Post: #1

Some of us like to think that the pussification of the Western male will self-correct, if not soon, then in a major crisis. But I'm not so sure. It looks like having a feminised population of drones is a very sustainable model for economies and nations. The men, stunted and neutered, pay their taxes and work in their cubicles to appease their womenfolk, who themselves pay taxes and buy consumer goods. All to the advantage of the ultimate alpha males, the top 1% who actually own America and the capital in this world.

If you think America is on the way out because of this, think again. Look at its competitors. China is going to see female power due to the major imbalance in the sex ratios. Women are treated like princesses there and the men work harder than ever to get the money to marry. India, a rising economic power, is a nation of the most white-knighting males on earth. And even a rising star like Brazil is succumbing to the doctrines of feminism.

The betaisation of the male is not a cancer that is rotting the economic power of nations. For those at the top of the pyramid, it works. And it will continue to work. While in places like Africa, alpha males can be as alpha as they like, with traditional behaviour up to and including multiple wives. This model of human development has been superseded by the the model of empowered females and stoop-shouldered beta males all working to enrich the apex individuals - the social, political and financial global elite - who have taken the red pill but sell the blue pill.

Post: #2

Agree with most of it except the last part.

The blue pill sellers really do believe in their product. Alpha males in game terms, and alphas in economic terms, are not the same thing; if anything, they do not even overlap that much.

Post: #3

Yeah, I'm in China right now, teaching children, and being real? Girls have the same amount of shots, but the boys are still #1; most families would rather have a boy.

Post: #4

You contradict yourself.

Either it's a sustainable model or it is 'rotting the economic power of nations'. Can't be both.

While it's an undesirable cultural trend the numbers show that female empowerment and the proletarisation of the middle classes greatly boosts economies in the short/medium terms. That's why it's a relentless trend: the economic imperative is there. Getting women in the workforce makes economic sense.

The problem with most discourse is that the economy is deified at expense of all else. If it's good for the economy it must be good, period.

It's a Soviet-style worship of productivity and economic growth with reckless disregard for the knock-on effects. Little thought is given to the cultural and environmental effects of that growth, whether its sustainable or not.

Post: #5

(06-12-2012 10:09 AM)Caligula Wrote:  You contradict yourself.

Either it's a sustainable model or it is 'rotting the economic power of nations'. Can't be both.

period.

Try reading my post again. You'll notice I said "not rotting the economic power of nations".
Period.

Post: #6

IMHO feminism is here to stay and will remain forever. While it will cause unhappiness people are generally not smart enough to live for themselves. A sad truth.

The second reason I believe it will stay is while the manosphere is trying to help, this is similar to trying to convince a friend to take the red pill, you'll get 9 people lash out at you for every 1 that is open. Instead of trying to fix a broken system, why don't we figure out which nation is last to go? I have my own theories on future cities but I'm trying to project ~8 years out which is tough.

Post: #7

(06-12-2012 10:15 AM)RawGod Wrote:  

(06-12-2012 10:09 AM)Caligula Wrote:  You contradict yourself.

Either it's a sustainable model or it is 'rotting the economic power of nations'. Can't be both.

period.

Try reading my post again. You'll notice I said "not rotting the economic power of nations".
Period.

My bad. In the end it's the economic impetus that drives these changes. It's not some grand conspiracy.

Post: #8

(06-12-2012 10:26 AM)Caligula Wrote:  

(06-12-2012 10:15 AM)RawGod Wrote:  

(06-12-2012 10:09 AM)Caligula Wrote:  You contradict yourself.

Either it's a sustainable model or it is 'rotting the economic power of nations'. Can't be both.

period.

Try reading my post again. You'll notice I said "not rotting the economic power of nations".
Period.

My bad. In the end it's the economic impetus that drives these changes. It's not some grand conspiracy.

I agree. But the end result is the same - the economic currents favor a small elite. It's not a secret cabal, but simply the true upper class - the owners of capital, and their cronies in politics, academia and media.

Post: #9

(06-12-2012 10:41 AM)RawGod Wrote:  the economic currents favor a small elite.

Economic current, or just political cronyism? The largest indicator is, does a "small elite" remain the same generation to generation, with a hereditary class of rich?

In Japan where you live, it appears political cronyism.The same families hold control generation to generation. In the USA, where whole industries are rendered obsolete, it appears no. Look at the 400 richest people in the USA. There's about a 10% change year to year, must less generation to generation.

Post: #10

I'm in the camp that believes the 'beta' society will end when it comes to a crisis point. In my opinion it is inevitable.

Women will follow whatever guy/political strain is most dominant.
Weaker men will always be replaced by stronger ones.

When saying that 'something is here forever,' take into account that nothing anywhere in the biological universe lasts forever.
Humanity is not very old, but it is older than civilisation by hundreds of thousands of years. Western ideals are again only a fraction of that amount.

Post: #11

(06-12-2012 12:28 PM)Kitsune Wrote:  Women will follow whatever guy/political strain is most dominant.
Weaker men will always be replaced by stronger

This is why I believe we're fighting an uphill battle, work in big law/high finance/upper eschelon tech company. People with money will inevitably breed (women unable to settle for a poorer man). With that in mind chat up these guys and tell me of any of them have game, you have a better shot at convincing them money doesn't buy happiness. Not trying to start a pissing battle but I don't know how you get much better than a dude clearing $250K and decent looking, you need very little game at those levels. You'll see lots of unhappily married people though that is for sure and the wives will just cheat on their husbands behind their backs.

Post: #12

(06-12-2012 12:21 PM)Blackhawk Wrote:  

(06-12-2012 10:41 AM)RawGod Wrote:  the economic currents favor a small elite.

Economic current, or just political cronyism? The largest indicator is, does a "small elite" remain the same generation to generation, with a hereditary class of rich?

In Japan where you live, it appears political cronyism.The same families hold control generation to generation. In the USA, where whole industries are rendered obsolete, it appears no. Look at the 400 richest people in the USA. There's about a 10% change year to year, must less generation to generation.

It is the same in America. A few families have kept emmense wealth in there famaies for generations. They do not appear on Forbes lists or on the news.

Where are the Rockefeller's?

In 1910 's Standard Oil was worth in over a trillion dollars in today's dollars. It was broken up and even its broken up pieces (from 11 to about 6 companies) still make up most of the top 20 or largest companies (revenue) world wide today. Did The Rockefeller's money just disappear? No of course not.

In those times John D Rockefeller had almost 600 billion in net worth. Where did that money go? It did not vanish it is still there. This makes Warren Buffet and Bill gates look poor in comparison.

The Rockafeller's are above Wall Street, the media, and Washington DC.

Wait... they are Wall Street, The Media, and Washington DC. *Fixed*

How about the Rothchild's? whom had a trillion dollars in the 1900's. Nobody knows how much they have, its rumored they have more wealth then the global GDP (50 trillion), upwards of $100+ Trillion. They run shit. Period.

America's top .0001% has kept on to the mass of wealth for generations. We just don't hear about it. How can you track the earnings of somebody whom controls almost all of the earnings? You can't.

Bill Gates shines their shoes, Warren Buffet fetches their water. They both got nickles and dimes compared to the global oligarchs.

Post: #13

More likely, the global economy will collapse for reasons that have nothing to do with cultural trends. In that scenario I could see a "flight to strength" where male protection and leadership is restored to its natural role.

Post: #14

(06-12-2012 02:00 PM)kosko Wrote:  

(06-12-2012 12:21 PM)Blackhawk Wrote:  

(06-12-2012 10:41 AM)RawGod Wrote:  the economic currents favor a small elite.

Economic current, or just political cronyism? The largest indicator is, does a "small elite" remain the same generation to generation, with a hereditary class of rich?

In Japan where you live, it appears political cronyism.The same families hold control generation to generation. In the USA, where whole industries are rendered obsolete, it appears no. Look at the 400 richest people in the USA. There's about a 10% change year to year, must less generation to generation.

It is the same in America. A few families have kept emmense wealth in there famaies for generations. They do not appear on Forbes lists or on the news.

Where are the Rockefeller's?

In 1910 's Standard Oil was worth in over a trillion dollars in today's dollars. It was broken up and even its broken up pieces (from 11 to about 6 companies) still make up most of the top 20 or largest companies (revenue) world wide today. Did The Rockefeller's money just disappear? No of course not.

In those times John D Rockefeller had almost 600 billion in net worth. Where did that money go? It did not vanish it is still there. This makes Warren Buffet and Bill gates look poor in comparison.

The Rockafeller's are above Wall Street, the media, and Washington DC.

Wait... they are Wall Street, The Media, and Washington DC. *Fixed*

How about the Rothchild's? whom had a trillion dollars in the 1900's. Nobody knows how much they have, its rumored they have more wealth then the global GDP (50 trillion), upwards of $100+ Trillion. They run shit. Period.

America's top .0001% has kept on to the mass of wealth for generations. We just don't hear about it. How can you track the earnings of somebody whom controls almost all of the earnings? You can't.

Bill Gates shines their shoes, Warren Buffet fetches their water. They both got nickles and dimes compared to the global oligarchs.

I have never been able to find a source, but apparently 50% of the wealth and resources in the US is held within 12 families. The Rockerfellers being one of them.

Post: #15

In the short term, this is true. The modern liberal western system is great for short term wealth.

The catch, of course, is that it actually isn't sustainable at all over the long term, and it in fact leads to early death. The most liberal and heavily betafied societies on the planet are also the ones with the lowest chances of long term survival. They have their own killswitch built right in-they do not replace themselves. Most of these western societies (East Asia + nearly all of Europe) have already descended to fertility rates beyond which no culture/society has ever properly recovered from. They are certain to either die out, change significantly (beyond recognition with what we see now) or be simply pushed aside and marginalized-it is no longer a matter of "if", but rather only a matter of when this will occur. Our world is going to look very interesting come the latter half of this century.

Athens and Rome got here long ago and had the same symptoms that we now see in the modern west. The same was true of Babylon and Sparta, as well as many others. Our modern western societies will, for the most part, share in their fate. Those who, via their lifestyle, mannerisms and other traits, most strongly embody and propagate the trends you're concerned about are simply not going to be left standing when the next couple of generational chips fall. Their ideological opposites (both within their societies and in the developing world), on the other hand, are set to create and to raise the vast majority (75% at current projected fertility levels) of the next generation, and to retain many more of those children within their culture than they've historically done.

The future belongs to those who reproduce, and they are dead set on not doing so.

Post: #16

This whole "Betas are bad" thing is really starting to go Brave New World, with its Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons.

Every society needs multiple castes of people to survive. I think of The Breakfast Club with the intellect focused kid who failed shop class. Knowing calculus is nice, but you also need people who can build lamps that work. Otherwise everyone lives in the dark.

The idea that we could have an Alpha-only civilization is extremely questionable. Who would be happy cleaning hotel rooms or mopping toilets? Certainly not your Alphas. They consider themselves above such things. And as creatures of the mind, they tend not to be very successful at skilled labor, or physical labor at all.

Why no love for the Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons? All castes have their specialties. And only by each caste doing its part do all of us keep warm and fed.

Post: #17

(06-13-2012 12:20 PM)Blackhawk Wrote:  This whole "Betas are bad" thing is really starting to go Brave New World, with its Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons.

Every society needs multiple castes of people to survive. I think of The Breakfast Club with the intellect focused kid who failed shop class. Knowing calculus is nice, but you also need people who can build lamps that work. Otherwise everyone lives in the dark.

The idea that we could have an Alpha-only civilization is extremely questionable. Who would be happy cleaning hotel rooms or mopping toilets? Certainly not your Alphas. They consider themselves above such things. And as creatures of the mind, they tend not to be very successful at skilled labor, or physical labor at all.

Why no love for the Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons? All castes have their specialties. And only by each caste doing its part do all of us keep warm and fed.

Bingo.

What gets a guy laid is that he's the exception.

A majority of men can't be the exception.

Be happy that "betas" are in surplus. The alternative is that men band together and beat, kill, or legally restrain sexual competitors.

Post: #18

"The idea that we could have an Alpha-only civilization is extremely questionable. Who would be happy cleaning hotel rooms or mopping toilets? Certainly not your Alphas. They consider themselves above such things. And as creatures of the mind, they tend not to be very successful at skilled labor, or physical labor at all."

So, what kind of work do "alphas" do? Doctors and Lawyers? Internet marketing? Not Iron working? Tree service?

@Blackhawk Who do you think is fixing and building everything?

Post: #19

(06-12-2012 10:09 AM)Caligula Wrote:  The problem with most discourse is that the economy is deified at expense of all else. If it's good for the economy it must be good, period.

It's a Soviet-style worship of productivity and economic growth with reckless disregard for the knock-on effects. Little thought is given to the cultural and environmental effects of that growth, whether its sustainable or not.

Paul Fussell is a famous historian of World War I. He also wrote a great book on class in America. Among other things, he wrote that the middle class is characterized by a deep insecurity over their station in life, so they're always trying to appropriate the icons of success. Hell, they would even apply it after death as well, via the Protestant work ethic.

Fussell's description of the middle class is an apt description of America as a whole, as compared to Europeans. We don't know how to enjoy ourselves, so we work ourselves to death in some vain attempt to prove how successful we are.

We don't know what quality of life is, so we look to socially retarded economists to measure our 'progress.' We have countless economists counting our dollars down to the last cent every which way, but hardly a professional hedonist among them, to our pleasure approval ratings. No one to see whether the decisions that enrich us are impoverishing our senses. Economics, like any field of research is biased towards the things it can measure. Anything which it can't, goes unmeasured and disregarded when it comes to making decisions.

Why care about how beautiful your people or your cities are, when you can increase GDP! Our food may be shitty, it will even make you fat, but how can you complain when it's so cheap! Anyway, that's freedom!

Post: #20

(06-14-2012 07:22 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  "The idea that we could have an Alpha-only civilization is extremely questionable. Who would be happy cleaning hotel rooms or mopping toilets? Certainly not your Alphas. They consider themselves above such things. And as creatures of the mind, they tend not to be very successful at skilled labor, or physical labor at all."

So, what kind of work do "alphas" do? Doctors and Lawyers? Internet marketing? Not Iron working? Tree service?

@Blackhawk Who do you think is fixing and building everything?

This is exactly why the Alpha talk is stupid and makes me want to punch my computer when I read some of these threads.

Post: #21

(06-14-2012 07:22 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  So, what kind of work do "alphas" do?

If you're asking "What kind of work does the Upper Class do?" the answer is "Nothing useful."

If you're asking "What kind of work do guys good at smashing women do?" the answer is "whatever the hell they want to do." But having taken the red pill, they're generally not slaving their ass away 80 hours a week seeing themselves grow old while the world passes them by. They tend to choose employment that allows time for their pleasures.

If you're asking about in the book Brave New World, IIRC they had "technical" soft hand jobs like counting how many drops from an eyedropper to apply to a particular test tube embryo. And everyone did a lot of drugs. And had zipper clothes so they could get naked quickly and have lots of sex, often.

Post: #22

(06-15-2012 01:44 AM)Blackhawk Wrote:  If you're asking "What kind of work do guys good at smashing women do?" the answer is "whatever the hell they want to do." But having taken the red pill, they're generally not slaving their ass away 80 hours a week seeing themselves grow old while the world passes them by. They tend to choose employment that allows time for their pleasures.

That's a bit shortsighted. Plenty of guys are cool, they just have ambitions they put ahead of pussy. Richard Branson is no slouch, and looks to be a cool dude too.

I'm not a hater who will fault a guy for making pussy his greatest ambition, or a guy who doesn't. The guys I have a problem with are white knights.

Post: #23

(06-15-2012 02:27 AM)basilransom Wrote:  Richard Branson is no slouch, and looks to be a cool dude too.

Newsflash, Richard Branson gets as much pussy as Gene Simmons. Well, almost.

Post: #24

(06-15-2012 01:44 AM)Blackhawk Wrote:  

(06-14-2012 07:22 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  So, what kind of work do "alphas" do?

If you're asking "What kind of work does the Upper Class do?" the answer is "Nothing useful."

If you're asking "What kind of work do guys good at smashing women do?" the answer is "whatever the hell they want to do." But having taken the red pill, they're generally not slaving their ass away 80 hours a week seeing themselves grow old while the world passes them by. They tend to choose employment that allows time for their pleasures.

If you're asking about in the book Brave New World, IIRC they had "technical" soft hand jobs like counting how many drops from an eyedropper to apply to a particular test tube embryo. And everyone did a lot of drugs. And had zipper clothes so they could get naked quickly and have lots of sex, often.

Most if not all the dudes I know who go out and kill it have no idea about a red pill or what an alpha male is. I never even heard the word beta male until I came here.
These threads always end up comparing regular guys to celebs or super rich. Most of my friends that get plenty of pussy are happy if they have beer money and smokes.

Post: #25

[/quote]
Most if not all the dudes I know who go out and kill it have no idea about a red pill...happy if they have beer money and smokes.
[/quote]

I could be dead wrong, I've been wrong about many things and I believe this is a description of a natural/non-middle class person. I grew up relatively poor but still got sucked into the "get a good job save and retire happy mode". That's pretty much what "beta" is: caring about what people think of you (a branch off being insecure). If you are happy with smokes and booze... U dont care about the opinions of others.