Is Andrew Tate a Psyop?

Andrew Tate weak chin and sanpaku eyes.

I more or less got my start in alternative right activities through red pill topics back between 2008 and 2010. I have more or less moved on since I have heard most of what’s interesting to say in in that realm. However, I do like to occasionally check the pulse of these communities, and one good channel for that is Better Bachelor. However, I tend to avoid personalities which blow up a lot in popularity seemingly overnight for reasons I’ll get to. Andrew Tate is one such personality. Here is a video discussing Tate’s current status by BB:

Its really hard to know what’s real for any story which gets widespread attention. All the media does is lie and misrepresent, and the bigger a story is the more likely it is there are things about it which are purposefully not being disclosed.

There are a couple of things to keep in mind. TPTB tend to only promote people (good or bad publicity) that can be controlled. Ignoring and omitting is a ubiquitous strategy to prevent just anyone from “making it.” As a general rule, our current control system can’t allow anyone who might break from allowed narratives to achieve a significant following or else the sheep might rebel or at least cause inconvenience. That is, escaping the Overton window established by the main in-party and the controlled opposition. So, when lots of attention goes to someone, it immediately raises a red flag. Why him? Why not Better Bachelor? Or any number of other people who have been doing this for years? Tons of red pill guys out there who have said and probably done relatively outrageous things that just get ignored for the most part going back to at least 2010 or so. Red flag one.

Tate looks like a complete goober. Weak chin, manlet body type, crazed sanpaku eyes, etc. Charisma might be able to overcome that, but are there really no charismatic dudes with a matching physique? Out of 4 billion guys? A guy like that should blow Tate out of the water but we don’t see that. The guy looks like a weasel. You would expect it to be a big hurdle for someone pulling this off naturally. If, however, its an operation coming out of an intelligence agency its a feature, not a bug. The weasel would know he can’t do it without outside help so he needs that support. The intelligence agency would know that too, and consider him more controllable and thus a better operative. Such a character’s fame and fortune are entirely dependent on doing whatever the intelligence agency wants him to do. Red flag two.

The Epstein-like nature of his operation is concerning. He is accused of trafficking underage girls. He apparently flaunted outrageous wealth by owning or renting large mansions and then inviting various personalities and “influencers” in to parties where presumably they could have their pick of the litter. Its almost needless to say at this point, but if you put clandestine recording equipment into all the rooms of those mansions that makes for an excellent method of collecting blackmail on people intelligence agencies want controlled. Red flag three.

I don’t believe there is actually that much money in any sort of media enterprise. Having 32 nice cars to confiscate, on top of the mansions, seems like a level of wealth not realistic and commensurate with making videos and podcasts. People don’t part with that much money, especially when times are tough and there is a high inflation rate. Also, there is a huge amount of red pill content available for free. Why pay Tate when those other options exist? This wealth does seem commensurate with a state actor wanting to set up blackmail and psychological operations, however. Red flag four.

Lastly, another possible goal of intelligence agencies is discrediting potential genuine opposition. That is, when part of the Overton window breaks down that isn’t intended. A good way to do that would be to build up a controlled opposition figure and then publicly tar and feather that person and then use that situation to discredit anyone doing work in the same or tangential areas. Tate seems to fit this archetype perfectly. People who want to believe anyone pushing back against globohomo and feminism are scumbags have their beliefs confirmed and reinforced. Tate looking like a goober is again a feature. “Red pill guys look like goobers,” isn’t much of stretch to push. People on the fence might back away back into the approved Overton pasture. This sort of thing could be a big set back to anyone genuinely concerned with stable family formation and realistic gender relations. They will all be tarred with the same brush. Using the build up of this operation to get some blackmail work done is just efficient use of resources and a way to get uncontrolled people in the sphere on board with the narrative. Also, the whole story could in addition to the above serve as a distraction from more important things as needed. That would be true of most any psyop.

Its not like we don’t know governments do this sort of thing. The book mirage men highlights psychological operations aimed at discrediting UFO researchers with disinformation and discrediting. Meanwhile, “UFOs are real” is now seemingly official government policy. Don’t hold your breath for an apology for previous lies.

Mirage men mark pilkington

I don’t know that Tate is a product of some intelligence agency. Maybe his success (and controversy) is totally his own. I will probably never be able to know one way or another with certainty unless my suspicions are correct and some official documents get leaked. That said, there are enough red flags and enough proven examples of past shenanigans by intelligence agencies that I think its better to just steer clear of personalities like Tate.

2 Replies to “Is Andrew Tate a Psyop?”

  1. I think I’ve only known of Tate due to the attention he’s gotten the last few years. I never paid attention to him. I’m always suspicious when somebody comes out of nowhere with a seemingly pre-manufactured audience. It could be he’s been a voice out there all along that I never noticed. His wealth does seem unrealistic. I’ve known of other voices in that part of the Internet, whether you call it the manosphere, red pill, or whatever. Most, even if they have really good content and insight, struggle with constant censorship. When somebody doesn’t, I assume it’s because somebody is looking out for him. People like Roosh got death threats against their families and had to hire professional security.

    1. Ya, its weird. Making videos doesn’t make a person rich. If his money does come from trafficking, I am fairly certain that never happens without out some sort of state support.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *