Can we talk about Andrew Tate

Joe said:
Problem, IMO, is that Tate lies very easily. Most of the things he says, again IMO, are produced by his brain to serve his own self-aggrandizement. Since he has eked out a counter-culture niche for himself, that means that now and again he will come out with something that we view as the truth, but to him, it's not about the truth but about self-aggrandizement.
Click to expand...
I agree sort of like a narcissist's or another personality disorder mirroring empathy or how someone acts to get a desired result or portray a certain perception in public but in private they are a 180 of what they fake. In the social media game and youtube video algorithm game these personalities will talk about a topic or say certain things to get more views to satisfy the algorithm to then make money/popularity.

Like I opined even if he was centered and whole and aligned there are so money 3D STS forces such as hia following, money, capatalistic industries, fame, ads... and other things pushing and pulling him in directions so by default one can't TRUST who he is or what he says when trying to look for B influences....But this brings me to my next point below and I think deserves its own thread based on recent personal revelations I will post about it in time I need to gather...

The BIG however for me is in my own recent experience one can still glean and progress around A influenced people with disorders or problems or fake people as all experiences are real and you can take some of the toxic water filter it and nourish yourself. Not to mix and match the word andrew tate and nourish as that word is too wholesome IMO to ascribe to such a person but an experience is an experience and how one progresses in it through it and past it is based on THEIR internal make up not the person with the problem. This was and is a revelation to me and I assumed positive progress can only be made when involved with REAL things but this brings me to G's book title "Life is only REAL when I am" its the observer that can make hay regardless of the intentions, truth or positive/negative of the experience/people... Albeit I wouldn't recommend jumping into a pit of snakes to try and progress but the snakes are there in everyday life regardless if you are in the pit or not so its important to learn to maneuver/progress around them. In the realm of what others who have been on the forum for a long time have said and I found interesting when I came across this recommendation 10+ years ago...the take on disinformation. Its beneficial to read a disinformation book dont be afraid of it or push it away to see if you can spot or get good at spotting the truth hone that skill so to say. The idea behind that is a non attachment and his followers are obviously attached to him so that makes it difficult to do an already difficult task

FYI I also posted that video as I enjoy watching PBD podcast from time to time (Interviewer) and I enjoy his line of questioning and thoughts as much as someone can enjoy a youtube personality that has the 3D influence pull....
 
Last edited:
My 2 cents on Andrew Tate, it is all for show; he's saying things that resonate just for tapping a certain demographic.
I've encountered some other social media personalities that have "made the pivot" to be "hip" and be "woke" or "anti-woke" or whatever the prevailing mood is at the time, just to get more views, likes, subscribes on their channel.

Here is a "youtube journalist" looking into one of Andrew Tate's business:
"By their fruits shall you know them"

Disclosure: Coffeezilla is a channel I've subscribed to after his many videos exposing the many scams in the ("wild-wild west" i.e. unregulated) crypto space.
 
So Tate has been released now. I've got a feeling he's gonna come back stronger than ever.

At this point it doesn't look like the neo-masculinity movement can be stopped. Real question is how will the ptb co-opt and divert it towards useless aims? The game they've just played with the trumped up arrest may well have backfired.

See the video below for instance. If this becomes the core primary message of the movement, then the forces that aim to keep us weak, passive and submissive may have a fight on their hands.

After his jail time I can see Tate becoming less "money and hoes" and much more "God-fearing spiritual warrior". We shall see.

 
When I answer questions like this, I really prefer to do some deeper digging.

I did purchase "Hustler's University" and used it for about a month, and I have second info from him from a friend I consider relatively quite intelligent. Which means that's not deep digging at all. But anyways, here goes nothing:

As stated here before, the tone of H(ustler's)U(niversity) is "leaving The Matrix". And doing so by earning your own money without having to rely to the 9-5 system, aka "The Matrix".

What I can tell you is that EVERYTHING I saw in terms of effectiveness of content in HU was either good or very good. That means that they do show very good strategies on how to make money quite independently.

There are distinct strats for those 1) money-poor/time-poor 2)money-poor/time-rich 3)money-rich/time-poor and 4) money-rich/time-rich. They almost all involve at least a first step in learning copywriting, but branch off in different directions, usually investing for the money rich and qualifying your action/client-finding for the time-rich.

There's a peer-feedback system for helping improving each other's copies, and to keep the group motivated. You can only advance from the beginner to intermediate, and then to advanced level when you post a screenshot that you have earned a certain amount of money from your copywriting activity (they also teach how to get clients, which did work for me quite quickly). The amount from beginner to intermediate is a total of $300, either from one job or from many. I saw many, many screenshots of people supposedly making this much money, and lot, lot more. Can't remember exactly the figures for the money-rich strats, but some were the tens of thousand and just a few weeks.

My point in describing this is that I experienced the content of HU as legitimate, and I wanted to showcase why.

Now, problems do abound. There's a lot of 18-ish kids who don't get anywhere with what's taught. From the comments and reading their copies, it shone me almost as always from lack of application, but not always. And of course persuading these impressionable demographic is a delicate enterprise.

My friend told me Tate's dad was a chess player, fluent in Russian, and many Russian dudes would often be at his home to play. As stated here, he's a many times kick-boxing world champion, and my friend said he was undefeated, or nearly so. Tate's brother is supposed to be on a similar level as well. Tate's seems to be an excellent chess player as well.

As for his businesses, I heard about the camgirl stuff, and also cassinos in Romania. The story goes that he'd open his cassionos right in front of competition and through some bold strategy that I can't remember, he put them all out of business. He has around 6 nationalities, many because you can practically purchase them, such as portugal and Cyprus. His raging success in social media really is so explosive that could indicate his connections and know-how somehow go quite deep.

About material independence as a ways of leaving "The Matrix", after much talking to people, thinking and observation, I came to see how material poverty can be a tremendous trap, and that inducing artificial poverty is one of the fundamental tools of the ptb (aka. "The Matrix" system).

I remember talking to this guy from Northeast Brazil, a place truly bountiful of culture and wisdom... who was living in a Megalopolis of over 10 million people, a place truly filthy of destruction and madness. My question was "why on Earth did you come here?". His response was "I didn't wanna die! Back at home we had to feed cactus to the cattle, and still they would die". Sheesh. These are fierce people. It's a very tough job to dumb them down - so poverty is a very important tool of domination.

point is: if you teach people to make a living independently, that's a leap towards actually LIVING independently.

My friend's assessment is that Tate is a legit guy trying to help people, and his nonsense garbage content is on purpose, to attract people who have a mind full of nonsense and garbage, and then somehow uplift them from dependency. I can see that. Still the "industries" he chose indicate an M.O. that is definitely not your run-of-the-mill ethic guidelines.

I find him quite hard to read, both from manners as well as from his history. I just can' tell if he's a puppet, a huge ego, a good guy, all of those combined or anything else.

I feel no need to reach a conclusion or pass any judgement. Besides, I find the whole Tate phenomenon so interesting and such a fun thread to pull to understand machinations of the ptb, that I definitely want to keep my mind open so Ican enjoy the show!
 
forest_light said:

Perhaps one day, someone will post something like this online with a picture of Tate. ​

He has every single one of these traits listed below. He makes my skin crawl.​

Sociopath Traits You Must Recognize For Your Own Safety​

  • High IQ: High-functioning sociopaths often have a higher IQ than other sociopaths or people without personality disorders. This helps them plan, manipulate, and exploit others.
  • Lack of empathy: They find it difficult to empathize with others or understand the emotional consequences of their actions.
  • Narcissism: They often have strong self-love and grandiose self-image. This occurs because of low esteem and delusional beliefs.
  • Charming: Although most sociopaths lack empathy, they are capable of mimicking and manipulating emotions to appear charming and normal.
  • Secretive: A sociopath doesn't feel the need to share intimate details with others - unless they are using them to manipulate others.
  • Sexually deviant: Since they lack guilt, remorse, and emotional attachments, high-functioning sociopaths tend to have affairs and engage in questionable sexual activity.
  • Sensitive to criticism: Despite their lack of empathy, sociopaths desire the approval of others. Sociopathic people feel entitled to admiration and are quick to anger when criticized.
  • Impulsive behavior: Sociopaths are often reckless. They typically live in the moment and will do what they feel is needed to reach their immediate goals.
  • Sociopaths often lie: Compulsive lying is a common trait among all types of sociopaths. They will often disregard the truth to make themselves look better or get what they want.
  • Needing constant stimulation: Sociopaths often get bored easily and need to be actively engaged.
  • Addictive Behavior: Their compulsive mindset may result in addiction to drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, or other addictive behaviors.
  • Rule Breakers/ Criminal Behavior: In general, sociopaths are known to be rule breakers. It is not uncommon for them to have a history of criminal activity because of their belief that they are above the law and breaking rules is of no consequence. Criminal activity associated with sociopaths could include theft, assault, or destruction of property. High-functioning sociopaths may also participate in more serious crimes or could be serial killers.

After the news last night, Sky News ran an interview with Tate on
'Uncensored' Piers Morgan, that happened a couple of months ago.
Nicely timed with the arrest that happened yesterday! :lol2:

In the interview, I watched Tate stare directly down the camera at every opportunity, trying to convince the viewer of his 'sincerity' attempting to mesmerise them with his 'hypnotic stare' (to the point that Piers had to say "Hey, I'm over here").

I observed him smiling, doing his best to be 'charming' and project a more 'moderate' version of himself, but that didn't really work. Piers could have raked him over the coals but he didn't, but I think it was a frustrating interview for him. It seems he is trying to 'see the best in Tate' and may have fallen for that fake charm and intellect, clearly he doesn't know a sociopath when he sees one.

I noticed that Tate LOVED it when Piers said he had been googled more times than Donald Trump, he really lit up and smiled delightedly. Loves the notoriety and any attention.

He made reference to the following things, I noticed there was particular 'frequency' and 'space' around the words when he said them, and the expression in his voice and on his face was a bit weird:

two references to 'the Devil' (something like 'I'm not the Devil')
two references to 'magic spells'
two references to "with great power comes great responsibility" while trying to conceal his pleasure at the words/thought.

I cannot help feeling Tate has been 'programmed' on some level, perhaps in connection with his Dad's work in the CIA.
He is very expressive with his hands and eye contact, almost like he believes he has the ability to 'cast spells' of some kind, that he has some kind of 'mind control' skills. He really seems to have respect but also some fear regarding his father. That would have been some kind of childhood raised in a household like that, how would you ever feel safe, or that you could trust anyone. I think that is evident in his behaviour and 'image' he presents to the world. God knows what has actually been done to him, but we can clearly see what he is doing to himself and others.
Click to expand...
I would have to agree with this 100%
He is serving as a catalyst to flare up pacified young men, but it is to his own making, it is not necessarily justice. His personality reflects clear narcissism and he will do that compulsive lying that isn’t backed up by any facts about himself or someone else in order to prove a point.

Tate is correct when he is speaking of the de-masculinity of men. But his “solution” and lifestyle is what I would label “conquerer masculinity.” The same type that has been getting men into the mess we’ve been re-living for millennia. Get money (power) view women as trophies, and have multiple sexual partners (objectification) and dominate weaker men.

Yea we’ve tried that, it always seems to…blow up in one’s face.

I would also agree that JP’s approach to a patriarchal, defender, lover, provider type of masculinity is what we as men need to re-kindle and search for. I can’t seem to blame Andrew Tate, his father let him down too. Thus continuing this ridiculous cycle of vengeful STS masculinity, I don’t even know what to call it. But it exists in all us men who have been in a position of power! And need to be very careful!

Tate needs to read some romance novels!
 
Joe said:
So freelance copywriting? And some were making "tens of thousands in a few weeks"?
Click to expand...
The ones that were supposedly making tens of thousands in a few weeks were doing more money-intense activities - the money-rich time of activity -.

They involved stock, bit-coin trading. Their ‘proof’ were screenshots of their virtual wallets, bank statements, etc.
 
I’m finishing reading “Political Ponerology”, and doing some intense reflecting, so here’s a small update on my take on Tate.

I still have to say all the content of HU that I’ve seen is sensible and effective in my own practice. As for the likelihood of some individuals making over 10k a month with their advice, I also find it plausible, according my understanding and small practice of financial speculation. The possibility that at least many of those screenshots are fake somehow, is also real.

That said… I’ve watched the ~80min interview and the video he’s abusing a lady, allegedly consensually.

In the interview, as stated, he talks to the camera (awareness of audience) instead of the interviewer, seemed to have clear talking points he repeated about 2 times per minute in some instances, and used incongruent language. His change in demeanor after his usual talk points didn’t work with the interviewer is quite big. Also, I’m surprised he thought his talking points would be embraced in that environment (ie: arguing women belong to men because the Quran says so). The incongruency in language I mentioned is arguing over the semantics of “belonging” to imply he didn’t mean anything that’d hurt the interviewer’s and his audience’s value system. So, women are both autonomous and independent, and at the same time belong to their husbands. An example real-time manufacturing of Doublespeak?

And for the video he’s abusing the lady, first I find the context hard to understand. She’s more than half-naked, on a bed, first he’s stretched out, and says something about leaving a door open, and then he slaps and gets on top of her yelling “did I say ‘listen’?!”. I don’t understand why that’d be taped as well.

Considering he ran a cam-girl website and cassinos, my guess would be he was terrorizing her, and the taping would be for sadistic and/or “managerial” purposes, in terrorizing other people - ladies mostly.

It bears many marks of typical torture and gross domination: he’s more clothed than her, he’s unpredictable, he has at least someone else “on his side” (the one taping), he’s language is confusing, he demands submission, he’s physically hurting her, he gets physically on top of her.

I don’t know if consensual S&M involved somebody sounding like she did. I heard no pleasure in voice, more like she was cracking up.

Also, he seems very practiced in all of those torturing techniques.

And how much a difference does it make if it was consensual or not? His fluency and participating in such torture is a sign of either “pathology” or “transpersonification” (using the terms from Ponerology, pathology meaning that individual has a bodily and nervous system defect, and transpersonification meaning that someone with a normal nervous system has acquired pathological-like behaviors).

So it does seem he functions in the pathological spectrum, whatever the cause.

Still, I don’t want to just write him off as “just another sociopath”, which he does seem to be. By that I mean the whole Tate phenomenon has many very interesting keys for understanding.

If he’s like that, how come he’s so competent in chess and fighting? (“Deviants” tend to be less “intelligent” than the average, as Lobaczewski noted)
If his “instinctive substratum” (his basic making) is normal, then how come he participates in the torture and tortuousness of language?
How come he says some sensible things, at the same time distorting them to his gross gain?
How can he run HU at least well enough, if he’s so deficient in basic common sense?

I find the “Tate Show” a tremendous opportunity to learn about these types experientially - and how they deal with the core of the “pathocracy” (the rule stemming from a group of more severely pathological individuals who managed to seize power, and are looking to expand it)
 
Dovana said:
If he’s like that, how come he’s so competent in chess and fighting? (“Deviants” tend to be less “intelligent” than the average, as Lobaczewski noted)
Click to expand...
On psychopaths and IQ: Danger-zone Psychopathy

Basically, you can still have smart psychopaths, there just won't be as many of them, proportionally.

On chess, check out this thread: https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/i-write-about-russia.53180/post-1095763
Dovana said:
If his “instinctive substratum” (his basic making) is normal, then how come he participates in the torture and tortuousness of language?
Click to expand...
If so, it could just be the way he was raised. He may have a naturally 'tough' temperament, coupled with childhood experiences.
 
There’s something else I noticed about Tate, which is the way he writes. I didn’t mention because I wanted to keep the post somewhat succinct.

And then I just received this e-mail from him, advertising HU 2.0, aka “The Real World”. I find it fascinating, and very rich to study. I’m considering he was the one who wrote it, and I’ll later mention why I’m confident it was him or someone who functions similarly. Here it is in full:

SUBJECT: The destructive curse

“There is only one quality which is truly FATAL for any man aspiring for greatness.



The number one quality which GUARANTEES failure.



You could be the most talented man on the planet.



God could have blessed you with absolutely every single talent and gift POSSIBLE.



And with all these gifts, if you are a quitter?



You'll remain BRUTALLY unremarkable.



Out of every quality on earth, “quitter” is truly the most destructive.



You may be reading this with nearly every curse God could bestow you, short, ugly and poor.



As long as you are not a quitter, you're going to be just fine.



Understand that the people richer and more successful than you may be much LESS talented than you are.



They simply worked much harder than you did.



If you worked as hard as they did, you'd be surpassing them.



Every world champion had doubts on their climb to greatness and every world champion ignored them.



You should feel a deep shame inside of your heart when you quit something.



When you don't work hard enough at a chance to become someone great.



Life doesn't give you unlimited chances.



You do not deserve unlimited chances.



Life gives you a few chances, and tests how seriously you dedicate yourself to each one.



DO NOT FAIL.”

Right under it, there’s a button that says “click here to escape the matrix”, that leads to this page: _Never Give Up

I assume I’m receiving this because I quit HU. It was very useful, and I’m still applying important lessons I learned there, but I don’t see fruitful use for it at the moment.

When he was arrested, I received an e-mail supposed to be from him, almost identical in structure. It struck me: it was very similar to the writing of a confirmed pathological/transpersonified individual I worked with.

He put down his blog, so I can’t paste his writings here for comparison. Still, the above writing is indicative of significant characteristics of the functioning of who wrote it:

• Both words “destructive” and “curse” have many of their semantics aspects unexplored or not echoed in the body of the e-mail. A curse is something persistent, and mythologically must be broken, but the e-mail says little to nothing of overcoming, or of finding a cause. It’s quite explicitly a shaming attempt.

Also “destructive” is not quite explored. It’s not even clear what is being destroyed - maybe the individual themselves, or the dreams of “greatness”, but then we’re talking about very vague language.

• Many healthy or descriptive language violations (cognitive distortions, in cognitive psychology):

-emotional language marked but the caps. “FATAL”, “GUARANTEES”, etc
-Vague terms. “Greatness”, “quitter”, “DO NOT FAIL”
-All or nothing thinking: “you could be the most talented man on the planet”, “only one quality truly FATAL”,
-Complex equivalence: “if you worked as hard they did, you’d be just be just fine.

Etc, etc.

• There are erroneous statements. I’m confident there’s more than one cause to one’s lack of “greatness”.
And if one accepts these suggestions, they’ll be at a loss in find the true cause, while anxious to effect a solution - which the proposed ideology is posed as.
A prime example of “spellbinding”?

• Short sentences, without clear connection. Elements and words from the beginning of the the text not echoed later. Akin to not even remembering they were said, or a disregard for verbal consistency - what matters is the target audience’s reaction (similar to looking at the camera during the interview).

He writes as he speaks; “and with all these gifts, if you’re a quitter?”

Some phrases have an almost certainly unintended double-meaning: “you could be reading this with near every curse God could bestow you…”. Syntactically, it’s like saying some is using at least one curse to read this… and that likely god has a habit of cursing people - with nearly every one He could bestow! But would that matter? - after all, the subject of the e-mail implies there’s only one destructive curse!.. so all of the other must be constructive?

Lobaczewski talks about how most often the ponerogenic pathologies affect the linguistic parts of the brain.

I’m confident he wrote something, and a professional more verbally competent edited it. It’s curious that he wouldn’t just pay that individual to just do it from the start. Ego getting in the way?

Also raises several questions about HU’s management, since copywriting is the highly encouraged in almost situation. Interesting incongruency!

• “Every world champion had doubts… and ignored them…”. Now that’s a key one! This one indicates to me he isn’t fully pathological - Lobaczewski says “essential psychopaths” are incapable of doubt.
The destruction of “doubt” (which is probably a doublespeak for “conscience”) is a point of repetition at least in artistic depictions of ponerogenic associations:

“ah, my pupil, you harbor doubts. Doubts that stem from your impure attachment to your mother, and the old, decrepit world from whence you came! They are making you weak! Hesitant! You must burn this world… with your own hands”. Than kind of stuff.

So it seems that 1) This is typical “patholical induction” (the futile attempt to make normal people function like deviants) and 2) because it’s only said once, it might be unconscious from the writer.

I can’t guess any further than this, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the author unconsciously adressing this to himsef. Lobaczewski talks about how the spellbinding types primarily use their abilities to for self-charm, to flood down whatever conscience they still have (conversive thinking)

“You do not deserve unlimited chances”. Typical “pathological material”(aka verbal abuse)?

“If you’re not a quitter, you’ll be just fine” typical self-soothing (response to pathological material)? Interesting he’d say this under so much legal pressure.

• Grandiosity. “Greatness”, “World Champion”. Matches his lifestyle and image he projects. The book also mentions how essential psychopaths tend to stay in the shadows pulling the strings - not Tate’s case. So whatever deviance he’s operating from, it’s something else, and it’s “Narcissistic” (using a more contemporaneous terminology not in Lubaczewski’s book.

• Of course, wishful thinking with so many erroneous statements about success and failure, and ending by “DO NOT FAIL”.
Does saying this, especially in caps, usually aid in success?

Well, well, now! Looks like Tate is answering many of our questions by his own accord.
 
I’ve seen plenty of ad copy emails with exactly this style and flavor. To me, it is now totally generic millennial manipulation with embedded hooks galore. It is formulaic. This is not unique or original. It speaks FROM a certain mindset that I would say is now ubiquitous in certain circles. (Millennial self help/pseudo personal development) People give pricy seminars on how to write this way and increase sales by a whopping X %. And It speaks TO a certain mindset targeting fear, shame, FOMO, guilt, insecurity while triggering programs and playing to the lower centers while pretending to be about rising above. (Targeting Millennials primarily and fringe Gen Xers I’d say).

I can speak with some authority here since I have one millennial son who uses a similar but less heavy-handed, guilt tripping style for his own online marketing. He has even enlisted me to review and contribute to this sort of ad copywriting. I have tried to make it more up-lifting and open ended but my kid, of course, does what he does. What I am saying is that this style of copywriting is now normal and standardized and is nothing extraordinary. It’s just what goes around these days and has been for several years now.

Ad copy for Indigo’s!! LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom