based on faith and not science?
Because they're typically right-wingers themselves.
What it means to be red-pilled is when a man is such a loser that he can't forge a loving relationship with a woman, and so instead he resorts to secretly fantasizing about men while desperately trying to prove to other men that he's not gay by wearing porn mustaches, riding horses shirtless, walking around naked in gym locker rooms, and posting to red-pill and MGTOW forums bragging about how manly he is.
Quote from: Atheon on December 16, 2017, 01:40:12 PM
What it means to be red-pilled is when a man is such a loser that he can't forge a loving relationship with a woman, and so instead he resorts to secretly fantasizing about men while desperately trying to prove to other men that he's not gay by wearing porn mustaches, riding horses shirtless, walking around naked in gym locker rooms, and posting to red-pill and MGTOW forums bragging about how manly he is.
So being Right wing makes you closet gay? Bizarre theory. On your theory, Putin is closet gay.
I figured you for a trannie, living in Taiwan after your Thailand operation (just saying, not prejudiced). Or at least gay (again, not prejudiced).
Yes, it is a strange part of masculinity, or closet male gay, to do some of these strange things. Not easy to diagnose ... is he just masculine, or trying to hide being gay or trannie? I would keep sex talk, and remote psychoanalysis ... out of my posts, when I can.
Did I say being right-wing means being gay? No. Did I even mention right-wing? No.
But Putin? Gay as the day is long!
Quote from: Atheon on December 16, 2017, 02:15:14 PM
Did I say being right-wing means being gay? No. Did I even mention right-wing? No.
But Putin? Gay as the day is long!
So is that why we must nuke Russia ... because Putin is closet gay (publicly oppressing gays) or because he is just a bad ass gay?
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on December 14, 2017, 05:45:09 PM
The question is, who here is colorblind?
I am not colorblind. But I recognize that women seem to see and keep in mind more gradients of color than I do and I pay attention to colors... There ARE differences.
Quote from: Cavebear on December 18, 2017, 08:09:10 AM
I am not colorblind. But I recognize that women seem to see and keep in mind more gradients of color than I do and I pay attention to colors... There ARE differences.
Is part of the palette of your avatar, puce?
Quote from: Baruch on December 18, 2017, 10:07:13 PM
Is part of the palette of your avatar, puce?
No pucer than you are atheist. But one never really knows what goes in to all those monitor colors.
My monitor probably even has SHADES of "puce". Light puce, middle puce, dark puce, moderate lightly aqua puce, heavy bright gold puce, etc, etc, etc.
And don't EVEN get me started on "fuchsia". I mean, the word is even nasty to say properly and the color is even weirder... LOL!