Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
You are, or at least is trying to be, far left, given the constant talk and praise of Marx, Communism, and revolution. You want everyone to be hyper-radicalized to the far left, and very often call other leftist centrist because you view himself as a just a simple leftist; you are not.
Given your position, many people including other leftists will be to your right, and your only methods to try and convince people is by refusing to use critical basic communication skills like using words correctly, and preaching to people about how they don't understand a thing.
There's a reason why I've convinced more people about leftism while you have 0, because I stick with the basics instead of jumping straight to personal complexities using words to convey things entirely different from their meaning. You won't convince anyone by always assuming.
Given your position, many people including other leftists will be to your right, and your only methods to try and convince people is by refusing to use critical basic communication skills like using words correctly, and preaching to people about how they don't understand a thing.
There's a reason why I've convinced more people about leftism while you have 0, because I stick with the basics instead of jumping straight to personal complexities using words to convey things entirely different from their meaning. You won't convince anyone by always assuming.
Psychopaths, narcissists, and machiavellians should not be in positions where they can control other people's lives. They thrive in making others miserable. Their disease is their whole personality. These people orbit around positions of power. I really think we should have strict requirements for such positions.
It is really the same reasoning for not allowing pedos around kids. Dark triad people are predators. They can't be allowed in positions where they can cause the maximum harm. I think society has been neglectful towards those for way too long. Crime is strongly correlated with those traits. You can't trust people that have a strong propensity for cruelty and immorality to take positions where they need to be empathetic and righteous.
Dropping this here because it's relevant.
https://www.instagram.com/reels/DU--aFqFa9k/
The Dark Triad just got an upgrade — and it’s even more twisted.
🔍 Psychologists added sadism to the mix: the pleasure of hurting others.
Not just physical — but emotional, social, and reputational harm.
ㅤ
📌 Why it matters:
A 2021 meta-analysis found sadism predicts cruelty above and beyond narcissism, psychopathy, or manipulation. That’s why it was added to form the Dark Tetrad.
(Buckels, Jones & Paulhus, 2013, UBC Psychology)
📌 And it gets darker — a 2021 study published in Science Advances showed that people instinctively treat victims as more moral than others…
Which opens the door for manipulative people to perform pain for social advantage.
(Jordan et al., 2021)
📌 In fact, people with Dark Triad traits are more likely to signal victimhood in public — to gain trust, avoid accountability, or extract sympathy.
(Ok & Qian et al., 2021, PubMed)
🧠 Real victims exist. And they deserve to be heard.
But weaponised victimhood is real too — and spotting it could save you years of emotional damage.
https://www.instagram.com/reels/DU--aFqFa9k/
The Dark Triad just got an upgrade — and it’s even more twisted.
🔍 Psychologists added sadism to the mix: the pleasure of hurting others.
Not just physical — but emotional, social, and reputational harm.
ㅤ
📌 Why it matters:
A 2021 meta-analysis found sadism predicts cruelty above and beyond narcissism, psychopathy, or manipulation. That’s why it was added to form the Dark Tetrad.
(Buckels, Jones & Paulhus, 2013, UBC Psychology)
📌 And it gets darker — a 2021 study published in Science Advances showed that people instinctively treat victims as more moral than others…
Which opens the door for manipulative people to perform pain for social advantage.
(Jordan et al., 2021)
📌 In fact, people with Dark Triad traits are more likely to signal victimhood in public — to gain trust, avoid accountability, or extract sympathy.
(Ok & Qian et al., 2021, PubMed)
🧠 Real victims exist. And they deserve to be heard.
But weaponised victimhood is real too — and spotting it could save you years of emotional damage.
Last edited:
Indeed it is. We are mad, not stupid.
Because they would be dangerous with them? Ok, let me extend this point of view : Rightists are statistically more dangerous with their marginalized kids.
So as a result, should we prevent people who are rightist from making kids?
The fear you feel when talking about skizophrenia, is part of the domination we all (mad people) feel when people tell us that we are not capable of having discussion, logic or legitimacy. This fear you feel is the result of a process of dehumanization. A deconstruction of the reality of madness (in its political meaning).
"they are dangerous"
Two people, mad and not mad can raise their voice the same way. But only one will see the fear in the eye of their peers when they do. This fear is not natural, it's constructed to marginalize us into silence, delegitimization.
Madness is not a cognitive condition. We are not mad because we are skyzophrenic or psychotic, or incapable of moving, we are like that because that is how the world sees us, class us, hierarchize us, marginalize us.
Madness is a class position. This is the world of anti-sanism.
Sure doo
Not anymore. I'm indeed far left now.
debatable
Perhaps. Only time will tell.
This is not a competition bro. I prefer to make sure that you are seen as a non radical centrist with progressive idea in order to convert far rightist than not having any conversion at all.
The moment you will see that it is not a battle of ego for me, you will understand who I am.
I don't care about what I can or can't do here and I don't care about being wrong. Only the result matters, the progression of anti-capitalism in a world and a space that can be of help to everyone. Not my person, not my little personnal wins. I'm nothing but a grain of sand. I'm secondary.
Because they would be dangerous with them? Ok, let me extend this point of view : Rightists are statistically more dangerous with their marginalized kids.
So as a result, should we prevent people who are rightist from making kids?
The fear you feel when talking about skizophrenia, is part of the domination we all (mad people) feel when people tell us that we are not capable of having discussion, logic or legitimacy. This fear you feel is the result of a process of dehumanization. A deconstruction of the reality of madness (in its political meaning).
"they are dangerous"
Two people, mad and not mad can raise their voice the same way. But only one will see the fear in the eye of their peers when they do. This fear is not natural, it's constructed to marginalize us into silence, delegitimization.
Madness is not a cognitive condition. We are not mad because we are skyzophrenic or psychotic, or incapable of moving, we are like that because that is how the world sees us, class us, hierarchize us, marginalize us.
Madness is a class position. This is the world of anti-sanism.
Sure doo
Not anymore. I'm indeed far left now.
debatable
Perhaps. Only time will tell.
This is not a competition bro. I prefer to make sure that you are seen as a non radical centrist with progressive idea in order to convert far rightist than not having any conversion at all.
The moment you will see that it is not a battle of ego for me, you will understand who I am.
I don't care about what I can or can't do here and I don't care about being wrong. Only the result matters, the progression of anti-capitalism in a world and a space that can be of help to everyone. Not my person, not my little personnal wins. I'm nothing but a grain of sand. I'm secondary.
The Dark Tetrad, also known as the Dark Quad, is a set of interrelated negative personality features: narcissism, psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and sadism. The term is an expansion of the idea of the Dark Triad construct, which does not include sadism. In the last decade, researchers have noted a correlation of sadism with Dark Triad traits, with the result of the Dark Tetrad. The concept was coined by Erin Buckles, Daniel Jones, and Delroy L. Paulhus in 2013. Paulhus is also the originator of the Dark Triad construct.
Understanding the Dark Tetrad
People with Dark Tetrad traits score high on measures of the following:
Is the Dark Tetrad a mental disorder?
No, the Dark Tetrad is a confluence of personality traits. Three of the four elements of the Dark Tetrad do have correlates in the DSM, however. High levels of psychopathy most closely resemble antisocial personality disorder, and high levels of sadism are a prerequisite for sexual sadism disorder. Pathological levels of narcissism may translate to narcissistic personality disorder.
Why was sadism added to the Dark Triad?
Individuals may score highly in each of these traits on their own, without the others. A narcissistic person does not have to be a sadistic person, and a psychopath may not be Machiavellian. But researchers have found that among the many personality traits, these four appear alongside each other more often than would be expected if these constructs were not related. The common underlying feature, evident in each of these four "dark" constructs, is the tendency to see others as a means to achieve one's own ends.
What’s the correlation between online trolling and the Dark Tetrad?
Researchers have found a link between internet trolls and cyberbullies and Dark Tetrad traits. Study participants who said trolling was their favorite online activity also scored highest on tests for Dark Tetrad traits. Psychopathy and sadism, in particular, correlate most strongly with internet trolling and bullying.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/dark-tetrad
Understanding the Dark Tetrad
People with Dark Tetrad traits score high on measures of the following:
- Narcissism: A belief that one is special, particularly gifted, obsessed with themselves and that they are superior to others.
- Machiavellianism: A tendency to see people as a means to achieve one's own goals.
- Psychopathy: A condition characterized by a lack of affective empathy and the willingness to exploit others.
- Sadism: The tendency to derive pleasure from the pain or humiliation of others.
Is the Dark Tetrad a mental disorder?
No, the Dark Tetrad is a confluence of personality traits. Three of the four elements of the Dark Tetrad do have correlates in the DSM, however. High levels of psychopathy most closely resemble antisocial personality disorder, and high levels of sadism are a prerequisite for sexual sadism disorder. Pathological levels of narcissism may translate to narcissistic personality disorder.
Why was sadism added to the Dark Triad?
Individuals may score highly in each of these traits on their own, without the others. A narcissistic person does not have to be a sadistic person, and a psychopath may not be Machiavellian. But researchers have found that among the many personality traits, these four appear alongside each other more often than would be expected if these constructs were not related. The common underlying feature, evident in each of these four "dark" constructs, is the tendency to see others as a means to achieve one's own ends.
What’s the correlation between online trolling and the Dark Tetrad?
Researchers have found a link between internet trolls and cyberbullies and Dark Tetrad traits. Study participants who said trolling was their favorite online activity also scored highest on tests for Dark Tetrad traits. Psychopathy and sadism, in particular, correlate most strongly with internet trolling and bullying.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/dark-tetrad
Criticism
Some researchers have criticised the dark triad and studies which use it as a foundation, arguing that "such work is often superficial, statistically weak, and presents an overly simplistic view of human nature."[177] Clinical psychologist Joshua Miller published a critical appraisal of dark triad literature in 2019, arguing that issues and limitations had been "unrecognized or ignored",[178] including:
Delroy Paulhus has rejected Miller's criticisms, claiming that they "can be made of any personality scale,"[177] and that he and other researchers "resent its popularity".[177] However, he has conceded that "lots of research on the dark triad out there is less than stellar."
The terminology behind the dark triad construct has received criticism for being stigmatizing, sensationalistic, and potentially offensive.
---
Get ready, in the next decade or so, you will start to see and hear the rise of anti-psychiatry and how dated these types of "researches" are. You might not understand it just yet, but you will hate it lmao
Some researchers have criticised the dark triad and studies which use it as a foundation, arguing that "such work is often superficial, statistically weak, and presents an overly simplistic view of human nature."[177] Clinical psychologist Joshua Miller published a critical appraisal of dark triad literature in 2019, arguing that issues and limitations had been "unrecognized or ignored",[178] including:
"the treatment of dark-triad constructs as unidimensional, contrary to evidence for their multidimensionality ... the indistinctness between current measures of Machiavellianism and psychopathy ... the use of multivariate statistical approaches that pose statistical and interpretive difficulties ... failure to test dark-triad relations directly against one another; and ... methodological concerns related to convenience sampling and reliance on mono-method approaches."[178]
Other researchers have blamed "sloppy psychologists rather than fundamental weaknesses with the idea"[177] and argue that "psychopathy and Machiavellianism can both be accurately measured by the dark triad."[177]Delroy Paulhus has rejected Miller's criticisms, claiming that they "can be made of any personality scale,"[177] and that he and other researchers "resent its popularity".[177] However, he has conceded that "lots of research on the dark triad out there is less than stellar."
The terminology behind the dark triad construct has received criticism for being stigmatizing, sensationalistic, and potentially offensive.
---
Get ready, in the next decade or so, you will start to see and hear the rise of anti-psychiatry and how dated these types of "researches" are. You might not understand it just yet, but you will hate it lmao
It has nothing to do with competition, and speaks volumes that you saw it that way. If someone is always annoyed by your super long, condescending posts, but I convince them by keeping it short and simple, sometimes using the same points as you, that should be a wake up call that your tactics are the issue.
Are you sure about that? What about a systemic correlation?
I must have missed the memo, The US and UK too btw
You are the one who tried to compare how much people we both converted wdym?
I tried that "non condescending and short" approach for month. Spoiler : People are not against me because of the way I talk, but because of the things I say. I know, strange.
And you are in the error if you think you are using the same points as me. You are confusing being progressive, being leftist and being materialist. We are not using either the same arguments or the same logic at all.
Your vision idealist, turned toward the individuals choices within the system and the negation of the complete power of domination systems on our lives. Mine is materialistic, turned toward a systemic approach where our behaviors and institutions (like yours for example) are the direct result of these dominations system. (when you tell me "not all policemen", this is a clash between an idealist vision ("some people can be good") and a materialist vision ("all people will eventually get influenced").
So of course your rethoric will please idealists. it would be strange if it didn't.
The form I use within my post are an excuze for people not to attack the point (which they rarily do).
I must have missed the memo, The US and UK too btw
You are the one who tried to compare how much people we both converted wdym?
I tried that "non condescending and short" approach for month. Spoiler : People are not against me because of the way I talk, but because of the things I say. I know, strange.
And you are in the error if you think you are using the same points as me. You are confusing being progressive, being leftist and being materialist. We are not using either the same arguments or the same logic at all.
Your vision idealist, turned toward the individuals choices within the system and the negation of the complete power of domination systems on our lives. Mine is materialistic, turned toward a systemic approach where our behaviors and institutions (like yours for example) are the direct result of these dominations system. (when you tell me "not all policemen", this is a clash between an idealist vision ("some people can be good") and a materialist vision ("all people will eventually get influenced").
So of course your rethoric will please idealists. it would be strange if it didn't.
The form I use within my post are an excuze for people not to attack the point (which they rarily do).