My nigga, I'm mirin your avatar. I love Lelouch
You guys are right, I regret wording that part the way I did. I should have instead said:
"None of this is to say competition in general is inherently bad. Some fields benefit from some amount of competition, but competition isn't something that should be everywhere all the time, and hyper-competitiveness is always bad."
And you guys are correct to point out that hyper-competitiveness leads to immoral behaviors. The more hellbent someone is on achieving a certain outcome, the less likely they are to care about how they ultimately get there, which means they'll be far more likely to toss aside things like ethics and morality. This leads to things like sucking up to higher-ups (brown-nosing) to gain favorability, sabotaging others, spreading rumors in an attempt to damage other people's reputations, etc. These things only serve to benefit the individual at the expense of everything and everyone else.
And at the corporate level it's even worse. So much of what megacorps do revolves around sourcing the cheapest labor possible, exploiting as many tax loopholes as possible to minimize tax obligations as much as possible, and doing whatever they can to qualify for as much in government subsidies as possible. Not to mention quietly cutting expenses in a way that screws over consumers (see: shrinkflation). And worst of all, giving political "donations" (which are functionally bribes) so that politicians will pass and maintain laws that are favorable towards them. Because the motivation behind the donation is unspoken (but understood by both parties) it's technically not a "bribe" by the legal definition.
Frankly the latter (pushing boundaries too much) is FAR more nefarious than explicit cheaters. Cheaters are much easier to call out because you can easily point out the rule/law that was violated and how they violated it. When someone is a boundary pusher or someone who violates the spirit of a rule in a way in which they can argue they were "technically" within the boundaries of the rules as they are written, it makes it much more difficult to call them out. It requires too much explaining and it's too easy for the boundary pusher to play "rules lawyer", or just make it seem like you're being a silly, or a conspiracy theorist, or that you have some sort of personal vendetta against them and you're grasping for straws as a way to get them. The audience is far more likely to side with them over you.
I realize this is getting off topic a bit, but this is why "lies of omission" are by far the worst types of lies, far more than absurd tall tales. When someone makes a lie of omission, they do everything in their power to imply a certain thing (that's actually a falsehood) is true, and intentionally leave out a critical detail that would dramatically change the narrative. They do this as insurance for if they get caught, after which they can claim "ACKSHUALLY, I never TECHNIKLEE said that" and act like it's YOUR fault for interpreting things that way when that was their intention from the start.
Getting back to the boundary pushing, this is something I've seen from some users here. It's a small minority, but some clearly try to push the envelope as much as possible and violate the spirit of some rules (common examples are bragging, bluepilled posts, and racebaiting) and it's obvious they went out of their way to write them so it ostensibly appears to be within the boundaries of the rules. Another thing I noticed is some people try to game the warning system. They know warnings expire so they'll break the rules, then when they're at 60 percent or so, they'll behave for a while, then once they're back to zero percent they'll break the same exact rules again. Like they treat a "0 percent" current warning level as a free pass to break the rules a couple times without facing any real repercussions. So you end up with users who have 20+ warnings, yet conveniently they never went over 60 percent. As a moderator, I make it a point to hit these people who game the system like this extra hard.
But the sad reality is that for any system that has a set of rules, there will be people out there who spend a lot of time aspie-analyzing them and looking for ways to game the system. So much of the law is full of autistic shit like this. A lot of what lawyers do is try to get their clients off on a technicality and on the other side of the coin, a lot of police officers look for excuses to arrest people who aren't hurting anyone and a lot of prosecutors do everything they can to prevent exculpatory evidence from being admitted into court, often on some bullshit technicality. This is part of the reason why the law is so absurdly overcomplicated and vast. There are so many laws, and the laws are so long, we have dozens of different types of lawyers because no one person could ever hope to understand more than one small category of law. Part of this is because someone exploits a legal loophole, then the loophole gets "patched" then the same types of people aspie-analyze it to figure out a way to keep doing the very thing that the law was very clearly designed to prevent in the first place. Then they patch it again and try to come up with a provision for every scenario they can possibly think of, and it goes on and on.
I think an ideal society would have a simplified law, something that could fit in a reasonably sized book. And that book would encompass every facet of the law. The rules wouldn't be in autistic detail, but instead make it clear what the law is intending to require or prevent. The spirit of the rule would be enforced, instead of enforcing the law to the letter, which allows retarded technicalities. Then again a lot of this isn't even a problem with the system per se , it's a people problem.
Last edited:
"No Señor! Please don't put your knee on my neck! Me no breath!"
Last edited:
Yes we need a plasma reset or apocalypse where some humans are granted enhanced bodies and minds(maybe the ones with higher consciousness) and set the new rules with a different world where "competition" starts from scratch with totally different rulesets like it used to be before the flood (with nephilims, longer lifespans, shamans, fantastic beasts etc). Modern humanity is nothing but something to reset. It sounds crazy but it's litterally the only thing worth looking forward to
high awareness
Grgrgrgrgrgrrr that’s what a LOoosssseeerr would say gggrgrgrggrgrr your comfort zone need to be destroyed cold showers push upper street rage shitter grgrgrrr alpha mindsetter is the way grrrr roarrrrrr
yeah, what you wrote is true. everyone contends with it and every faucet of life gets shittier and shittier because of it. the worst part is that it's totally unnecessary, it's not like there isn't enough to go around for everyone to live a decent life. whether we're talking about problems of money, housing, or access to mates, the solution is for the mass of have-nots to wield their collective power against the haves and force them to fork over their excess. unfortunately most people are too retarded and proud to admit that they are have-nots, so they'll never stick up for their interests
Last edited:
Shut up nigger! Have a snif of fent!
Yes this is only a symptom. As is neijuan. Competition is inevitable and since bare necessities like a roof over your head and food on your table will always be in demand, our kabbalic kike overlords exploit this by gradually upping the effort and thinning its respective reward. It’s so incredibly subtle you never catch a normie protesting it because they’ve been thoroughly brainwashed that this is natural and how it’s always been.
The example you cited of fighters is especially interesting because the skill standard for MMA has completely changed in the past three decades. Those who used to be hailed as legends back then would be unranked or not even professional in today’s market.
Everything’s been optimized to the extreme.
Overall very high IQ thread as I’d expect from you, wouldn’t have bothered reading if it was another user ngl.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
