The Downfall of Roosh V (Daryush Valizadeh)

[Winston]

I have a question:

If Rooshv is a sociopath, asshole and douchebag, and maybe a con man as well, then he has the qualities that American women go for right? Why would he be a misfit in America? Wouldn't he be the type that thrives in America? Why would he be a HAer? Any idea?

It seems he has a knack for getting attention, even here in this forum. lol

He is not a misfit at all in USA. He had sex with maybe over 70 very drunk american women.

There is just one thread about Roosh on this forum.

Discussing about Martin Shkreli or about Elliot Rodger or Saddam Hussein doesn't mean they are popular.

It simply means that people want to discuss and have the freedom and the free speech of also honestly and openly criticizing someone.

What do you mean there's just one thread in this forum about Rooshv? Hello! How long have you been here? Have you tried the Google search engine at the top to find the other threads? lol

If you use the advanced search feature in this forum, you find that there are 33 threads about Rooshv. See the list of them here:

search.php?keywords=roosh&terms=all&aut ... mit=Search

[Winston]

Confidence isn't a mindset you can manipulate yourself into. Confidence is a positive expectation based on historical success. If you have no historical success then your mindset is misplaced. In a video Roosh just made he was discussing weight lifting. He said based on what he lifted before he knew he could lift more. That is confidence. But if he just went into a gym and had never lifted before this mindset could get him killed. Real confidence is something that applies to all parts of life. The problem is women cannot tell the difference between confidence and acting. So they validate some guy acting and he reiterates to others that it's confidence. I don't care what someone uses in dating, but outside of dating this doesn't work. In business or war it is crystal clear when confidence is bullshit.

This is only true up to a point. Obviously historical success underpins confidence. But everyone has to start somewhere. Five years ago my life was pretty worthless. I had no historical successes to rely on. For a long time this made me suicidal and overwhelmingly depressed. But five years later I've become much more successful and confident and I cured my depression. How did I do it? Well I had confidence in myself. With no historical successes under my belt, I had confidence in my own ability. There was no reason for anyone to believe I would succeed. I had never proven that I could. But I had confidence in my ability and started achieving success. Now I have historical successes to draw upon for confidence. But I didn't start out that way. Sometimes people have to try new things, take gambles in life.

Yes, Roosh can predict he'll lift more the next time based on historical averages. But long ago I'm sure he was a teenager stepping into the gym for the first time and lifting an empty bar. Having never stepped into a gym before, did he have any reason to assume he could lift even that much? Not based on any history at least. It's just a blind self confidence. People have to start from somewhere, so it's not like history is the only thing that determines confidence.

It's called faking it until you make it. Eventually the line blurs between acting and reality. I bullshit on job interviews and won. Made my resume look a lot better that way. It's not an uncommon thing at all. But now I actually have job experience and don't have to bullshit as much.

People need blind confidence when they start trying anything new. It's not like someone can just say, "I have no history of this, so I have no confidence and I'm not going to even try." Eventually that blind confidence leads to results. Probably most of the time it's failure. But sometimes it's success. Blind confidence at the beginning leads to historical successes. You can't even have a history of success if you don't start in the first place. That applies to trying anything new, from dating women to business and war. Did Israel have any reason to be confident when they declared independence? It was a brand new country in 1948 with no history at all. All the neighboring arab countries launched an invasion, but Israel beat them all back. With no history, Israel had no reason to be confident. Yet they won and kept winning wars against the neighboring arab states. This became their historical success, but they had no history when they started out as a nation.

Abcdavid,
What's going on? You sound like you've been listening to too much New Age claptrap or New Age guru BS. I think you used the wrong word here when you talk about "confidence" in trying a new sport. The word should be "bravery" in trying something new. Not confidence. Without some basis, confidence is useless and false. If you didn't know how to fix a car, can you say with confidence that you can? If you did, you'd be lying. If I am skilled and experienced at fixing computers, then I would have the RIGHT to say that I'm confident I can fix your computer. See the difference?

Confidence isn't going to do anything if it doesn't have skill, talent or experience to back it up. Didn't you read our thread about "The Myth of Confidence"?

viewtopic.php?t=9050

Success has more to do with whether you do something you are GOOD at. You gotta have a knack or aptitude for it too. Every successful person got to where they are at, because they did what they were GOOD at, not because of their confidence. And they persevered too of course. For example, do you think Gary Kasparov won all those chess championships because he had confidence? No way. He was very talented in chess and very good at it. Do you think Bill Gates became rich because of his confidence? No, he had a talent and aptitude for computer programming. Likewise, Steve Jobs had a talent for design. Even Thomas Edison, who said that perseverance is everything, was extremely good at inventing things, it was his TALENT. He was good at something.

Do you think a novice in chess is going to beat an expert just by using his confidence alone? No way. If you are way outmatched, your confidence isn't going to help. If you are evenly matched though, it may help somewhat, but you also gotta focus and concentrate too. It's a combination of factors. But skill and talent definitely precede confidence. Confidence doesn't make or break everything. It's not the end all and be all that delusional American New Agers make it out to be. Confidence is not only way overrated in America, it's used as a shaming tactic too.

So why you buy into all this New Age BS and nonsense?

Go to a gymnastics coach. Tell him to train you because you have all the confidence in the world and that you believe in yourself. Well, not only will he tell you that you are too old to start, but even if you were a kid, having confidence isn't enough. He will tell you that you have to demonstrate a TALENT and APTITUDE for gymnastics too. Otherwise, you are wasting his time and yours. Without a strong aptitude in gymnastics, you won't make it, no matter how "confident" you are. This is reality. New Age bullshit about "confidence" being able to do anything without limits is WRONG and is a LIE and is NOT TRUE! Geez. I hate bullshit. So why is bullshit so popular in America, when it can be debunked by simple logic? Sheesh!

Using Israel is a bad example. The elite Jewish bankers financed and arranged for Israel to be born. These bankers own all the money in the West and plotted long ago to get a Jewish homeland in Palestine. They even got America into World War One as long as Britain promised to allow a Jewish homeland in the Middle East. That was an agreement made by bankers with the British government. Google "Balfour Declaration". The Rothschilds, Schiffs, and others were behind it all. Didn't you know?

So Israel was protected by the most powerful elite. It didn't stand on its own against hostile enemies. That's why there was a Holocaust during World War Two, because the Jewish population in Europe wanted to stay in Europe and were comfortable there, they didn't want to move to hot desert land to fight Arabs forever. So they had to engineer persecution of Jews in order to get them to migrate to Israel. Didn't you know all this?

[Winston]

Women are not the same as men, but they are similar enough that you can often sanity check statements "women like men who X" by swapping genders, at least if X is not something inherent to men, like "have erect penises".

Suppose a woman is fat, ugly but confident (Mama June type): "I am confident that I am the girl of your dreams and that deep down you want me and we will have a wonderful life together". Compare with a girl who is beautiful but low self-esteem: "You probably won't like me, which is why I never answered your emails, blah, blah." Which one do you choose?

Don't give me this BS that confidence is attractive in men but not women. What's attractive in both sexes is physical beauty, nice personality, intelligence, etc. Somebody going through a bad spot in life and throwing a pity party for his or her self loses just a tiny bit of their natural attractiveness. Confidence is a nice addition, but it's not a game changer. Ugly and confident doesn't work. Sorry. (Good news for men is that, contrary to sluthate, face is not that important for a man to be considered attractive. Average male face but lean and muscular beats pretty male face but fat and weak, at least for women over age 19 or so.)

This is why we need downvoting posts, so when someone introduces PUA thinking, like "confidence" BS, we can send that post into oblivion before it sends us all off on a wild goose chase.

This is true. But I don't know any man who values confidence in women, except maybe liberals and white knight manginas. Men prefer women who are humble and sweet. In Asia, almost all women will say they aren't very beautiful, even if they are SUPER HOT, because in Asia, modesty is the desirable trait for women, and for men too. A man is not supposed to brag. Rich people will usually say "I'm not rich" if you say that they are rich. Etc.

I don't think too much confidence is good, but neither is too much self-pity. Just be real and be balanced.

Also when in times of trouble or adversity, one should have a fighting spirit. That's what wins against obstacles and adversity. But a fighting spirit isn't "confidence". It's a fighting spirit that is brave and courage. Confidence is more like "I am confident I can fix your computer because I know a lot about them and have fixed them before" etc. Or "I am very good in golf, so I am confident that I will play well, since I have played well in the past." You gotta use the words in the proper context.

So you see, confidence has to be based on something. It isn't useful by itself. To give another example: A hot woman who walks into a nightclub can rightfully say "I'm confident everyone will notice me because I look attractive and am dressed sexy." But an ugly fat whale of a woman cannot say the same with confidence. Even if she generated "confidence" it wouldn't do anything, because people aren't going to look at her if she's not hot or worth looking at. See how that works?

[Winston]

DrMorpheus,
Don't accuse me of having schizophrenia without basis, since I have none of the official traits of schizophrenia and do not fit the criteria for it. I may have mental issues or even mental problems, but schizophrenia isn't one of them. I've issued a warning on your account for this. But it looks like JamesBond already banned you.

[abcdavid01]

Winston, I agree with everything you wrote here. It's just a matter of semantics.

[PeterAndrewNolan]

Roosh posts conspiracy stuff all the time. It's like a third of the stuff he writes about. And Roosh hasn't put out bang guides in a good while. His most recent book is about censorship.

What kind of conspiracy stuff? NWO type stuff or moon hoax type stuff? That makes a difference.

Let's see him walk the walk long term and then perhaps it'll be convincing.

It is interesting to note Roosh is venturing in to my area of expertise now.

I have offered to educate him because he is woefully ill informed about what is really going on in the world....but so far he seems to not want to learn from me.

And that's fine....the C300 made their decision for the genocide final in 2013 and it's going to happen.

Not much to do but get out of the way of it and that means get a highly mobile business that will work even though a slow genocide is coming.

[books]

Laurie Penny (has about 145,000 fanbase) met with Roosh (has about 24,000 fanbase) this week



"Roosh is bitter and vindictive, convinced of his own victimhood as a self-made blogger who was never given his due by the mainstream media.

He tells me that the reason I have a column is that I’m a useful idiot and all my readers have low IQs. I ask him if he’s negging me.

I turn to leave, and Roosh suggests that we should start some sort of “fake fight” on the internet, because that’s “part of the game”.

“I’m good,” I say, genuinely confused. There is no way I could have a fake fight with this man. We clearly have real, profound differences.

I think he’s a dangerous manchild with an army of credulous misogynists at his disposal. I cannot fight him insincerely, and I don’t want to fight him in good faith because he’s already had too much of my attention. What — truly — does this extravagantly-bearded sociopath think he’s playing at?


"I turn to leave, and Roosh suggests that we should start some sort of “fake fight” on the internet, because that’s “part of the game”."

It’s all part of the grift, even for true believers like this shitbag. Anything for attention, anything to feel important.
"

[Winston]

This was straight to the point, although their circlejerk is more pathetic actually.

And if you don't circlejerk together with them, you are banned in a matter of days.

Roosh forum has actually more banned members than active members, and I think this says everything

And I'm sure they've lost so many good posters or potentially good posters because of this.

I would never join that forum again

The fact that they also banned our Great Leader is unforgivable. I think I'm going to cry. Excuse me.

Roosh spends online more than 90% of his time everyday, he bans users no matter how
many hundreds or thousands of posts they had, at the smallest disagreement.

It is all a power trip for him, underlining his frustrations, his bitterness and resentments towards almost everyone.

People are here are curious what "reason" did Roosh give when he banned Winston?

Roosh himself didn't ban me. One of his moderators did. All I did was debate some people there. I cleared up some of their lies about me and HA. Then they got nasty and attacked me. When I counterattacked, they banned me for rudeness. They have double standards, in that if you are new, you can be attacked by senior members, but if you counterattack or defend yourself or correct their LIES, then you are the guilty one that gets banned. Only senior members can insult others, newbies can't. It's a double standard, which we don't have here of course.

The "moderators" on RVF are just alt-usernames created and controlled by Roosh.

I thought this was well-known public knowledge since many years ago.

How do you know this? How can you prove that rooshs moderators are actually him? Is that just a theory or speculation? Some here have joked that jamesbond is winston under another username. Lol. Anyone can start a silly rumor.

[Banano]

I wonder how make fake users are on HA forum. Jamesbond doesn't seem real, he just rehashes what Winnie says, I never seen anything creative from him. And there has been few other cases where he posed as a girl but it was typical Winstons way of asking stupid questions

[Mr S]

Laurie Penny (has about 145,000 fanbase) met with Roosh (has about 24,000 fanbase) this week



"Roosh is bitter and vindictive, convinced of his own victimhood as a self-made blogger who was never given his due by the mainstream media.

He tells me that the reason I have a column is that I’m a useful idiot and all my readers have low IQs. I ask him if he’s negging me.

I turn to leave, and Roosh suggests that we should start some sort of “fake fight” on the internet, because that’s “part of the game”.

“I’m good,” I say, genuinely confused. There is no way I could have a fake fight with this man. We clearly have real, profound differences.

I think he’s a dangerous manchild with an army of credulous misogynists at his disposal. I cannot fight him insincerely, and I don’t want to fight him in good faith because he’s already had too much of my attention. What — truly — does this extravagantly-bearded sociopath think he’s playing at?


"I turn to leave, and Roosh suggests that we should start some sort of “fake fight” on the internet, because that’s “part of the game”."

It’s all part of the grift, even for true believers like this shitbag. Anything for attention, anything to feel important.
"

I find it odd that she finds him physically attractive, especially since he's got a Civil War period beard going on. Shows how much her likes and dislikes can be trusted...To me he's no more than average face wise, maybe his body is better than average but he seems to be overly hairy, which too much can turn the average woman off I think unless she has a fetish for that kinda thing.

[Ghost]

.

[abcdavid01]

New post by Roosh on how to raise a son.

http://www.returnofkings.com/90283/5-th ... aise-a-son

[Ghost]

.

[abcdavid01]

Roosh is mid thirties I believe. Based on his recent writings, he's seriously considering settling down. I wouldn't be surprised to see him with a kid in five years.

[Ghost]

.