The Problem with Andrew Tate (and Incel Radicalization)

[Neu California]

Sorry. Not how it works. You made the positive claim, it's on you to back it up. That's how burden of proof works.

Nope. Not how it works. You made the positive claim that Testimonials are wrong. I could show you testimonials, but you would reject them simply because they are on YouTube. If you don't wanna accept Testimonials, then the burdon of proof is on you to prove that they're wrong. I can show you testimonials. You're the one claiming that the testamonials are false, so you have to prove that testimonials are false. I am willing to show you YouTube testamonials. If you reject them, the burdon of proof is on you

Except, well, there's no way to determine whether or not they're bullshitting to promote their agenda. That's the problem, and that's why I demand solid evidence that's not just anecdotal.

[The Rio Grande River Basin]

Nope. Not how it works. You made the positive claim that Testimonials are wrong. I could show you testimonials, but you would reject them simply because they are on YouTube. If you don't wanna accept Testimonials, then the burdon of proof is on you to prove that they're wrong. I can show you testimonials. You're the one claiming that the testamonials are false, so you have to prove that testimonials are false. I am willing to show you YouTube testamonials. If you reject them, the burdon of proof is on you

Except, well, there's no way to determine whether or not they're bullshitting to promote their agenda. That's the problem, and that's why I demand solid evidence that's not just anecdotal.

STOP THREADJACKING!

[Neu California]

I was specifically talking about his response to me, which has little if anything to do with religion, not the rest of the stuff. It's a giant pain in the ass to cut the rest of the quoted stuff on tablet is all.

Doesn’t matter. Stop responding to threadjack and focus on the topic at hand.

Anyhow, my opinions are clear, in that the Tate brothers need to be thrown out of a window.

Considering the post I responded to first (followed by his response and then mine) was about why people flock to Andrew Tate, it seems on-topic to me

Also, if you think this is threadjacking, report it in moderation. Don't just yell about threadjacking

[The Rio Grande River Basin]

Doesn’t matter. Stop responding to threadjack and focus on the topic at hand.

Anyhow, my opinions are clear, in that the Tate brothers need to be thrown out of a window.

Considering the post I responded to first (followed by his response and then mine) was about why people flock to Andrew Tate, it seems on-topic to me

Still, a debate going off the rails to another topic is still threadjacking. I’m not a mod, but, it’s hard to find relevant posts anymore.

[Juristonia]

Still, a debate going off the rails to another topic is still threadjacking. I’m not a mod, but, it’s hard to find relevant posts anymore.

You're right, you're not a mod, so either report it or move on.
At this point you're the one threadjacking. At least they're being tangibly relevant.

[Luna Amore]

Let's get back on topic, guys.

The Rio Grande River Basin, repeatedly posting 'Stop Threadjacking' in huge font is not helping and basically spam. Report it and move on next time.

[Fahran]

A rootless, anti-nationalist, materialistic sex fiend is not the Fascist ideal of manhood. He's more fitting as a libertarian.

He's not really liberal in his conception of hierarchy or in his broader values though. But I do think you have a fair point when you point out the lack of nationalism and the materialism. A lot of what he proposes is pretty much the right-wing version of what the beatniks did, and probably about as abusive.

[Australian rePublic]

Except, well, there's no way to determine whether or not they're bullshitting to promote their agenda. That's the problem, and that's why I demand solid evidence that's not just anecdotal.

STOP THREADJACKING!

Dude, it's not threadjacking, we're discussing why people are radicalised

Nope. Not how it works. You made the positive claim that Testimonials are wrong. I could show you testimonials, but you would reject them simply because they are on YouTube. If you don't wanna accept Testimonials, then the burdon of proof is on you to prove that they're wrong. I can show you testimonials. You're the one claiming that the testamonials are false, so you have to prove that testimonials are false. I am willing to show you YouTube testamonials. If you reject them, the burdon of proof is on you

Except, well, there's no way to determine whether or not they're bullshitting to promote their agenda. That's the problem, and that's why I demand solid evidence that's not just anecdotal.

You think I haven't considered bullshitting. Of coarse I've considered bullshitting. Here's people who used to subscribe to these ideas, or people who have studied these things. I'm not quoting people who are lying. For example, I could quote Alex Jones' right hand man, Paul Joseph Watson, but I'm not going to do that, obviously, the guy is at best a raging lunatic. Obviously. I'm going to use people who are more objective.

Finding the exact video I'm looking for is really hard, so I'll
Here Isacc Butterfield. He centrist like me. Since he is NOT a white supremist, nor a NAZI, why would he lie on behalf of NAZIs? Also, read the comments. In fact, he opposes Andrew Tate. Isacc's video is well researched: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0ynNieXpY&t=247s
And here is Shaun, I can't find the video where he mentioned it, but I think it's this one. Shaun is an actual socialist whose politics align more with yours than mine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcoYKuoiUrY

If you can somehow prove that Isacc, his commentors and Shaun are lying, then I'll try to find more

[Neu California]

STOP THREADJACKING!

Dude, it's not threadjacking, we're discussing why people are radicalised

Except, well, there's no way to determine whether or not they're bullshitting to promote their agenda. That's the problem, and that's why I demand solid evidence that's not just anecdotal.

You think I haven't considered bullshitting. Of coarse I've considered bullshitting. Here's people who used to subscribe to these ideas, or people who have studied these things. I'm not quoting people who are lying. For example, I could quote Alex Jones' right hand man, Paul Joseph Watson, but I'm not going to do that, obviously, the guy is at best a raging lunatic. Obviously. I'm going to use people who are more objective.

Finding the exact video I'm looking for is really hard, so I'll
Here Isacc Butterfield. He centrist like me. Since he is NOT a white supremist, nor a NAZI, why would he lie on behalf of NAZIs? Also, read the comments. In fact, he opposes Andrew Tate. Isacc's video is well researched: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0ynNieXpY&t=247s
And here is Shaun, I can't find the video where he mentioned it, but I think it's this one. Shaun is an actual socialist whose politics align more with yours than mine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcoYKuoiUrY

If you can somehow prove that Isacc, his commentors and Shaun are lying, then I'll try to find more

Not on me to prove they're lying. Again, burden of proof is on the one making the claim, and you're making the claim that they're right.

Also, I don't buy that you're a centrist for a second.

[The Phoenician Republic]

A rootless, anti-nationalist, materialistic sex fiend is not the Fascist ideal of manhood. He's more fitting as a libertarian.

He's not really liberal in his conception of hierarchy or in his broader values though. But I do think you have a fair point when you point out the lack of nationalism and the materialism. A lot of what he proposes is pretty much the right-wing version of what the beatniks did, and probably about as abusive.

What exactly was abusive about the beatniks? Did Jack Kerouac beat some woman up or something?

[Australian rePublic]

Dude, it's not threadjacking, we're discussing why people are radicalised


You think I haven't considered bullshitting. Of coarse I've considered bullshitting. Here's people who used to subscribe to these ideas, or people who have studied these things. I'm not quoting people who are lying. For example, I could quote Alex Jones' right hand man, Paul Joseph Watson, but I'm not going to do that, obviously, the guy is at best a raging lunatic. Obviously. I'm going to use people who are more objective.

Finding the exact video I'm looking for is really hard, so I'll
Here Isacc Butterfield. He centrist like me. Since he is NOT a white supremist, nor a NAZI, why would he lie on behalf of NAZIs? Also, read the comments. In fact, he opposes Andrew Tate. Isacc's video is well researched: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0ynNieXpY&t=247s
And here is Shaun, I can't find the video where he mentioned it, but I think it's this one. Shaun is an actual socialist whose politics align more with yours than mine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcoYKuoiUrY

If you can somehow prove that Isacc, his commentors and Shaun are lying, then I'll try to find more

Not on me to prove they're lying. Again, burden of proof is on the one making the claim, and you're making the claim that they're right.

Also, I don't buy that you're a centrist for a second.

Burdon of proof is on you to prove they're lying. Again, their own testimonials. You specifically accused them of lying, not being wrong. Stop shifting the goal post. This is what drew them themselves to the cause. In either case, what makes you so sure that you're right? If it's not far left-politics that turned them to NAZIism, what is that did? Something did, no body wakes up one morning thinking "hmmm... I wonder if Hitler was right..." and if you believe that they do, prove it. I at least tried to provide some kind of proof, what proof do you have for your hypothesis of what draws people to the far right? And if you have no hypothesis, under what authority do you call mine wrong? Again, I at least tried to provide some kind of proof, what do you bring to the table other than "but you wrong, bro..."

Also, considering that you appear to be really, really far left, so far left that you make the BBC look like Fox News, of course you don't buy that I am a centrist. Most far-left consider me to be very far right, just like how most far righters would consider me a Karl Marx loving communist. As a hardcore centrist, I am accused of being far-right by left-wingers and far-left by right-wingers. That comes with the territory of being a centrist.

[Mountains and Volcanoes]

Not on me to prove they're lying. Again, burden of proof is on the one making the claim, and you're making the claim that they're right.

---

Also, I don't buy that you're a centrist for a second.

Burden of proof is on you to prove they're lying. Again, their own testimonials.

Isn’t that a accusation in a mirror?

Also, considering that you're probably really, really far left, so far left that you make the BBC look like Fox News, of course you don't buy that I am a centrist. Most far-left consider me to be very far right, just like how most far righters would consider me a Karl Marx loving communist. As a centrist, I am accused of being far-right by left-wingers and far-left by right-wingers. That comes with the territory of being a centrist

Centrist? (Like Tim Pool?) Or a fence sitter, a status quo (neoliberal)?

[Australian rePublic]

Burden of proof is on you to prove they're lying. Again, their own testimonials.

Isn’t that a accusation in a mirror?

Wait, what? I have since edited that post and wrote more to it

Also, considering that you're probably really, really far left, so far left that you make the BBC look like Fox News, of course you don't buy that I am a centrist. Most far-left consider me to be very far right, just like how most far righters would consider me a Karl Marx loving communist. As a centrist, I am accused of being far-right by left-wingers and far-left by right-wingers. That comes with the territory of being a centrist

Centrist? (Like Tim Pool?) Or a fence sitter, a status quo (neoliberal)?

I don't know who Tim Pool is, but centrist, actual centrist, NOT fence sitter. Hardcore centrist, NOT apathetic

[El Lazaro]

Isn’t that a accusation in a mirror?Centrist? (Like Tim Pool?) Or a fence sitter, a status quo (neoliberal)?

I don't know who Tim Pool is, but centrist, actual centrist, NOT fence sitter. Hardcore centrist, NOT apathetic

Conservatives are boring. What’s with the effort to be labeled as a centrist?

[Australian rePublic]

I don't know who Tim Pool is, but centrist, actual centrist, NOT fence sitter. Hardcore centrist, NOT apathetic

Conservatives are boring. What’s with the effort to be labeled as a centrist?

The fact that I actually am a centrist. Something you would know if you bothered to ask what I believe in, rather than make idiotic assumptions. Financially, WHILST NOT PERFECT, believe that the best system of government is capitalism with socialist characteristics, as is the case in Canada, Australia, NZ, and much of Western Europe, the best countries in the world in terms of freedom, health care, wealth of the average citizen, wealth mobility, education, etc.. I support capitalism with worker's rights, universal health care, free education, and am willing to experiment with a Universal Basic Income. At the same time, I don't believe that there should be a limit to how much an individual can earn, if you can be a trillionaire, go for it, the market should be (relatively) free and I support the concept of businesses and the stock market. Centrism is the best system that has ever existed and I fully support it

[El Lazaro]

Conservatives are boring. What’s with the effort to be labeled as a centrist?

The fact that I actually am a centrist. Something you would know if you bothered to ask what I believe in, rather than make idiotic assumptions. Financially, WHILST NOT PERFECT, believe that the best system of government is capitalism with socialist characteristics, as is the case in Canada, Australia, NZ, and much of Western Europe, the best countries in the world in terms of freedom, health care, wealth of the average citizen, wealth mobility, education, etc.. I support capitalism with worker's rights, universal health care, free education, and am willing to experiment with a Universal Basic Income. At the same time, I don't believe that there should be a limit to how much an individual can earn, if you can be a trillionaire, go for it, the market should be (relatively) free and I support the concept of businesses and the stock market. Centrism is the best system that has ever existed and I fully support it

You are as centrist, if not less, than I am, and I make no effort to claim to support or oppose it. Can you not simply have your views without having an obsession with reminding everyone they are “common-sense” and “pragmatic” and whatever else arbitrary labels you need to control how people think of them?

[Australian rePublic]

The fact that I actually am a centrist. Something you would know if you bothered to ask what I believe in, rather than make idiotic assumptions. Financially, WHILST NOT PERFECT, believe that the best system of government is capitalism with socialist characteristics, as is the case in Canada, Australia, NZ, and much of Western Europe, the best countries in the world in terms of freedom, health care, wealth of the average citizen, wealth mobility, education, etc.. I support capitalism with worker's rights, universal health care, free education, and am willing to experiment with a Universal Basic Income. At the same time, I don't believe that there should be a limit to how much an individual can earn, if you can be a trillionaire, go for it, the market should be (relatively) free and I support the concept of businesses and the stock market. Centrism is the best system that has ever existed and I fully support it

You are as centrist, if not less, than I am, and I make no effort to claim to support or oppose it. Can you not simply have your views without having an obsession with reminding everyone they are “common-sense” and “pragmatic” and whatever else arbitrary labels you need to control how people think of them?

And when did I say that. The only time I ever said ghat anything was common sense is that it's common sense that those who are disenfranchised with the way society treats them will look towards those who want to elevate their position in society. That's the only time I said that anything was common sense

[El Lazaro]

You are as centrist, if not less, than I am, and I make no effort to claim to support or oppose it. Can you not simply have your views without having an obsession with reminding everyone they are “common-sense” and “pragmatic” and whatever else arbitrary labels you need to control how people think of them?

And when did I say that. The only time I ever said ghat anything was common sense is that it's common sense that those who are disenfranchised with the way society treats them will look towards those who want to elevate their position in society. That's the only time I said that anything was common sense

You are using the word “centrist” as an expression of political virtue rather than honestly trying to describe your beliefs in a useful capacity. This is an appeal to the perceived rationality of “true centrism” that conservatives, like Tim Pool, often make. Centrism isn’t an ideology, it’s a relative position and has no objective value or meaning. Trying to claim it as a justification for your views is ridiculous, especially when the issues you actually post about have a clear bias towards one side of the spectrum.

[Australian rePublic]

And when did I say that. The only time I ever said ghat anything was common sense is that it's common sense that those who are disenfranchised with the way society treats them will look towards those who want to elevate their position in society. That's the only time I said that anything was common sense

You are using the word “centrist” as an expression of political virtue rather than honestly trying to describe your beliefs in a useful capacity. This is an appeal to the perceived rationality of “true centrism” that conservatives, like Tim Pool, often make. Centrism isn’t an ideology, it’s a relative position and has no objective value or meaning. Trying to claim it as a justification for your views is ridiculous, especially when the issues you actually post about have a clear bias towards one side of the spectrum.

Again, I don't know who Tim Pool. Also, again, left-wingers will see me as right-wingers, and right-wingers will see me as left. I know that I stand in the middle.

I don't know who Tim Pool is, but centrist, actual centrist, NOT fence sitter. Hardcore centrist, NOT apathetic

Conservatives are boring.

So? People hold political beliefs because they believe that they're political beliefs are the best way to run society. People don't hold political beliefs in an attempt to entertain you

[El Lazaro]

You are using the word “centrist” as an expression of political virtue rather than honestly trying to describe your beliefs in a useful capacity. This is an appeal to the perceived rationality of “true centrism” that conservatives, like Tim Pool, often make. Centrism isn’t an ideology, it’s a relative position and has no objective value or meaning. Trying to claim it as a justification for your views is ridiculous, especially when the issues you actually post about have a clear bias towards one side of the spectrum.

Again, I don't know who Tim Pool. Also, again, left-wingers will see me as right-wingers, and right-wingers will see me as left. I know that I stand in the middle.

Conservatives are boring.

So? People hold political beliefs because they believe that they're political beliefs are the best way to run society. People don't hold political beliefs in an attempt to entertain you

I am the true real legitimate centrist^TM and I have now decided the only reason you think I am left-leaning to any degree whatsoever is that you are the reanimated corpse of Hitler. Reality BTFO by my feelings.

[Neu California]

Not on me to prove they're lying. Again, burden of proof is on the one making the claim, and you're making the claim that they're right.

Also, I don't buy that you're a centrist for a second.

Burdon of proof is on you to prove they're lying. Again, their own testimonials. You specifically accused them of lying, not being wrong. Stop shifting the goal post. This is what drew them themselves to the cause. In either case, what makes you so sure that you're right? If it's not far left-politics that turned them to NAZIism, what is that did? Something did, no body wakes up one morning thinking "hmmm... I wonder if Hitler was right..." and if you believe that they do, prove it. I at least tried to provide some kind of proof, what proof do you have for your hypothesis of what draws people to the far right? And if you have no hypothesis, under what authority do you call mine wrong? Again, I at least tried to provide some kind of proof, what do you bring to the table other than "but you wrong, bro..."

Also, considering that you appear to be really, really far left, so far left that you make the BBC look like Fox News, of course you don't buy that I am a centrist. Most far-left consider me to be very far right, just like how most far righters would consider me a Karl Marx loving communist. As a hardcore centrist, I am accused of being far-right by left-wingers and far-left by right-wingers. That comes with the territory of being a centrist.

Yeah, let me explain it to you in simple terms.

If they're telling the truth, then it should be easy to find actual evidence that they are. You keep insisting they're telling the truth, and I'm saying that I don't believe them for a second.

Also, for a supposed centrist, you have one hell of a tendency to spout off right-wing talking points while only seriously criticizing the left. Curious, that.

Edit: also, I made no claim about what I think draws people to the far right, so I have no clue what you're talking about there.

[Australian rePublic]

Burdon of proof is on you to prove they're lying. Again, their own testimonials. You specifically accused them of lying, not being wrong. Stop shifting the goal post. This is what drew them themselves to the cause. In either case, what makes you so sure that you're right? If it's not far left-politics that turned them to NAZIism, what is that did? Something did, no body wakes up one morning thinking "hmmm... I wonder if Hitler was right..." and if you believe that they do, prove it. I at least tried to provide some kind of proof, what proof do you have for your hypothesis of what draws people to the far right? And if you have no hypothesis, under what authority do you call mine wrong? Again, I at least tried to provide some kind of proof, what do you bring to the table other than "but you wrong, bro..."

Also, considering that you appear to be really, really far left, so far left that you make the BBC look like Fox News, of course you don't buy that I am a centrist. Most far-left consider me to be very far right, just like how most far righters would consider me a Karl Marx loving communist. As a hardcore centrist, I am accused of being far-right by left-wingers and far-left by right-wingers. That comes with the territory of being a centrist.

Yeah, let me explain it to you in simple terms.

If they're telling the truth, then it should be easy to find actual evidence that they are. You keep insisting they're telling the truth, and I'm saying that I don't believe them for a second.

Also, for a supposed centrist, you have one hell of a tendency to spout off right-wing talking points while only seriously criticizing the left. Curious, that.

Edit: also, I made no claim about what I think draws people to the far right, so I have no clue what you're talking about there.

I'm pretty sure that people are correct about their own opinions and about what drew them specifically to a certain cause. You can claim that it doesn't apply to everyone, but you can't argue that it doesn't apply to at least some people when those people themselves said that that's what drew them to the cause. Again, if you don't think that what I am saying has turned people to the far right, what do you think has? Also, what part of "fuck neo-NAZIs, Andrew Tate is a nut job, etc." Makes you think I support alt-right crap? I don't really do it much on NSG, because I rarely see any far right crap on NSG, and when I do, it's usually debunked before O get the chance to, and don't really have anything new to add. If there were more alt-right crap on NSG (or at least more than I am aware of) I would rightly call it. I am a highly active member of Quora, and I do call out far-right crap there, where it is more proliferant. This is to the point where I am the sole reason why some far-right political spaces on Quora have turned off comments completely. You, my friend, are buying into this toxic partisan politics crap. The very crap that polarises people in the first place. You're very polarised toward the left and that's nearly as dangerous as being polarised to the right. Andrew Tate is not the probably. Andrew Tate is a symptom. If Andrew Tate disappeared, a million more like him would take his place. The problem is polarised us vs them crap. The only reason why you don't see it is because you're radically part of it, but at the opposite end. You're part of the polarising us vs them crap, but you're at the left rather than the right end

Again, I don't know who Tim Pool. Also, again, left-wingers will see me as right-wingers, and right-wingers will see me as left. I know that I stand in the middle.


So? People hold political beliefs because they believe that they're political beliefs are the best way to run society. People don't hold political beliefs in an attempt to entertain you

I am the true real legitimate centrist^TM and I have now decided the only reason you think I am left-leaning to any degree whatsoever is that you are the reanimated corpse of Hitler. Reality BTFO by my feelings.

Same applies to you. At the opposite end of this spectrum. You subscribe to the toxic us vs them crap. It just happens that you're the "us" whilst Andrew Tate is the "them". You're just as extreme as Andrew Tate, but in the opposite direction

[El Lazaro]

Yeah, let me explain it to you in simple terms.

If they're telling the truth, then it should be easy to find actual evidence that they are. You keep insisting they're telling the truth, and I'm saying that I don't believe them for a second.

Also, for a supposed centrist, you have one hell of a tendency to spout off right-wing talking points while only seriously criticizing the left. Curious, that.

Edit: also, I made no claim about what I think draws people to the far right, so I have no clue what you're talking about there.

I'm pretty sure that people are correct about their own opinions and about what drew them specifically to a certain cause. You can claim that it doesn't apply to everyone, but you can't argue that it doesn't apply to at least some people when those people themselves said that that's what drew them to the cause. Again, if you don't think that what I am saying has turned people to the far right, what do you think has? Also, what part of "fuck neo-NAZIs, Andrew Tate is a nut job, etc." Makes you think I support alt-right crap? I don't really do it much on NSG, because I rarely see any far right crap on NSG, and when I do, it's usually debunked before O get the chance to, and don't really have anything new to add. If there were more alt-right crap on NSG (or at least more than I am aware of) I would rightly call it. I am a highly active member of Quora, and I do call out far-right crap there, where it is more proliferant. This is to the point where I am the sole reason why some far-right political spaces on Quora have turned off comments completely. You, my friend, are buying into this toxic partisan politics crap. The very crap that polarises people in the first place. You're very polarised toward the left and that's nearly as dangerous as being polarised to the right. Andrew Tate is not the probably. Andrew Tate is a symptom. If Andrew Tate disappeared, a million more like him would take his place. The problem is polarised us vs them crap. The only reason why you don't see it is because you're radically part of it, but at the opposite end. You're part of the polarising us vs them crap, but you're at the left rather than the right end

I am the true real legitimate centrist^TM and I have now decided the only reason you think I am left-leaning to any degree whatsoever is that you are the reanimated corpse of Hitler. Reality BTFO by my feelings.

Same applies to you. At the opposite end of this spectrum. You subscribe to the toxic us vs them crap. It just happens that you're the "us" whilst Andrew Tate is the "them". You're just as extreme as Andrew Tate, but in the opposite direction

What are my extreme views?

[Australian rePublic]

I'm pretty sure that people are correct about their own opinions and about what drew them specifically to a certain cause. You can claim that it doesn't apply to everyone, but you can't argue that it doesn't apply to at least some people when those people themselves said that that's what drew them to the cause. Again, if you don't think that what I am saying has turned people to the far right, what do you think has? Also, what part of "fuck neo-NAZIs, Andrew Tate is a nut job, etc." Makes you think I support alt-right crap? I don't really do it much on NSG, because I rarely see any far right crap on NSG, and when I do, it's usually debunked before O get the chance to, and don't really have anything new to add. If there were more alt-right crap on NSG (or at least more than I am aware of) I would rightly call it. I am a highly active member of Quora, and I do call out far-right crap there, where it is more proliferant. This is to the point where I am the sole reason why some far-right political spaces on Quora have turned off comments completely. You, my friend, are buying into this toxic partisan politics crap. The very crap that polarises people in the first place. You're very polarised toward the left and that's nearly as dangerous as being polarised to the right. Andrew Tate is not the probably. Andrew Tate is a symptom. If Andrew Tate disappeared, a million more like him would take his place. The problem is polarised us vs them crap. The only reason why you don't see it is because you're radically part of it, but at the opposite end. You're part of the polarising us vs them crap, but you're at the left rather than the right end


Same applies to you. At the opposite end of this spectrum. You subscribe to the toxic us vs them crap. It just happens that you're the "us" whilst Andrew Tate is the "them". You're just as extreme as Andrew Tate, but in the opposite direction

What are my extreme views?

Dude, you're sitting there lecturing me about how I am not actually a centrist, but rather a right-winger spewing NAZI talking points. You're an extremist inasmuch as you subscribe to the us vs them crap, and trying to support your us vs them crap by saying that I am (at least partially) supportive of NAZIs, despite having called them the wart on humanity's arse. Now, I'd love to know you think I am sympathetic to a cause which I have actively described as the wart on humanity's arse. The fact that you're clutching at straws to defend your us vs them mentality shows just how extreme you are with regards to the us vs them mentality, which is dangerous in and of itself. Andrew Tate plays into that mentality, but on the opposite side of you. Andrew Tate isn't the problem, this us vs them crap is, and you're an extremist in the us vs them mentality. You clutching at straws to criticise me for commending something that I have criticised just proves it. If you're going to sit there playing the us vs them game, and you're on the "us" side, of coarse there are going to be people on the "them" side

[Neu California]

Yeah, let me explain it to you in simple terms.

If they're telling the truth, then it should be easy to find actual evidence that they are. You keep insisting they're telling the truth, and I'm saying that I don't believe them for a second.

Also, for a supposed centrist, you have one hell of a tendency to spout off right-wing talking points while only seriously criticizing the left. Curious, that.

Edit: also, I made no claim about what I think draws people to the far right, so I have no clue what you're talking about there.

I'm pretty sure that people are correct about their own opinions and about what drew them specifically to a certain cause. You can claim that it doesn't apply to everyone, but you can't argue that it doesn't apply to at least some people when those people themselves said that that's what drew them to the cause. Again, if you don't think that what I am saying has turned people to the far right, what do you think has? Also, what part of "fuck neo-NAZIs, Andrew Tate is a nut job, etc." Makes you think I support alt-right crap? I don't really do it much on NSG, because I rarely see any far right crap on NSG, and when I do, it's usually debunked before O get the chance to, and don't really have anything new to add. If there were more alt-right crap on NSG (or at least more than I am aware of) I would rightly call it. I am a highly active member of Quora, and I do call out far-right crap there, where it is more proliferant. This is to the point where I am the sole reason why some far-right political spaces on Quora have turned off comments completely. You, my friend, are buying into this toxic partisan politics crap. The very crap that polarises people in the first place. You're very polarised toward the left and that's nearly as dangerous as being polarised to the right. Andrew Tate is not the probably. Andrew Tate is a symptom. If Andrew Tate disappeared, a million more like him would take his place. The problem is polarised us vs them crap. The only reason why you don't see it is because you're radically part of it, but at the opposite end. You're part of the polarising us vs them crap, but you're at the left rather than the right end

I am the true real legitimate centrist^TM and I have now decided the only reason you think I am left-leaning to any degree whatsoever is that you are the reanimated corpse of Hitler. Reality BTFO by my feelings.

Same applies to you. At the opposite end of this spectrum. You subscribe to the toxic us vs them crap. It just happens that you're the "us" whilst Andrew Tate is the "them". You're just as extreme as Andrew Tate, but in the opposite direction

I can, however, say that I genuinely believe they're making up shit to make their move to the radical right of politics seem more justified. I mean, it's not like people don't lie about their past to make themselves look better or more justified or draw others to their cause or anything.

Also, I don't buy anything you're selling about quora or whatever. It's all too easy to make stuff like that up to make yourself look good. I only work off of what I see from the person themself, at the point where they make their statements.

And for the love of all that is good, stop assuming shit about my politics. I'm a self-declared left wing social-democrat, not this far-left boogeyman you're imagining.

Lastly, you say I'm buying into toxic partisan crap, when you offered this barrel of toxic partisan crap against the left, which shows YOU buying into it:

As much as the general NSG community likes to deny it, the left has a lot to answer for when it comes to becoming so ridiculously extreme that they deter rational people away from the cause and into the embrace of the far right. It's really time that the moderate left stopped living in denial, held the extreme left accountable and saying that the extremists don't represent the left as a whole. But as long as the left lives in denial, nothing will change and people, especially young men, will get more and more radicalised

I smell projection

edit: clarify that it's a belief of mine that they're lying, not a fact.