Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

"Winners can only exist if losers exist"

Soul_Rattler

Soul_Rattler

Active Member
The "king/queen" thread got me thinking...

If there are people who think that kings/queens are implicit in the oppressed status of others, is it safe to say that they also think that winners can only exist if losers exist?

The "For one to succede, another must fail" mentality sounds like that of a hater. A crab in the barrel. The idea that your success means my failure. The notion that my failure is a direct result of your success.

My opinion: One can win while another loses. Also, all can lose. But the reality of mutual benefit is that multiple parties can win, even if one party wins more than another..
 
konceptjones said:
that's an idiotic way of looking at any given situation. "Winning" implies that everyone is shooting for the same goals in life and nothing could be further from the truth.
Click to expand...
To play devil's advocate, all it takes is for two people to shoot for the same goal.

Then, both can eventually achieve the goal. But even then, whoever reaches the goal first, wins.
 
Soul_Rattler said:
To play devil's advocate, all it takes is for two people to shoot for the same goal.

Then, both can eventually achieve the goal. But even then, whoever reaches the goal first, wins.
Click to expand...

If you both reached it, then there is no winner or loser. Everything in life cannot be predicated on getting somewhere first; that's a child's mentality. What matters is if you got there or not, fuck what anybody else is doing unless y'all are in it together.
 
Thor said:
I don’t agree.

I just got a weight bench inmy house and I’m trying to get back in shape.

And when I do I win and nobody will lose.

I’m trying to teach my son to be great and responsible young man. And if I succeed that’s a win and nobody will lose.
Click to expand...
You getting into shape makes the fat niggas lose.

You teaching your son to be great means the niggas who ain't in Hus sins life loses.

No matter what.......the light is only light because we know what dark is.

Niggas are niggas because we have black men who have sense who aren't niggas. Otherwise we all niggas.
 
konceptjones said:
If you both reached it, then there is no winner or loser. Everything in life cannot be predicated on getting somewhere first; that's a child's mentality. What matters is if you got there or not, fuck what anybody else is doing unless y'all are in it together.
Click to expand...
Are black people in america winning or losing?
Or are we good where we are.

If we good where we are.....then we shouldn't be complaining. Are we complaining about being excluded? Excluded from what? What's the end goal?
From a third world countries perspective...black Americans are doing well.
 
DOS_patos said:
You getting into shape makes the fat niggas lose.

You teaching your son to be great means the niggas who ain't in Hus sins life loses.

No matter what.......the light is only light because we know what dark is.

Niggas are niggas because we have black men who have sense who aren't niggas. Otherwise we all niggas.
Click to expand...

Each line was more wrong than the one before it. And it started off pretty wrong so that's saying something.
 
In competition there always must be losers so the question is a matter of perception... is life, work, sex or the attempt to get it, family legacy, business, etc a competition or is it better we all have participation trophies
 
konceptjones said:
If you both reached it, then there is no winner or loser. Everything in life cannot be predicated on getting somewhere first; that's a child's mentality. What matters is if you got there or not, fuck what anybody else is doing unless y'all are in it together.
Click to expand...
The nuclear arms race.

The race into space.

Nations have invested millions into being "first" and I would wager that it meant more than to simply have bragging rights. Sometimes, being first means having first choice, which means whoever comes second/third/etc is taking a potential loss.
 
Soul_Rattler said:
The nuclear arms race.

The race into space.

Nations have invested millions into being "first" and I would wager that it meant more than to simply have bragging rights. Sometimes, being first means having first choice, which means whoever comes second/third/etc is taking a potential loss.
Click to expand...

because you are first doesn't make you a "winner", it only makes you first.

The first man to eat nightshade died a horrible death; what did he win?
 
Focal Point said:
Winning and losing are simply measurements can't measure your winning without comparing it to losing.
Click to expand...

One can win and lose at the same time. It's just a way of describing your state of being. You turned in your test first, therefore you feel as if you won. However, you got an F on that test, so you lost.

But you were the first to turn it in; at least you can revel in that while being left behind.

see how childish that way of thinking is?
 
How many people made millions and enjoyed the good life, "winning" as y'all put it, only to wind up broke soon after due to a mistake? How many wound up in prison because they made their money illegally? How many wound up dead because they crossed the wrong person?
 
konceptjones said:
because you are first doesn't make you a "winner", it only makes you first.

The first man to eat nightshade died a horrible death; what did he win?
Click to expand...
The first colonial powers to reach the Americas were Europeans.

The rest is history and there are definitely winners and losers there.
 
No such thing as a eternal winner, we all lose from time to time

Nothing wrong with losing if you dont accept finality in losing.

The difference between a winner and loser in a sense of a personal construct. Is that a winner doesnt accept a loss as a finality,.and sees it more of a set back to learn from.

Where as a loser sees a loss as evidence that they cant win.
 
is this question about a mindset, or the functional need in society for people to (lose) and do lower level work?

nobody necessarily HAS to lose in order for anyone to be successful, though there are some positions and business that pretty much make it that way

and on the other end, yeah i think there has to always be that "working class" portion of society that does the jobs more fortunate people just wont do....with that said it doesnt mean they cant at least make a decent living....I just would never expect a janitor to take home what a doctor does, not even in a perfect world
 
1/2 said:
is this question about a mindset, or the functional need in society for people to (lose) and do lower level work?

nobody necessarily HAS to lose in order for anyone to be successful, though there are some positions and business that pretty much make it that way

and on the other end, yeah i think there has to always be that "working class" portion of society that does the jobs more fortunate people just wont do....with that said it doesnt mean they cant at least make a decent living....I just would never expect a janitor to take home what a doctor does, not even in a perfect world
Click to expand...

none of this has anything to do with winning or losing.

A janitor could genuinely love what he or she does, and takes great pride in their workmanship. And while their pay may be lower than most, if they live within their means they can live a simpler, happy, content life.

Meanwhile a doctor can make lots of money, drive nice cars, take lavish trips, and live in a large house, but is ultimately miserable from the stress of the job, adapting to new regulations, and the constant threat of malpractice hanging over their head in the event of a single mistake. Outwardly the doctor could appear to be "winning", but in reality is anything but that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top