Andrew Tate Challenges Critics To Experience Wealth Before Judging It

X/@Cobratate

Andrew Tate launched the challenge at anyone who dares declare riches to be under-fulfilling. He states that one must reach that stage of hoping to be extremely rich before evaluating anything on the contrary. This searing and incendiary person issued his argument through a video accompanying a post: “Before you say being rich isn’t all that great. You should try it first.” What followed was a lengthy debate about money, happiness, and the true kind of success.

Advertisement

In the videos, Tate expounds these views far more courageously and concretely. He states that the phrase “money cannot grab happiness” is often tossed in the air and that this, he says, is the opinion of a person who has never really had money. “People say money doesn’t grab happiness. And my answer is how would you know?” In his view, the wealthy get to inhabit a very different kind of reality, one where money is never an issue. Tate describes his own life as “just a random assault on impulse. A couple supercars here, jet there, yacht somewhere, not really because I wanted anything. Just because I could.” He admits that there is sometimes a void: “Sometimes you sit and go, I bought all this shit and I spent all this money and I don’t even really care about any of it.” In juxtaposition to this void feeling, he glorifies freedom with Tate also giving himself the choice to go back to being broke. He states, “I can decide to be broke. You don’t have a choice. You’re broke by force.”

Finally, as with everything Tate-related, supported Tate’s polarizing nature, there was immediate and divided opposition to his stance in the online digital parlance. Many sided with him in agreeing that, ultimately, financial freedom must be the goal. One commentator commented,” People who say money don’t grab happiness are full of shit. I’d be a lot happier not being forced to work everyday. 10-12 hours a day 6 days a week.” This kind of comment typifies the fundamental popular feeling against the forced daily drudgery in which money is viewed as the only escape from constraints. Another stated like, “Only a poor person would say that being rich is not cool.”

But most responses seemed to reject Tate’s materialistic ideas of success. An insightful reply offered an alternate view of wealth with a touch of historical philosophy: “Like with all aspects of life, real wealth is a mindset. When Alexander the Great offered Diogenes anything he wanted, he just answered, step away from my sunlight. Socrates says wealth relies on wanting less… When you know your own worth, you don’t need all the glittering garbage.”This comment has shifted the focus of the discussion from material things to places of inner contentment. Another somewhat reflected this idea by chastising Tate, “Money does not grab happiness. It buys comfort,” making a distinction between emotional fulfillment and financial security.

Certain reactions veered somewhat into personal territory, ranging from praise to scathing attacks. One comment wished him well: “I really hope you have a long and healthy life. I really hope that in fact I will include you in my daily prayers.” That same commenter, however, was quick to add, “We get it you’re rich and so much of a better person than any Doctor, Nurse, Engineer, ect. could ever be. For a rich guy though, you sure are fucking ugly.” This combination of adulation and insults is stereotypical in debates surrounding Tate. One practicality-minded commenter called money “leverage” and “the silent blade that cuts deeper than any sword,” an expression viewing wealth as a source of power and independence rather than mere consumption.

Advertisement

The up-to-date outpouring by Andrew Tate is another well-oiled launch in the continuation of a long line of disclaimers for a hyper-materialistic and self-determined definition of success. His message goes deep into the hearts of those who yearn for financial liberation and, conversely, has drawn opprobrium for the soullessness and divisiveness of the world he so energetically paints. The discourses he launches come far less to life by virtue of particularities of fact and more to answer deep questions about what constitutes a worthy life. Given this, his argument that only a person who has experienced wealth can judge it will have his audience looking within at their own desires and their concept of happiness.