Summary: Men are solely at fault for the current state of modern western society because of two reasons: First, men hold most positions of power and therefore are responsible for all the goings-on in their society. Second, the average modern man is emasculated due to being raised as such and because society is designed this way.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Body:
Good evening everyone,
Today I want to talk about the decline of modern western society, and more specifically, the cause of it. I’m not going to get really into the weeds, but rather look at the overarching reason today’s PC culture is rapidly growing.
First, men hold all the power. Why? Ultimately it’s because men are stronger than women and force is the ultimate authority from which all other authority is derived. Here in the US (I will talk about the US since I live here and can speak to it), all the Presidents of history have been male. Most Senators and Representatives are male. Most CEOs and judges are male. Most military and police forces are male. Most engineers and scientists are male. Men have always been the builders of nations and are the ones who shape the world. This is a cold, hard fact. Women contribute and support, of course, but in general, most of the people keeping the earth turning are male.
So, knowing that men are the columns that keep society afloat, why is the West declining? Why can you be fired for looking at someone the wrong way? Why must we all be politically correct? Why is it marriage 1.0 has collapsed and been replaced by marriage 2.0? The reason is very simple: Because men let it happen.
Collectively as a sex, males have allowed the PC culture to infect the West and have allowed the slow emasculation of men to go unchecked. All of the woes of such a soy society can be fixed if men put their foot and said “enough”. So, why don’t they?
Second, men allow this to happen because men have been emasculated. Men have been raised to be blue pill (including myself). Men have been told to suppress their natures and do “the right thing”. Why does this happen? Because it is by design. In order for a civilization to function, you can’t have people running around killing each other and raping women and pillaging resources.
So, for a nation to work, people have to follow the rules. Specifically, the nuclear family was designed to prevent revolt. The government wants stable, happy families because a stable, happy man is less likely to join the revolution if he has kids, a loving wife, and a nice house. A lone, angry, incel is more likely to take out his unchecked aggression on the government or on his neighbors. The nuclear family placates nation-destroying urges. It’s been discussed here before, but basically by letting the bottom 80% of men have a family instead of trying to compete with the alphas who get all the women, society is stabilized. This has been working until recently.
What happened then? Well, marriage 1.0 dissolved to make way for marriage 2.0. Now hypergamy goes unchecked and you have all these women doing whatever they want, fucking men in the bad way, and destroying the nuclear family. These men, who were raised to be blue pilled and “good for society” are now thrown back into the jungle. Look at how many neckbeard white knights are out there. Fathers are not doing their jobs (if they’re even around). Marriage today no longer placates them. It doesn’t help that the government seems to support this. By having the State take care of single mothers and kids, men are no longer needed. They are being replaced. This is good short-term for politicians since it gets them elected by those who rely on the State. But it’s bad for the long-term stability of the nation. It will eventually implode on itself.
Finally, it is only a small percent of people who are constantly complaining about gender wage gaps, racism, white supremacy, toxic masculinity, etc. But when you have all these blue pilled men, stuck in their old ways of thinking, raised by single mothers and told all their life that being a Mi’Lady will get you laid, you have governments, businesses, and media jumping to the defense of these few squeaky wheels. Men in all levels of the power hierarchy of the nation allow it to happen. When CEOs, Senators and Celebrities are getting crucified for the slightest offense, society continues to slip. When women can fuck unchecked and divorce-rape men with the support of the courts and public opinion, society will continue to slip. It is all a GIANT shit test that men collectively are failing miserably. If only men realized it's a test, laughed it off, and continued on, the West today would look very different. No wonder women today are getting fat, bitching more, and wearing vagina hats. I’d be frustrated and act out too if all the people I want to procreate with turned into fat weak-willed spineless beta boys.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion:
Takeaways:
· Men hold all the power in the West and thus are solely to blame.
· Most men are emasculated by design; to preserve the stability of civilization.
· The decline of the West is actually a colossal shit test, one that men today are failing.
· The fix is simple: Men need to put their foot down and course correct.
PS: I understand that women do hold some positions of power and do contribute to society. I’m speaking in general. Women know it’s true. They know that all this acting out is child-like pouting and they want daddy to send them to bed. They know that men are the leaders and decision-makers and they want them to take charge and fix this black hole we’re in. Women WANT their captain to steer the ship, so steer it!
TL;DR - Western Society is Falling and It’s Entirely Men’s Fault
VisibleTheory 5y ago
No, title should be "Liberals are responsible for the Decline of the West". Democrats and their policies have done the most damage/
jazztaprazzta 5y ago
Except that men today lack adequate role models and are educated mostly by women straight up from kindergarten. Women make them the way they are, they create this false veil over reality (a.k.a Blue Pill).
korkyshadow 5y ago
Men let women spend their money, women want dumb shit, companies pander to money.
chazthundergut 5y ago
Men lead, women follow.
Stay in your masculine frame around a woman, and she will fall into her submissive, feminine frame around you.
Start getting comfortable and needy and seeking validation from her and you enter your feminine frame. She will respond by losing attraction for you and entering her masculine- testing you, bitching at you, etc.
If the west has a crisis of over-masculinized women, it is a direct result of over-feminized men.
[deleted]
haroldpeters 5y ago
How do you guys feel about the notion that WW1, WW2, Vietnam, Iraq etc have purged a lot of "good strong men" from the west, and allowed betas to rise to the top who would not have otherwise got there.. also allowing women to do more for themselves and increase the social welfare system to look after the majority of women who could not provide for themselves..
kung_fu_cious 5y ago
Way to discredit your conclusion in your intro!!!!
MattyAnon Admin 5y ago
Women have 51% of the vote.
OP, you have fallen foul of the Patriarchy Myth: the belief that because a small minority of men are successful that somehow all men are all responsible for all of society.
Many great CEO's are also blue pilled indoctrinated brainwashed simpletons when it comes to women (due to BP upbringing). Putting their energies into a business all their lives leads them to be blind to the wiles of women.
Why is society the way it is? Because a lot of people (men and women) continually make short sighted selfish and stupid decisions and votes.
Women act collectively, men compete.
Add in 50 years of technology: social media, birth control, low infant mortality rate leading to smaller families requiring fewer decades to raise plus some political/economic shifts including welfare support and the result is today's society with all its pros and cons.
The blame does not lie with men: it lies with all of us. We've all created the world as it is, and we all have to live with it.
All the "decline of civilisation" posts are from beta males bemoaning the fact that being a good provider no longer nets them a hot 20 yr old virgin for life.
The pound-me-too shit is completely out of control and we need an effective backlash against it.
Dating today is fantastic for men: no longer do we need to commit to one woman and pay our entire lives for a little duty sex. Instead we date hotter younger women three at a time without paying a dime.
It's fucking awesome, I don't want to go back.
Mangasbzo7 5y ago
I've been ucking 3 girls for the last year. It really is not all it's cracked up to be.
I would rather much have 1 woman who is wife material (i.e. loyal and submissive most of all), than 3girls who are only good for their bodies and riding dick.
But that's the problem with women today, almost none of them are wife material any more
MattyAnon Admin 5y ago
This is like saying "I want a spaceship to ride to work in every day like I was told I'd have in the movies".
We would ALL like that, but it doesn't exist.
I'm not sure they ever were.
I don't believe the movies of the past any more than the movies of today. I don't believe what women said about themselves in the past any more than I trust what women today say about themselves now.
I don't think it was ever as good a deal as we like to think.
Skyhawk_And_Skyhead 5y ago
Marriage 1.0 is dead, long live Marriage 2.0
Jfc_Manners 5y ago
If you're going to celebrate the death of marriage 1.0, at least give your long lives to uncommitted sex.
Obediah_Stane 5y ago
A lot of good points. I neglected to realize that today is really a good time for people. I got a little idealistic in my post I admit.
[deleted] 5y ago
[--removed--]
UseForThrowAwayStuff 5y ago
what do you suppose are the likeliest next things to be attacked?
Obediah_Stane 5y ago
Good point, the departure from religious traditions that the country was founded on was the first step in this chain of downfalls
TheDevilsAdvokaat 5y ago
Some of those traditions had to go. Traditions exist because they are useful answers to certain circumstances. As societies change and advance some of the "answers" were no longer useful.
Aristocracy and religion are two cultural relicts whose time was up.
riot2100 5y ago
As everything around us goes to shit, as we slowly inch towards social dystopia, as the meaning of equality gets rewritten by those in power, is the next occurrence going to be the total societal subjugation of non-conforming ideas? With some buddies I saw a new Pixar film and sat there thinking that I’d never show this to a child. It saddens me to think that parents rely on these films to instill values into children, like a tumor that slowly grows as they age. The twenty first century image of societal progression is an illusion. Within my mental frame is an obligation to try and help these people out, who sit and listen their entire lives, without asking. I think it’s because I see part of my old self within them. Someone who didn’t even know he was being conditioned. However, these people have to realize and make the decision to unplug by themselves, which leaves a harsh duality. Having the right to choose should come with a right to an education that lets them know what they’re actually doing in the first place. The lack of this has lead to the chronic weed smoking masturbator. I mean, one can possibly educate themself with a good book, but who does that anyway when they can waste their time on social media?
[deleted] 5y ago
[--removed--]
DeGENZerate 5y ago
That's why we need to educate ourselves, educate others, and linger in their institutions. Then we must educate them all because they will never educate themselves.
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
DeGENZerate 5y ago
Go outside and look up into the sky. Then turn around 180. You should see off in the distance my comment that went over your head
logicalthinker1 5y ago
I don't think you used nihilated enough
[deleted] 5y ago
[--removed--]
Einzakin 5y ago
Ofcourse avoid the criticism and try to untactically change the topic.
logicalthinker1 5y ago
isn't that what you purport to be? ????
[deleted]
Einzakin 5y ago
When you use a word three times you may want to spell it right. If you can't spell nihilate or nihilation properly then how can we believe that your ideas are well thought out?
You have an intermediate level of understanding on the constitution and generally on most things you say. Learn to spell and then you can talk about complex issues. "The consitution is built on the logic of the French Revolution". The fuck are you talking about. Explain yourself. The sentence doesn't even make sense.
Nicolas0631 5y ago
You are argument is not about countering the content, but performing attack on the form (who write it, the spelling...). That's not convincing.
Einzakin 5y ago
Well I countered both his content and his lack of spelling of simple words. He also used the same word 4? times in a few sentences, letting us know he lacks vocabulary. Plenty of red flags.
You also seem to have a problem with english so that may be why you don't understand my criticism.
Nicolas0631 5y ago
Yep that's it anybody that has spelling or vocabulary problems can only say bullshit. It is impossible for them to be non native speaker or for example to have a strong logical mind but to be less versed in rhetorics. I have seen too many people that have high IQ, high level of education and have a strong logical mind having problem with things like that to consider this argument to be even remotely valid.
Why not attack the actual arguments ? Honestly, I am not convinced at all by what he says, but to me spelling isn't the core of the problem.
The american constitution was actually approved 2 years before the date of the french revolution and it can be said that the americans actually influenced the frenchs. This to me is a more solid couter argument than spelling.
In reality, I think both country influenced each other because none could ignore the other one.
What I find more important is that the things we paint as decline are about equality and respect. It is really hard to argue that women cannot vote, that women cannot think, that women cannot work well or that they shall not have equal rights. That the same for people of various races all over the world. Ethically, this doesn't work.
And actually that's why it hapened.
I can agree that because of its wealthyness the west has gone onto a decline: less babies, lot of people being dependant of the state and overall the countries become less competitive. But one has to understand, if we were more like we were 200 years ago, in a much more competitive environement for survival, most of us would not even have made it to adulthood. Also out of the survivors, only a few would get the full benefits while the other would just strugle to survive. The situation of the individuals would be much worse overall, not better and beta males would be still be beta males. On top of being cuck, they would have died in napoleonian war or maybe american civil war but I fail too see how this would be an improvment for them.
Einzakin 5y ago
You're right in that arguments should be attacked. The man just posts ridiculous shit all the time and young bucks seem to think he knows what he's talking about. I'm just pointing out that his vocabulary and spelling are limited and he doesn't take the time to correct himself. This leads me to believe he doesn't take the time to think about his arguments, which seems completely obvious to me.
It's hard to attack someones arguments when they are bullshit. What can I say to counter him other than mention how what he said means nothing and is not backed up by anything. The more people realize how retarded he sounds the more they'll understand his thinking offers no benefit here. It will probably allow the community to grow into something alot better than it is now. We don't need leaders who are complete morons.
As far as other stuff it's such a broad topic. Seeing everything in either a blue pill or a red pill lens is dumb. You need to be adaptable. Redpill is good because you need to be strong and stand by your ideas in life. Bluepill can be equally as good if applied right because you need to take into consideration other people and as cooperative humans if you can get people to trust you and you can benefit both parties, you're going to have a much better time in all areas, including women.
Some dudes here think that being this strong stoic silent type is the only way to live. They've watched too many 300 movies and think they have to be an alpha male like there were 200 years ago. Guess what, we live in a different society and as we evolve we need to adapt. The most successful men I've seen have been adaptable, and they don't have to fucking try to be something. They just are. Sometimes they're nice and kind when it's natural and feels right to do so, and somethings they're strong and lay down the law. They usually just go with the flow.
That's why who leads matters. Rollo Tomassi is especially an egotistical person. I've noticed it in many musicians. "Lets hand this psychology question to Rollo, he has a bachelor in psychology." Really? Then Rollo goes on to speak with some kind of authority in psychology. He then pretends to know more about psychology than say Jordan Peterson. It's hilarious. "Jordan doesn't understand because he's married. He lives in a blue pill world." Yeah real convenient, anyone who disagrees with anyone on red pill ideas could only live in a blue pill world. So. Fucking. Stupid.
Most of the angry bitter men here will find an excuse to hate people who rejected them, so they'll come here. This place seems to turn them to blaming women alot of the time instead of maybe becoming not only stronger men, but better people in general to be around. In the end that's all any of us want, to be around people and have people enjoy being around us.
Be open, and be strong. Stop listening to leaders who say stupid shit as if they're your authoritative father figure.
If I read one more fucking post about holding frame holy shit. Holding frame comes NATURAL. It's what you do away from frame holding scenarios which allows you to hold frame in those scenarios. If you're the smarter/best/most confident person in said scenario, then you will naturally hold the frame unless some other dipshit is forcing his frame onto you - which will be easy to correct by calling him out.
Dis_mah_mobile_one 5y ago
The Constitution predates the French Revolution
[deleted] 5y ago
[--removed--]
ZoroasterFlame 5y ago
Not true. The Constitution is built on Locke and Montesquieu, the Revolution on Rousseau.
Einzakin 5y ago
Are you trying to say that because a few ideas were the same they have the same philosophical foundation. Are you getting this from ideas of Baron on Spirit of the Law... or American Sovereignty? Natural Rights?
There's entire books written on these topics. You can almost take any two big events and have some similarities. Does not mean they have the same philisophical foundation.
Probably a mandatory reading, among others if you want to understand the topic: https://mainelaw.maine.edu/faculty/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/rogoff-mlr-49.pdf
Jfc_Manners 5y ago
They were both built on the rejection of divine right, which was, despite our modern sensibilities, a nearly universal sentiment at the time. To claim that the French Revolution and the American Revolution weren't fundamentally philosophically connected just because there isn't a single overarching book they both cited is disingenuous.
Skyhawk_And_Skyhead 5y ago
They're both built off of the Ideals of the Enlightenment
[deleted]
[deleted] 5y ago
[--removed--]
Einzakin 5y ago
So what you're saying is that the philsophical foundation of the Constitution AND the French Revolution are based on the theories of Emmanuel Kant, to quote the great Cathy Newman.
Do you have any evidence to back this up other than "Someone should do something less intellectually challenging blah blah blah".
What are you going to say - Social Contract? Property Rights? Sure there are parts of what he talked about within both. If you could provide anything which shows some evidence I would be willing to read it.
[deleted] 5y ago
[--removed--]
Einzakin 5y ago
Ahhh yes, Shad's blog of eight or so paragraphs with five sources is going to convince me that the philisophical foundation of the Constitution and French Revolution is based around Kant. Funny thing is one of the two comments on the blog states "I would like to know your sources for the certainty that the founders were influenced by Kant."
Don't try to change the subject to you holding my dick. You can't provide any evidence for your claims. Just shows you posture. You do it all the time and once again you can't back up the shit you say.
Why don't you get the stick out of your ass and read if you want to talk about complex issues. You don't get to alpha and frame your way to the top, bro.
[deleted] 5y ago
[--removed--]
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
Yakatonker 5y ago
This is an epic failure of an article.
Now what happens in the macrocosm? A massive cluster fucking mass of corruption. If the plutocratic establishment from the top down shit out a Eugenics program such as Feminism, guess what all the followers below them are going to do? They'll lock, stock and initiate it because resisting the tide means their on the out economically.
People are whores, immoral, unethical. Most of the tards here don't even take the basic principle, the lessons here of reproduction and apply them to other facsimiles of life.
Conclusions:
(a)The State controls women, women control men, and men control nothing unless they reign in their sexuality and learn to exploit the game, which is a gigantic pyramid scheme.
(b)People in this era are whore, slaves to social capital in a matriarchal system, ergo going against PC can be easily suicidal economically. The methodology of control is almost absolute, and made infinitely worse through technology/technocratic facism of the plutocratic state
(c)The people do not realistically have any way of successfully rebelling given the advancing state of technocracy, because the state is more organized then ever and the masses more ignorant and disorganized
(d)There is no "putting the foot down", "no shit test" when the system is designed to control people. Some really dumb motherfuckers in here assume statecraft to be this moral or ethical endeavor when it is the furthest thing on this planet. The nature of power always dives into the pool of absolution.
(e)Because of the monopolist nature of government as is, all its institutions are whores, feeding like parasites on the public, more on men because they're the ones who're actually economically productive. There is a literal incentive to enslave men thoroughly
(f)Only a global catastrophe can free us from the Matrix. Prey for Chaos friends, because nothing besides that will free us from the New World Order.
Jfc_Manners 5y ago
Man, I'd love to sip some whiskey with you. No joke.
JamesSkepp 5y ago
OTOH, this is an gigantic failure of a reply.
To which a question can be asked - who controls the macrocosm? Men do. The article stands.
It didn't control women before 1980s', perhaps even 1990s'.
Women control betas.
Game is "natural selection", genuine attraction translated into understandable process. It's better to know it (even if in non-TRP style) than to not know it and operate in BP dating-courtship.
On the contrary, we are more and more freed from being tied up in "social capital", no small part thanks to feminism, liberalism ("society has no right to judge you" taken to extreme) and as a result of counteraction and oversaturation - TRP and mansophere (if you're an alpha, society's opinion matters little). What you're describing is in reality something different: the shift from what kind of social capital people are invested in (honour, gentelmanship, nationalism, patriotism, etc. into individuals place in global and local pecking order).
So it's only the matter of technology (most of which already exists) to free the people from state's control, at least in the context of freedom of speech. Overton window already shifts towards "right" (broadly speaking) and we already have women following the trend to some degree (not b/c they agree but b/c it's popular or trendy - think social media, youtubers). Combine the 2 and it's not as bleak as one might think.
The anti-PC consumer market is growing both in US and EU. My personal theory is that any company can play on PC market, even an anti-PC one, it just has to know how to navigate the said market not as someone who bows to PC but as someone who steers it to it's own benefit with disregard whether it's PC or not-PC, only to it's own self interest.
It took French a month for the government to capitulate before their demands. Also, don't throw fearmongering "technocracy" b/c technology works both ways, it's a matter of application.
As The_Donald's and 4chan examples showed, you can win the presidency race (at least in the internet) using the rules the system put in place. Both sites basically trolled anti-Trump crowd into most popular memes ever thus swaying the fencesitters.
Women follow alphas, enough alphas with RP-ish mindset and we have a say in global politics. Even better, if enough non-RP men understand that "feminism is a shit test on personal level too" (thus freeing their dependancy on one woman, be it oneitis, gf or wife) - we will have a shift in politics b/c independency from women for beta is the first step into full blown political-RP.
Right, so don't call cops or an ambulance when you get shot. Most of the state's institutions are necessary to keep people in check so they don't behave selfishly and devolve into "i have a gun so i go first in line" stuff. Belief that people with no state-like rules would behave decently is overrated, just look at any country in recent decades state lost control, it turns into tribal like warfare and criminal paradise.
You're an ignorant of highest order. Global catastrophe (say Yellowstone, asteroid, magically disappearing electricity) would turn what's left of us into relative barbarians who would QUICKLY organize into tribes to control what's left of the civilisation and resources. State is simply hierarchy of the AF/BB system taken to it's extremes. Since you cannot not-have hierarchy between humans, state is unavoidable consequence, sooner or later regardless whether it's peace or global catastrophe.
Generally your reply is nothing new since late 1990's conspiracy theories of WO, you just forgot to choose whether this time the NWO is going to be socialist, neo-con or fascist (depending on current administration's leaning). Mostly b/c current NWO conspiracy trends omit that 3 categories b/c none of them managed to held the test of time. Props to following the latest one tho, the thechnocracy trend, which clearly illustrates to me that you both are independent thinker (don't read internet blogs but genuine sources) and understand how technology works.
Jfc_Manners 5y ago
I feel that we already have adequate alphas, but we don't have adequate organization or social capital.
Yakatonker 5y ago
The concept of a federal candidate can enter the gated complex of the electoral system by "being an outsider" is outrageously ludicrous, especially more so when they join one of the established political camps. Trump is by no measure an "outsider", he is the epitome of a lifetime ruling elite in the strata of American plutocracy. Something made quite obvious in the Al Smith Diner hosted with Cardinal Spellman during the final election year. Trump remarked he had been going to this prestigious plutocratic gathering since he was a child, Hillary on the other hand only gained admittance later in her political career.
The other blaring item about Trump is his financing, more particular his Casino empire. There's a lot of theories around casino's and CIA money laundering, made even more suspicious by the fact Trump's bankrupted Casino empire was bailed out by the Rothschild's. Additionally the banker who helped finance the deal, Wilbur Ross is now Trump's Secretary of Commerce. Then there's the Goldman Sachs bankers as his Treasury Secretaries. Then there's David Rockefeller's Council on Foreign Relations(CFR) who're a continuity in Trump's administration. Then there's the pedophile, human trafficker and power black mailer Jeffrey Epstein who was for a time Trump's next door neighbor and socialite at Trump's Mar-a-Lago. A number of Trump's associates and administration have tie backs to Epstein and have aided the convicted pedophile from doing hard time.
There is a predominant theory called kleptocracy. However the modified version is they're all under the thumb of the Global establishment, which has the power to destroy them at will. It's my staunch belief a serious federal candidate, will never be organic or "anti-establishment".
(&)
(&)
Technology is a powerful tool, however when its plutocracy versus the unorganized masses, hands down there is no competition. The other blatant thing with technology is its overt usurious effects on the male mind. Gaming is the most obvious example, with the ungodly amount of hours men on average spend virtually masturbating the competitive instinct in a digitized environment run by gaming monopolies.
The other item which is a historical favourite of the CIA, the induction of drugs to lobotomize the public. Literal hard drugs and on the other end, the digitized variant as well, being pornography, gaming and social media. All inflict the same addictive responses in the brain in a more macro phenomena called "Gamification". An item more blatantly seen in China with the user credit system. The other comical item of China's censorship and monitoring apparatus, a large part of it was built by Western corporations. Hell, they're already priming the kids here for it too, "AI detection of pre-crime" in the form of a program called "Hawkeye" and all that jazz.
(Quotes continued)
If I recall correctly, there's an thousand fold ROI for companies to bribe federal institutions and their officials. Its extremely problematic when those corrupt institutions have broad regulatory powers over a market. In terms of social stability and the protection of commerce, is the government necessary? Arguably yes, however the problem arises discerning where these protections should start and sharply end. At a ground level you mention police, ambulance services, however the second is already a largely and successfully privatized market in several western countries. Police forces can also be privatized as well, and they're remarkably cheaper then the inferior cost/production of unionized workers. In countries such as South Africa the private security market dwarfs their government military, obvious implication being the government provided security forces are not effective, though admittedly there is a major racial compenent to this, and gaps in security coverage can be common.
The second item which most are ignorant in the West, monopolies are created on purpose to protect globalist population control schemes. Namely in the West being Eugenics/Dysgenics and population reduction. Rockefeller got the ball rolling with monopolization of the North American medical markets in the early 1900s. The Rockefeller Foundation even created the Nazi German equivalent by gifting them close to a billion dollars with the Carnegie Foundation, which resulted in the Kaiser Wilhem Institute. Feminism in this branch is a brilliant depopulation scheme based on the blow back mechanics of "alpha widowing", mass emasculation of the male population through television and internet programming, and including the reversion of economic income as a way siphon off trade in the sexual market. Social media and dating apps are also chiefly responsible for augmenting the sexual market for women, including the freely available modes for abortion. The other need of the medical cartel is the extraction of biometric data, which is worth a fortune. Census data is a huge and absolutely required tool in population control, population programming and in creating and forecasting population movement in a number of fields.
If you look into The Rockefeller Foundation alone you will find them balls deep in Genomics, CRISPER, Cold Springs Laboratory, pharmaceuticals, etc. In Canada cypto-Eugenicists have some of the highest science awards, ie one Bartha Maria Knoppers herself called herself a Eugenicist while giving the coveted annual Galton Lecture at the original Eugenics, British society, the Galton Institute. You will also notice, if you watch the video she preaches of the want of the destigmatization of Eugenics, with a back drop of Babylon in the background. Second item, she's the chair of genomics at McGill University in Canada, has an Order of Canada.
JamesSkepp 5y ago
I know, I had a list of his cabinet people and their connections to the big money, corporations and agencies. That being said, Trump's supporters did game the system when it comes to the internet part and he clearly "won" the internet campaign going against MSM on and off the internet.
The more I read about this (serious books, not blogs), the more I'm convinced that "global elite" is inevitable result of the number of humans we have on the planet. And since each individual human has his own interest in mind, why should that be different for the elites? They simply operate on bigger scales, but the underlying mechanism is the same, hierarchy and selfishness.
Very probable, but then again it's also very improbable that any serious candidate that has unpopular beliefs will ever get elected either. So the choice is limited from the start. Yield to establishment or yield to populism. Trump is, perhaps, middle line.
That's why there's RP mindset. "Go out" and get stronger mentally and physically by challenging yourself. The solution is not to blame and reject technology for making weak men, the solution is to recognize that technology is necessary and we need to play our masculinity with it, not against it.
With 1,5 bn people they had a choice to make. Liberalize like West and let people choose their own government or tighten control and stay in power. What would you chose?
Any who, pry tell, intervenes and sets up rules for privatize police forces? Could it be... state? At some level there has to be outside, impartial mediator and rule enforcer. Arguably, state is not impartial as it protects it's own interests first, but it does protect one citizen form the other. At that level state is necessary.
That's the "also" reason. Most monopolies are created with the purpose to make money, there's relatively few companies big enough that can influence global markets. While we're at it, guess who breaks down monopolies? State.
Eugenics got a bad rap in the late 19th and early 20th century. In itself the goal is to make a better human, they just went about it with very questionable methods. Now that we have gene editing and first designer baby is out, so to speak, it will get normalized and that's a good thing.
I'll skip population reduction b/c it's a conspiracy theory with no real arguments behind it.
Yakatonker 5y ago
Part ii
Two kinds of people fear this outcome, the old and the weak. While there is an argument for the comforts of modern "civilization", the system turns those people into slaves on a never ending hedonistic treadmill. Most people are so inured with the system they cannot perceive life without it, I'm certainly not that naive to leave myself a dependent of it. If that disaster came, I can live the remainder of my life in relative peace.
Rome is the best theory for the origins of the ruling establishment. The European bloodlines all seem to trace well until the later end of the 900sAD, including the more popularized bankers of 1500s Italy. It would also interest people to know the Knights Templar were the first pan European bankers, and that the Knights of Malta also took over the task when Rome turned on the Templar's. The other item, its highly suspect the Jesuits are the continuity of the Knights Templar. In this line of thought, it would be unsurprising if one were to find the majority of prominent American plutocrats having trained at Jesuit institutions or that such academies can be found globally, which they are. Trump for example was trained at Fordham University, which schools are blatantly infested with "social justice". Clinton's were trained at Georgetown University, which is also a Jesuit institution.
The other curiosity with the Jesuits is their habit of assassinating sitting Popes. Popularized around the tumult of their ban in the 1773 by Pope Clement XIV who was poisoned by them with a date, his favourite food item. The Jesuits were unsurprisingly restored by Napoleon in 1814 after he took Pope Pius VII hostage.
If you research you'll find Rome had largely consolidated power over Europe, further more Protestantism may have likely have been one of their earliest macro social economic deployments of the Hegelian Dialectic.
JamesSkepp 5y ago
You forgot the people who have a problem with elites wanting to depopulate planet. So you're either for a "global catastrophe" or against "depopulation by NWO".
You can do it even now, move into deep woods, no electricity, no mobile, no car, no roads and so on. Come one now, commit to doing it, otherwise one might think you're old or weak.
Obediah_Stane 5y ago
I agree with you on your assessment of government. I guess something like the American Revolution won't ever happen again in this age, since it's too interconnected and life is too easy now. People are comfortable in the world they are in. Government is a necessary evil unfortunately. Anarchy would be worse.
​
Edit: The thing is, the State is just a bunch of people. People who are undoubtedly in it for themselves though. It's almost impossible to get everyone on board with a collective colossal effort, but it's been done before.
Nergaal 5y ago
Unmitigated migration, will lead to dissolution of principles that made the West the leading culture of the world peace. Once that happens, mankind will devolve into its natural state, the state of war.
Yakatonker 5y ago
"leading culture of the world peace"
What gives the West its power is the construct of its global economic apparatus, which centralizes power in Europe. The knowledge base which construes this didn't even originate from Europe, but more from the cradle of civilization in the Mediterranean. Something that becomes apparent when studying The Royal Society or Isaac Newton.
What's occurring today is more about World Empire then it is about nationalism, nations. In order to lay the ground work of a Global Empire, so to must blood flow and anchor, which is why they're subsidizing mass migration into the West.
Wolveryn 5y ago
This is the kind of thing I think regularly... we're slowly nearing a scenario where chaos and anarchy presents better odds for a better outcome all things considered.
I think it will be the next generation though that will initiate it... when the middle class is long since dead and most of the population is fighting for survival... we're really not far from this.
Yakatonker 5y ago
What we're seeing is very plainly the Hegelian Dialectic.
Mass migration(subsidized), baited desire for government to control migration, plus a gestapo to remove people from the country = Advanced technocratic power to control people.
Chris Christie spoke at a CFR forum in 2016, he plainly advocated a massive biometric tracking system, not just for illegals, legal migrants but all Americans. Its not enough people are slaves, they have to desire it. This is why they're the masters of the Hegelian Dialectic.
Its also why I've completely tuned out of the MSM and the fake counter "alt-media", because its so clear they're playing the same dynamo to achieve the same result in social programming.
Wolveryn 5y ago
What’s the solution? Enjoy the decline? Worry about yourself so your retire early on a tropical island, with a weed crop for your spliffs? (That’s kind of my goal)
Jfc_Manners 5y ago
Mindfulness has helped me a lot. I remind myself that everybody behind the scenes is also mortal, and they also die. Nobody is truly in control, although some are transiently more in control than others. The world is chaos and pain, and that applies to your enemies just as much as it does to you.
Working on yourself emotionally, socially, physically, and so on that you find life bearable, meaningful, and worthy is the starting point. Along the way you may end up with opportunities to do even better than just resigned indifference, and if so, you are exceptionally lucky. But don't count on it.
Wolveryn 5y ago
Good way to look at it... I think I’ll borrow from that
Skyhawk_And_Skyhead 5y ago
Pretty much. Many will say that going against the tide and implementing a new social order is alpha. You must ask "who pays for it, and what's the price. The answer will most likely be "you, and your life and/or livleyhood"
haroldpeters 5y ago
we have similar goals! haha
Satou4 5y ago
How do you propose men "put their foot down?"
When a man does that on the societal level, all he gets in return is hate mail.
omartrs 5y ago
How about you write something that doesn't get repeated every week?
DownyGall 5y ago
And it’s not even written well lol
[deleted]
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
Obediah_Stane 5y ago
You mean like books, stories, and the such?
[deleted]
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
Obediah_Stane 5y ago
I completely agree, thanks for the input. My idealism got carried away a bit.
rebelde_sin_causa 5y ago
I dunno, this is demonstrably and objectively the best time there has ever been to be alive, so it's hard to say what has declined
it may be that various moral beliefs or customs of yours or mine are not being adhered to, but that has been true throughout history that somebody's were or weren't
and maybe the decline of the family unit and mass immigration will destroy society as we know it, but it hasn't happened yet
throughout history, there is never a shortage of people saying we are in decline, or complaining about the younger generation, but usually they turn out to be wrong
ReefaShark 5y ago
Masculinity. Where in your head are people complaining about literacy rates or the wealth of the west? It’s like you want to have an entirely different conversation.
rebelde_sin_causa 5y ago
my masculinity is doing fine, if some other guys are simps or what have you, I don't really care, it's nothing to do with me
ReefaShark 5y ago
Hey look everyone, this guy gets laid.
No one asked about your masculinity, the conversation is about the broad decline of masculinity in the west, I’m not spelling any more of this out for you alpha cool guy.
Nicolas0631 5y ago
This view is to me simplistic. It assume there actually a problem worth to be solved from the point of view of the elite, the alpha.
If you are actualy part of this elite you don't have at all the same needs, objectives and way of thinking than the common men.
Actually I think true people in power are quite different than that. They learned to understand the world how it is actually, to stop renting about what they don't like and on the contrary to embrace it and use for their own interrest. That why they manage to grab, grow and maintain their power.
I'd advise to take the knowledge for what it is and use it to grow. Trying to put the fault on the majority of men or men in power without giving them an actual reason to change the situation is bound to fail.
RedUtopia 5y ago
Does that mean it is our fault as well because we choose to "enjoy the decline"? Doesn't knowing TRP gives us some responsibility in the West because we are aware of the root causes and how it all works? How can it be truly men's fault when these blue-pilled men are just doing what they think is right and what is best for the world? Since we preach masculinity here, isn't going out of your way to save something such as our society today a masculine trait?
logicalthinker1 5y ago
Yeah it does.
You can either be selfish and exploit the decline or strive to fix it. Both are defensible positions and goals.
[deleted] 5y ago
Yes, it is our responsibility too. The bluepilled, as you said, think they're doing the right thing. Stronger men need to take responsibility and help fix this shit.
HumanSockPuppet 5y ago
Help fix this shit for whose benefit? A bunch of nancy anti-masculine faggots who can't even get their own asses to the gym? They'll happily spit on you while you toil in vain to make the world a better place for them.
The world eats self-sacrificing heroes for breakfast, junior. Lose this "save the world" shit and focus on saving yourself.
Jfc_Manners 5y ago
For our own benefit, of course. We could make like the post-Roman Europeans and carve out tiny little fiefdoms for ourselves and slowly stitch it all together again. Admit it, it sounds fun, even if we're likely poorly suited for it.
HumanSockPuppet 5y ago
You're using a bucket to bail out the Titanic. Western civilization is accelerating towards a collapse faster than you can steer it onto a safe path. Even if, by some miracle of human charity, every Red Pill-aware man acted to reverse this process, there wouldn't be enough of us to stop it.
The basic problem is one of perverse incentives. Social policy has been tilted to favour value-sappers over value-generators. This has occurred in both formal social policy (e.g. laws) and in informal attitudes communicated via various media platforms (and becomes a part of the zeitgeist).
Moreover, this phenomenon is not unique, not in time or in place. This is a vulnerability inherent to civilization. It occurs in every civilization as part of a cycle. To date, no human has discovered a way to stop it from occurring, and it is likely that no human ever will, because the root cause of the problem resides in the human genetic blueprint. We're built for opportunism at the expense of outgroup members.
Don't be a sucker. Live for yourself, and to the scope of the sphere of events and interests over which you have control. Anything more is futile.
Jfc_Manners 5y ago
Uhhh...are you sure you meant to reply to my post? Because I literally advocated for becoming post-apocalyptic warlords for the lulz
Obediah_Stane 5y ago
I admit my post was a bit idealistic in the way that I want everyone to come together and fix society for the benefit of all, but I forgot to take into account a huge factor: No one else will care what you do since they are only worried about themselves and will happily crucify you to save themselves. Good point. A good extra dose of red pill is needed every now and then.
[deleted] 5y ago
Didn't think of it that way tbh. You're right. These betas who cry "toxic masculinity" will never appreciate when masculinity benefits them.
HumanSockPuppet 5y ago
There you have it. Fagballed proto-men want to wear skinny jeans and get the best price for kale at Whole Foods. They've got nothing to do with us.
Remember, TRP is just a toolbox for taking back control of your own life and doing what you want to do with your own time and sweat. That's it.
This is why TRP isn't a movement.
Movements consist of groups of people who all want the same general outcome (increasing worker pay, voting privileges, legalized marriage between people of different religious faiths, etc.).
You and I probably don't want to accomplish the same things with our lives, so there's no central cause for us to rally behind. It's just you doing your thing, and me doing mine. We may cooperate if our interests intersect and we strike a bargain, but for the most part we leave each other alone.
TRP can only Incidentally save society when enough men say "no more" and take back their lives and productivity for themselves.
The_Noble_Lie 5y ago
You can contribute a digital blueprint and action plan for the project of your life for others to learn, adapt, and perhaps choose to follow as well.
HumanSockPuppet 5y ago
Every building has a different blueprint.
We don't prescribe building this type of building or that. Here, we teach architecture.
The_Noble_Lie 5y ago
Thats true. Which is why I wrote it in such a way that "perhaps some will follow". This is because some are not introspective enough or care to be, to make their own blueprints. But regardless seeing someones blueprints...many people's blueprints ... helps one form their own. Its how humanity works. Standing on the shoulders of giants. Its why we can gain from learning from learning from mentirs and "field reports" here. Im more about "life reports" though which is essentially what I was asking for.
But I appreciate the meta architecture symbolism and acknowledge that every one inevitably should have their own path, albeit cognizant of followers.
NolanKnowstheTruth 5y ago
Factually true I guess, when you consider it was men (BP) that allowed women to vote, which created a further BP political landscape etc. So i guess that you are correct men did create the situation we are in. The good news is we (RP) are close by to bail out humanity.
AutoModerator 5y ago
Just a friendly reminder that as TRP has been quarantined, we have developed backup sites: https://www.trp.red and our full post archive (and future forums) https://www.forums.red/i/TheRedPill. Don't forget to register on TRP.RED and reserve your reddit name today. Forums.Red is currently locked but will be opened soon.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
KewlThanks 5y ago
When the west goes, any hope goes.
So despite this, I will fuck bitches, but am outspoken for family values and virtues, making a rebellious badass somehow in today's fucked up world.
Why? Because I have hope.
"And hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things."
[deleted]
0kool74 5y ago
Yes but Shawshank Redemption was only a movie.
KewlThanks 5y ago
oh sorry didn't know hope was a bad thing, and maybe the worst of things.
magx01 5y ago
You disproved your own point in the first paragraph.
[deleted]
[deleted]
maljo24 5y ago
Throughout history men in power caused endless war and destruction. Violent crime has fallen in half in the last 25 years, humans are better off than at any time in the history of our species, most economies are doing well. Feminism and liberalism are highly successful. There is no decline in civilization. Men - especially young men - are the criminals on our planet. We need more women in positions of power because the are less aggressive.
Razkolol 5y ago
Feminism and liberalism breeds subhuman males. Masculinity created this civilization, 99.99% of everything that was ever invented was done by one those « young criminal males ». If it weren’t for them we would still be living in caveman days. Female leadership will always have sujective decision-making, look at all the fortune 500 companies that had female ceos, compare their stock price to before. A feminized society is a weak society, killing west masculinity will only give eastern countries more and more power, why would you want your western men with 0 courage and power while their eastern counterparts are 100% in control? Do you think any of those feminized men will defend their women/daughters/home/borders? Or they will just flee and let the empowered women deal with it? I’m not even going to start on natality in western countries, this ideology is plain sad and will be the downfall of the west.
mintylove 5y ago
That's why suicide rates are through the roof, middle schoolers are taking their own lives more than ever before and a good chunk of young people, especially the "criminal young white men" are feeling demoralized and lost. Gtfoh.