TRP.RED: Home | Blogs - Forums.RED: ALL | TheRedPill | RedPillWomen | AskTRP | thankTRP | OffTopic
Hot New Old TopControversial
Login or Register
916
- Hide Preview | 727 Comments | submitted 2 years ago by redpillschool [Post Locked]

For the most part, we've stayed politics neutral here on TRP, limiting political discussion to how it applies to TRP (or how TRP applies to the political world), and what we can learn from it. This policy isn't changing any time soon; the last thing we need is for TRP to devolve into a political debate sub.

But discussion of red pill principles has always been on topic, and events that occur in the greater culture do affect us, as men, and are on topic.

This election season we're not going to be able to put up any walls between sexual strategy and politics, because the outcomes from these candidates are directly tied to the very cultural influences and trends we've been discussing here for the past few years. They're tied to sexual strategy.

To begin, I want to state with a disclaimer that TRP is not going to officially endorse one candidate or the other. If you lean liberal or conservative, or if you lean in any other direction, you're always welcome to discuss your viewpoint on TRP. This hasn't changed.

That said, I am posting this today to announce my endorsement of Donald Trump for president. And not in spite of his alleged sexual assault gaffes, but rather because of them.

Today's US presidential candidates do not represent Republican V Democrat. They're not representing a difference of economic or social opinion at all. I've had casual arguments with many people of different political leanings, and many have well-reasoned arguments for their disagreements on policy. The reason there's a political debate is because there is no hard answer to many of these questions. If economics was a solved field, we probably wouldn't even need elections today.

No, our presidential candidates are representing instead a system set up to increasingly damage the lives of men (and promote the choices, advantages, and positive outcomes for women), and those alienated by this system, respectively.

I'm sure you've heard the old adage that Democrats and Republicans are just two sides of the same coin. Our elections with a two-party system have been set up to offer us an illusion of choice, but no matter which party you end up with, the new boss is strikingly similar to the old boss.

Yes, the "liberal" media is against Trump, and democrats are crying louder than ever. But there should be no better tell that Trump is outside of this system than the fact that his own party is now turning against him.

It would seem that our entire culture is against Trump. If this didn't appear particularly damaging to his chances, I'd suggest Trump orchestrated this himself just to bolster his credibility with those disenfranchised by our system. But alas, this may not be good news for team Trump. Only time will tell.

This is a fascinating scenario on its own, but the point that interests me the most about it is on what pretext our culture saw fit to turn against Trump: An off-color remark about his legal, consensual sexual exploits.

Essentially, the establishment took a benign comment that uses coarse language, and made it into a sexual assault using their newspeak versions of consent and assault. They lied about what took place, but nobody is catching the lie because consent today means, well, whatever the hell works for the feminists' narrative.

Why is this election important?

The last eight years have been a great example of the left generating a society in which baseless attacks that involve certain keywords (such as "misogyny") will now be taken seriously in lieu of any actual proof or crime having been committed.

I hope that it's clear to any red pill veteran what the culmination of this past decade has achieved. The erosion and broadening of the term "consent" (among others) has played a pivotal role in the grand movement against men. By making the concept as nebulous as possible, it not only makes it impossible to play by the rules, but it retroactively makes any law abiding citizen that they point the social justice beam at into a guilty one.

There's no doubt in my mind that the past two terms have done more damage to our language and race/gender relations than anything I can point to in the past half century. Anybody who thought it was coincidental or unplanned should have another look at exactly how they weaponized these changes in language and relations to attempt to maim a presidential candidate. The worst part is, it might actually work.

Let's imagine the next four (or God help us, eight) years with Hillary at the helm. Is there any reason to believe that this war on language and men will subside? The very tools that put her into power will obviously be solidified, and built upon with Hillary in power. These tools are too effective to be used once and then tossed. They will be used and abused.

This is why I am officially endorsing Trump. I'm not here to get into the nitty-gritty details of foreign or economic policy, or discuss the best way to fix the healthcare situation in our country. I do have opinions on them, and coincidentally I believe Trump has pretty decent stances on a lot of them. But the reason I'm addressing this here on TRP and to this community is because what we stand to gain or lose is much larger than these items.

The war on men hasn't been abating as many here have suggested over the last few years. It's growing, and it's growing out of control.

The accusations of sexual assault are unfounded and convenient. People come out of the woodwork to accuse Trump of sexual assault years prior, but conveniently wait until right now to announce. The very accusation itself now holds as much weight as a guilty verdict, and our changing vocabulary ensures that any man, acting normally, would be considered guilty (both in the court of public opinion, and possibly in a court of law).

I know too well that these tactics and climate will affect more than just a presidential candidate. I know there are a number of men here today who have been on the receiving end of such false attacks. I know that these problems will only get worse for us as men, especially so if we endure more time under leadership that so willingly engages in (and takes advantage of) such nonsense.

When somebody accuses a powerful or famous figure like Trump of "sexual assault," I don't look the other way. I don't denounce them or their behavior. Instead I run towards them, because there is no truer signal which side somebody is on, than when they're given a bogus accusation by the establishment. This is our beacon to find allies in the war.

Do you ever wonder why, after an event like the Trump leak, reporters are quick to ask his endorsers: "But you don't condone sexual assault, do you?" Because the story they are trying to sell is that there is no question a sexual assault took place. They do this by distracting the viewership into thinking the only question left to ask is whether the bad people think it's okay.