[Incel Trait] Not knowing how to talk in a safe way and come up with convincing excuses

[Deleted member 23656]

Have you noticed how politicians talk? It's all so slimey. You know they're lying and full of shit. But why do people still follow what they say and elect them?

One reason is most people are dumb goyim

The other reason is it's not as easy to call them out as you think.

You say they said something stupid? They'll just say, that was a figure of speech and you misunderstood it. You say they supported an unethical action? They'll just say there's no proof of that, I was supporting something that just so happened to be linked with something unethical.

Basically everything they say is said in a way that their ass is covered from all angles. It's hard to land a direct hit at them coz they will keep going ACKSHULLY I was blah blah blah.

In some places they call this officer talk. But despite what you think, this kind of talk isn't reserved to just politicians but anyone who wants to succeed in climbing the career ladder.

People ask why are there so many curry CEOs? Someone said it's because apart from playing race politics by getting other curries to back them, there's one other thing curry bosses are good at.

Making excuses.

It's actually a compliment btw. Covering your ass and making excuses is an incredibly valuable skill. Any curries can attest how insane local bureaucrats in the government are in India. Their ability to make excuses for lack of action is beyond anyone else in this world. Even the Chinese can't do it which is why many of them fall out of favour very fast once their main supporter boss is gone.

And that's another reason incels like us will not get far. We are badly conditioned socially already. In the horrible office environment there's a lot of politics involved. Therefore what you say is very important. You cannot say things straight or you will get in trouble with everyone very fast. You need to talk in a very safe and subtle manner so people cannot easily attack you. When the boss asked you stuff of why something isn't working you go ACKSHULLY the thing is working ok and the reason it doesn't seem to work is because Joe over there fucked up the reporting. All in a subtle way of course.

Then again we look ugly so no one cares. We are wrong by default. But there are failed normies here who end up here because they don't know how to talk properly in a working environment.

Maybe you guys should ask @PPEcel lol
After all people like him are supposed to become the next David Camerons or Bill Clintons

 

[zangano1]

Im not good at talking because I lack practice

 

[Deleted member 22999]

I’m a pretty good talker I think

 

[Deleted member 23656]

Im not good at talking because I lack practice

Practice with the right people.

We could all hang out on Skype or something. But in the end the way we talk will still be "wrong"

 

[PPEcel]

Maybe you guys should ask @PPEcel lol
After all people like him are supposed to become the next David Camerons or Bill Clintons

OP let me explain your observation in further detail. Bear with me. @chadalwayswins @carticel @ChinaCurry @Anonymous MG thoughts?

Political life requires certain skills. First of all, the ability to digest and process a wide range of information every day -- topics ranging from abortion to climate change to antitrust laws to nuclear proliferation. "Which concepts must I remember? Which phrases will translate into the most effective debate soundbites? How does this connect to other pieces of information?" But more importantly, political participation requires the ability to "fill" the gaps in your knowledge by projecting expertise in an area where you have none; in colloquial terms, this is known as "bullshit". You must be good at spinning bullshit. You must, on some level, be able to shamelessly lie, backtrack, deflect, and flip-flop; I suppose this is what you describe as "slimey" behaviour. Survivorship bias means that these skills are even more pronounced amongst the higher levels of the elite. I would go as far as to suggest that some political institutions encourage this behaviour because officials are given roles based not necessarily on their professional experience but for reasons related to political showmanship. Westminster-style parliamentary democracies, in particular, shuffle cabinet ministers across a diverse range of policy areas quite often; this means that lawmakers are often forced to learn and adapt rapidly to new information.

The PPE degree condenses three different subjects' worth of material into three academic years of teaching. If you think about it, that's not a lot of time. Political science itself covers a number of somewhat disparate fields: comparative politics, international relations, political theory, political behaviour, public administration and policy, et cetera. It's quite frankly not possible to gain a very comprehensive understanding of every single subfield; as a result, you dabble a little here and there. I suppose the closest American equivalent to Oxford PPE would be choosing the Social Studies concentration as an undergraduate at Harvard -- a broad and flexible course of study that combines a little bit of each aspect of the humanities. At the graduate level, I think that programs with similar course content which repeatedly churn out members of the political and bureaucratic elite would include Harvard Kennedy School's MPA and the French Ecole Nationale d'Administration.

I know a lot of STEM students dunk on anyone who isn't also a STEMcel but I believe that the social sciences can be just as academically intensive. More importantly, these humanities programs are tailored such that their pupils develop skills and abilities. By ensuring the curriculum dabbles in a wide range of topics, students are forced to absorb and make connections between disparate sources of information. Not only that, but they are also encouraged to confront each other with different perspectives. And since the curriculum is rather broad, there are inevitably certain gaps in the amount of knowledge one has successfully retained. The result is that students become excellent at public speaking and issue framing ("spin"), and they learn how to project confidence even if they are aware of their incompetence. These are the exact same traits which I mentioned earlier are necessary for politicians. In fact, these abilities are also extremely helpful in sectors like law, NGOs, journalism, and management consulting; it shouldn't surprise you that many of those who work at firms like McKinsey or publications such as The Economist studied at elite universities.

Indeed, I would argue that some of these abilities and traits are developed among the global elite even earlier than at the university level. Many elite private schools, with their very small class sizes, encourage class discussions around a table where students aggressively question one another. Phillips Exeter Academy describes this as the "Harkness method" or something. When there are only a handful of people in the room, there is nowhere for you to hide. You learn to think quickly on your feet, you learn how others think, and more importantly, you learn how to perform what you describe as "talking in a safe way and coming up with convincing excuses": the art of spinning bullshit shamelessly and confidently.

TL;DR: Elite academic establishments often churn out Chads and Stacies with somewhat similar traits: internationalist, confident, and aggressive, with excellent language abilities and a particular gift for spinning bullshit. Consequently, by possessing cultural capital that others don't, these Chads and Stacies are well-equipped for life in the public eye.

I’m a pretty good talker I think

mogs me

 

[ChinaCurry]

Guess a caveat I'll call out, having worked with people with many backgrounds, is PPE like any degree, including most STEM degrees nowadays, can be larped.
Oxford PPE I have a lot of experience of, and my personal view is there is a branch you can go through that ends up being as STEM as anything you would do at Caltech or MIT.
And yes definitely agree the main problem in orgs today, that PPE and other elite backgrounds help with is issue framing. I can tell you for a fact 90% of senior execs in large firms spend all day turning handles and doing the same shit they did for 40 years whenever an issue arises because they are unable to comprehend, or think from first principles on what the issues are

 

[chadalwayswins]

Thanks for the shoutout @PPEcel

Some random thoughts:
By going to these elite institutions, there are "role models" (alumni, facility staff) for Chads to follow so for whatever career path they're after they know the tried and tested methods on how to get there.

Take being a Fortune 500 CEO. Most have a pretty cookie cutter background: elite university into MBB followed by business school and some industry role.

This is where those networks developed at elite institutions help you in pushing you along that path. Some kids have no idea what the process is and are doomed to failure from the start.

I don't follow politics enough to know, but I imagine there's a similar conveyor belt process in becoming a politician as there is to becoming a senior executive and you pick up the skills you need to become one along the way

 

[The Abyss]

No wonder I'm a failure, was taught nothing, not encouraged to do anything & not pushed into anything, the fucking joys of being an Autistic peasant & having mental issue parents that ain't got a clue how society works. God damn stellar role model setup.

 

[PPEcel]

I can tell you for a fact 90% of senior execs in large firms spend all day turning handles and doing the same shit they did for 40 years whenever an issue arises because they are unable to comprehend, or think from first principles on what the issues are

No problem, those execs will just pay a consultant $500k to give them the same advice that their underlings could, but it would kill their egos to ask someone 10 years younger than they are for advice.

 

[chadalwayswins]

No problem, those execs will just pay a consultant $500k to give them the same advice that their underlings could, but it would kill their egos to ask someone 10 years younger than they are for advice.

Have you read House of Lies by Martin Kihn (ex Booz I think?)
Pretty funny read exposing the scam that is management consulting

 

[Yerberito]

True i can relate this