My general theory of politics and culture in the 21st century

[Fontaine]

Every day, the world is becoming more divided into two factions. I would go as far as to say that the world is becoming ever more divided into two worlds. The two worlds are already clashing. This clash is extremely painful to human psychology and is responsible for a lot of cases of depression or suicide; the incel predicament is one symptom among many. The conflict will continually increase until at some point in the 21st century, no sooner than 2040 but no later than 2080, a great clash ("the big event") will bring absolute, total victory to one world. The victory will either be perfectly bloodless, or a devastating carnage that will tear open the bowels of this planet: there will be no intermediate solution.

I will name them world A and world B. Below, I will list attributes and characteristics of each world. They are not necessarily interlinked; some can even be contradictory. If you think I have gone crazy, bear with me and be patient. Everything will become clear in the end.

World A: State, Nation, Law, war, family, religion, conservatism, traditionalism, nationalism, patriotism, anti-semitism, marriage, Russia, René Guénon, Codreanu, Julius Evola, Adolf Hitler, Aleksandr Dugin, Christian Orthodoxy, white nationalism, Iran, Islam, cautiouness, reluctance to change, anti-feminism, anti-capitalism, racism, racialism, hierarchy, alt-right, Richard Spencer, death, heredity, eugenics, art, soul, cemetery, military chaplain, apple pie, roast beef, chimney, wood fire, Luddism, tribunal, gallows, military service, rifle, sword.

World B: Internationalism, capitalism, technology, progressivism, pacifism, feminism, liberalism, nihilism, atheism, transhumanism, divorce, Jews, Protestants, Silicon Valley, crypto currency, stock market, the internet, cyborg, China, anti-racism, Elon Musk, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, Justin Trudeau, genetic engineering, ramen, avocado salad, electricity, self-learning, peer-to-peer networks, longevity research, cryonics, computer, drone, robot, democracy, Barack Obama, plastic surgery, emigration, atom bomb.

Well, what do you make of everything I've just brainstormed? Here are possible answers, depending on your personality:

- World A is basically conservatism, world B liberalism.
- World A is reassuring, world B scares me.
- World A is what I want, world B is what I hate.
- In both worlds there are things I want, and things I hate. Why can't we do a synthesis?

My personal opinion is that world A corresponds to applied terror management theory, while world B is basically an attempt to remove ourselves from the shackles of nature so as to end heredity, aging and death.

I am also utterly convinced that no synthesis is possible, even if it appears wishable. Psychological suffering will thus continue. We are stuck in an antebellum period where world A and world B will continually face each other without coming to a permanent resolution, before at least two decades more.

If you have any question, I'd be glad to answer them.

 

[Unwanted]

Who will win in your opinion?

 

[Jockcel]

Nobody here cares about politics, mate. We have far more immediate and serious problems to deal with.

 

[Fontaine]

Who will win in your opinion?

I have absolutely no idea; but I do know one world will permanently defeat the other in this century.

It will heavily depend on whether a human mind and consciousness can be replicated on a synthetic, abiological substrate.

 

[Jockcel]

Who will win in your opinion?

Da Jooz.

 

[Fontaine]

Nobody here cares about politics, mate. We have far more immediate and serious problems to deal with.

The incel problem is directly linked to what I am exposing. We suffer because we were born in this antebellum period.

 

[theoldnick]

A

+1

 

[NeiboltStreet]

Every day, the world is becoming more divided into two factions. I would go as far as to say that the world is becoming ever more divided into two worlds. The two worlds are already clashing. This clash is extremely painful to human psychology and is responsible for a lot of cases of depression or suicide; the incel predicament is one symptom among many. The conflict will continually increase until at some point in the 21st century, no sooner than 2040 but no later than 2080, a great clash ("the big event") will bring absolute, total victory to one world. The victory will either be perfectly bloodless, or a devastating carnage that will tear open the bowels of this planet: there will be no intermediate solution.

I will name them world A and world B. Below, I will list attributes and characteristics of each world. They are not necessarily interlinked; some can even be contradictory. If you think I have gone crazy, bear with me and be patient. Everything will become clear in the end.

World A: State, Nation, Law, war, family, religion, conservatism, traditionalism, nationalism, patriotism, anti-semitism, marriage, Russia, René Guénon, Codreanu, Julius Evola, Adolf Hitler, Aleksandr Dugin, Christian Orthodoxy, white nationalism, Iran, Islam, cautiouness, reluctance to change, anti-feminism, anti-capitalism, racism, racialism, hierarchy, alt-right, Richard Spencer, death, heredity, eugenics, art, soul, cemetery, military chaplain, apple pie, roast beef, chimney, wood fire, Luddism, tribunal, gallows, military service, rifle, sword.

World B: Internationalism, capitalism, technology, progressivism, pacifism, feminism, liberalism, nihilism, atheism, transhumanism, divorce, Jews, Protestants, Silicon Valley, crypto currency, stock market, the internet, cyborg, China, anti-racism, Elon Musk, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, Justin Trudeau, genetic engineering, ramen, avocado salad, electricity, self-learning, peer-to-peer networks, longevity research, cryonics, computer, drone, robot, democracy, Barack Obama, plastic surgery, emigration.

Well, what do you make of everything I've just brainstormed? Here are possible answers, depending on your personality:

- World A is basically conservatism, world B liberalism.
- World A is reassuring, world B scares me.
- World A is what I want, world B is what I hate.
- In both worlds there are things I want, and things I hate. Why can't we do a synthesis?

My personal opinion is that world A corresponds to applied terror management theory, while world B is basically an attempt to remove ourselves from the shackles of nature so as to end heredity, aging and death.

I am also utterly convinced that no synthesis is possible, even if it appears wishable. Psychological suffering will thus continue. We are stuck in an antebellum period where world A and world B will continually face each other without coming to a permanent resolution, before at least three decades more.

If you have any question, I'd be glad to answer them.

Einstein IQ level

 

[Jockcel]

The incel problem is directly linked to what I am exposing. We suffer because we were born in this antebellum period.

I fully agree, but there is nothing we can do about it.

 

[Unwanted]

I have absolutely no idea; but I do know one world will permanently defeat the other in this century.

It will heavily depend on whether a human mind and consciousness can be replicated on a synthetic, abiological substrate.

I think World B will certainly win.

The only question is when, but it will certainly happen. If not in this century then in a couple of centuries for sure.

 

[Jockcel]

I think World B will certainly win.

The only question is when, but it will certainly happen. If not in this century then in a couple of centuries for sure.

World B already won, see World War 2.

 

[Deleted member 5861]

World B already won, see World War 2.

Well we may be heading towards world war 3. Settle it once and for all, there is too much opposition to world B for it to already have been settled. Just look at all the rising far right parties in Europe.

Einstein IQ OP.

 

[San Salvador]

I like your predictions; it's very nice that civilisation will crash and that we will be able to rebuild a new one.

Every day, the world is becoming more divided into two factions. I would go as far as to say that the world is becoming ever more divided into two worlds. The two worlds are already clashing. This clash is extremely painful to human psychology and is responsible for a lot of cases of depression or suicide; the incel predicament is one symptom among many. The conflict will continually increase until at some point in the 21st century, no sooner than 2040 but no later than 2080, a great clash ("the big event") will bring absolute, total victory to one world. The victory will either be perfectly bloodless, or a devastating carnage that will tear open the bowels of this planet: there will be no intermediate solution.

I will name them world A and world B. Below, I will list attributes and characteristics of each world. They are not necessarily interlinked; some can even be contradictory. If you think I have gone crazy, bear with me and be patient. Everything will become clear in the end.

World A: State, Nation, Law, war, family, religion, conservatism, traditionalism, nationalism, patriotism, anti-semitism, marriage, Russia, René Guénon, Codreanu, Julius Evola, Adolf Hitler, Aleksandr Dugin, Christian Orthodoxy, white nationalism, Iran, Islam, cautiouness, reluctance to change, anti-feminism, anti-capitalism, racism, racialism, hierarchy, alt-right, Richard Spencer, death, heredity, eugenics, art, soul, cemetery, military chaplain, apple pie, roast beef, chimney, wood fire, Luddism, tribunal, gallows, military service, rifle, sword.

World B: Internationalism, capitalism, technology, progressivism, pacifism, feminism, liberalism, nihilism, atheism, transhumanism, divorce, Jews, Protestants, Silicon Valley, crypto currency, stock market, the internet, cyborg, China, anti-racism, Elon Musk, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, Justin Trudeau, genetic engineering, ramen, avocado salad, electricity, self-learning, peer-to-peer networks, longevity research, cryonics, computer, drone, robot, democracy, Barack Obama, plastic surgery, emigration.

Well, what do you make of everything I've just brainstormed? Here are possible answers, depending on your personality:

- World A is basically conservatism, world B liberalism.
- World A is reassuring, world B scares me.
- World A is what I want, world B is what I hate.
- In both worlds there are things I want, and things I hate. Why can't we do a synthesis?

My personal opinion is that world A corresponds to applied terror management theory, while world B is basically an attempt to remove ourselves from the shackles of nature so as to end heredity, aging and death.

I am also utterly convinced that no synthesis is possible, even if it appears wishable. Psychological suffering will thus continue. We are stuck in an antebellum period where world A and world B will continually face each other without coming to a permanent resolution, before at least three decades more.

If you have any question, I'd be glad to answer them.

Also, why is fucking Luddism a part of world A? I'm pretty sure that right wingers don't want to destroy machines and technology.

 

[Gepard]

Stratospheric IQ

 

[Fontaine]

I fully agree, but there is nothing we can do about it.

Oh, yes, there are things we can do. Understanding the situation will bring the possibility of psychological resignation, and the virtue of patience. From there, we can improve our lives through several behaviors:

- Not reading or watching the news anymore, for nothing is ever going to change until several decades: no politician is ever going to revert this trend. Donald Trump will fail, and has already failed. His successors will be equally powerless to do anything about the march of the 21st century. World B will continue to grow at the expense of world A until the decisive clash happens (a clash that will be fully technological or military, and not cultural or political). I will make sure to necrobump my thread at every end of an US presidential tenure to put my point across.

- Not supporting any political party anymore, and not getting emotionally invested in elections. (You are free to vote, but it will have a nil. impact).

- Developing high-quality copes and focusing on yourself, free from the shackles of a political altruism that is actually ineffective terror management.

World B already won, see World War 2.

It was the first decisive battle won by World B. It was unexpected and quite spectacular, to be frank. In 1942, everybody, and I mean everybody, expected Nazi Germany to win the war.

However, winning a decisive battle is not winning a war. It is very much possible that the 22nd century will see the rise of a neofascism directly modeled after Hitler's dream, in case world B fails in the battle to end all battles.

Also, why is fucking Luddism a part of world A? I'm pretty sure that right wingers don't want to destroy machines and technology.

Fake right wingers who are actually left wingers, like Donald Trump or Ron Paul, don't. Actual right wingers (the kind who like Putin) tend to become ever more against technology, for they have finally realized that technology and progressivism are inextricably linked. For instance, the firearm gave the final blow to feudality, and the atom bomb the final blow to nationalism.

 

[FoidsDeserveCancer]

Every day, the world is becoming more divided into two factions. I would go as far as to say that the world is becoming ever more divided into two worlds. The two worlds are already clashing. This clash is extremely painful to human psychology and is responsible for a lot of cases of depression or suicide; the incel predicament is one symptom among many. The conflict will continually increase until at some point in the 21st century, no sooner than 2040 but no later than 2080, a great clash ("the big event") will bring absolute, total victory to one world. The victory will either be perfectly bloodless, or a devastating carnage that will tear open the bowels of this planet: there will be no intermediate solution.

I will name them world A and world B. Below, I will list attributes and characteristics of each world. They are not necessarily interlinked; some can even be contradictory. If you think I have gone crazy, bear with me and be patient. Everything will become clear in the end.

World A: State, Nation, Law, war, family, religion, conservatism, traditionalism, nationalism, patriotism, anti-semitism, marriage, Russia, René Guénon, Codreanu, Julius Evola, Adolf Hitler, Aleksandr Dugin, Christian Orthodoxy, white nationalism, Iran, Islam, cautiouness, reluctance to change, anti-feminism, anti-capitalism, racism, racialism, hierarchy, alt-right, Richard Spencer, death, heredity, eugenics, art, soul, cemetery, military chaplain, apple pie, roast beef, chimney, wood fire, Luddism, tribunal, gallows, military service, rifle, sword.

World B: Internationalism, capitalism, technology, progressivism, pacifism, feminism, liberalism, nihilism, atheism, transhumanism, divorce, Jews, Protestants, Silicon Valley, crypto currency, stock market, the internet, cyborg, China, anti-racism, Elon Musk, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, Justin Trudeau, genetic engineering, ramen, avocado salad, electricity, self-learning, peer-to-peer networks, longevity research, cryonics, computer, drone, robot, democracy, Barack Obama, plastic surgery, emigration, atom bomb.

Well, what do you make of everything I've just brainstormed? Here are possible answers, depending on your personality:

- World A is basically conservatism, world B liberalism.
- World A is reassuring, world B scares me.
- World A is what I want, world B is what I hate.
- In both worlds there are things I want, and things I hate. Why can't we do a synthesis?

My personal opinion is that world A corresponds to applied terror management theory, while world B is basically an attempt to remove ourselves from the shackles of nature so as to end heredity, aging and death.

I am also utterly convinced that no synthesis is possible, even if it appears wishable. Psychological suffering will thus continue. We are stuck in an antebellum period where world A and world B will continually face each other without coming to a permanent resolution, before at least three decades more.

If you have any question, I'd be glad to answer them.

I disagree with this post. I'm an incel but my cope is the fact that I'm a banker who is invested in Silicon Valley and cyber technology. I love capitalism and keynesian economics to boost stocks. I feel like under a traditional society looks would be even more important than now since we couldn't cope with these things.

 

[Solitarian_Walker]

Jews are getting ready to enact their final masterplan.

 

[Gyros_Pretcel]

I am not a big fan of this whole "left", right dichotomy, but I know it is the prevalent view.

I agree to A, but B are just the advanced means of control and replaced what used to be A. Liberal feudalism 2.0 if you will.

There is no real contradiction between the good of A (or B as well) and real leftism. (Abandoning of the privat ownership of the means of prodcuction and extension of democratic or republic principle to the economic sector and implementation of equal opportunity), Most todays (and past) problems stem from exploitation of human nature through accumulation and political use of money. If you are familiar with the Libertarian principles and add the idea that money is power and mighty persons or corporations can leverage it against the lifes of the unfortunate and accept the idea that you shouldn't own the nature given earth or it's products therefore and that you cannot buy infinite happiness anyway, congrats you are a real leftist (not a social democratic liberal capitalism rescue parachute).

I don't think Incels had it that much better in old times, if you substract the symptoms of "female degeneracy", but these don't have to be a part of a real educated advanced society and we don't need to rely on religion for this as well, this would only lead to manipulation sooner or later again (nothing wrong to have a faith though).

You all will burn your fingers on a real collaps as well. Read about historic events or watch some videos abut current wars. I know a lot of people have a pretty romantic view of this kind of situation.

If A wins the loop will close and the struggle will start again until we go to B again and over and over or we learn of the third solution C and we avoid the rise to power through money no matter if feudalist, or oligarchic, call it the Jews if you want, but there are many more of those people out there. Take the Yellow Pill.

Endgame for the west will be Japan, Brazil or a Near Eastern style uprising.

I like you (and most of the other guys here) and I hope your dislike of politics stems from a real deep understanding of it and not only some alt-right edginess. Yes our chances to change anything are low but politics are everything. I know I won't convince anyone with my pitty words here but maybe I can show you a third option and if you are curious you might educate yourself on the topic.

TL;DR A is cope, B is cope too. And the pendulum will swing forth and back with periods of chaos between until we approach the underlying coreroot of these problems. Swaying the media and political will through money, no matter if by private persons or corporations, no matter if Jew or not. Aka human nature and the working points in our current system. Socialism and in the long run Communism will fix those and I am talking about the scientific definition not of liberalism or what some stalin dude did.

I am a low lifer and I don't now if I should send this, tbh. Most of the time I am in a state of total mental surrender.

 

[San Salvador]

Oh, yes, there are things we can do. Understanding the situation will bring the possibility of psychological resignation, and the virtue of patience. From there, we can improve our lives through several behaviors:

- Not reading or watching the news anymore, for nothing is ever going to change until several decades: no politician is ever going to revert this trend. Donald Trump will fail, and has already failed. His successors will be equally powerless to do anything about the march of the 21st century. World B will continue to grow at the expense of world A until the decisive clash happens (a clash that will be fully technological or military, and not cultural or political). I will make sure to necrobump my thread at every end of an US presidential tenure to put my point across.

- Not supporting any political party anymore, and not getting emotionally invested in elections. (You are free to vote, but it will have a nil. impact).

- Developing high-quality copes and focusing on yourself, free from the shackles of a political altruism that is actually ineffective terror management.


It was the first decisive battle won by World B. It was unexpected and quite spectacular, to be frank. In 1942, everybody, and I mean everybody, expected Nazi Germany to win the war.

However, winning a decisive battle is not winning a war. It is very much possible that the 22nd century will see the rise of a neofascism directly modeled after Hitler's dream, in case world B fails in the battle to end all battles.


Fake right wingers who are actually left wingers, like Donald Trump or Ron Paul, don't. Actual right wingers (the kind who like Putin) tend to become ever more against technology, for they have finally realized that technology and progressivism are inextricably linked. For instance, the firearm gave the final blow to feudality, and the atom bomb the final blow to nationalism.

Interesting. However, as you said it, the decisive clash ought to be either technological or militaristic, and world A will not win without having an upper hand in either of these fields.

Also, I love how you divided humans in these worlds. When interacting with world B people and their creations, I feel a significant disconnect with their general perception of the world.

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

Interesting, especially the method of presentation with the buzzwords, I enjoyed that. I’m not so quite so sure though. (I concede that I have propagated some of my own, far more preposterous theories on this very site.)

This theory seems to be staged from an almost exclusively American perspective, it’s impossible to deny that you have picked up on the buzzwords that most aptly define the fractioning of the nation into two politicised factions that do not allow for any diversity of opinion within their own ranks. As we know China will become the world’s largest economy during the 2020s, I believe that most of the social parameters of our future world will be mandated by their cultural and political tendencies, rather than America’s. As they are at present a largely politically illiterate nation, who can say what they will be?

I also believe that because of automation of jobs (that will have made an unprecedented impact by the time we reach the 2040s/50s) rendering most of the unskilled labour force redundant, public expectation will be on their governments to take greater responsibility upon itself to provide for it’s people and a shift to the left is inevitable, at least economically.

I believe there will be a social element to this shif as well. Religion is on the decline in every western industrialised country. The only places it is on the rise have poor educational infrastructure and you can imagine these dying embers will be dampened when they inevitably catch up.

Factor in that the most fervent adherents to the ideologies/tendencies you listed in ‘World A’ are well into their 50s and beyond, and that the millennial population is, by a long way, majority left leaning. What you can expect is a massive shift of the Overton Window to the left between the present day and 2040, and which of the tribalistic factions you fall into will be defined along new parameters, many of which will be things you have mentioned in your prediction for ‘World B’, whilst a lot of what you spoke of in ‘World A’ will become resigned to history.

 

[Fontaine]

I am not a big fan of this whole "left", right dichotomy, but I know it is the prevalent view.

The Right and Left distinction is perfectly valid, to my mind; however, one must understand that the true distinction between the two is the attitude towards death. The Right wants to perpetuate and rationalize death through tradition and religion, while the fundamental project of the Left is Eden on Earth through technological means; as some intelligent conservatives have observed, immanentize the eschaton.

I agree to A, but B are just the advanced means of control and replaced what used to be A. Liberal feudalism 2.0 if you will.
(...)
If A wins the loop will close and the struggle will start again until we go to B again and over and over or we learn of the third solution C and we avoid the rise to power through money no matter if feudalist, or oligarchic, call it the Jews if you want, but there are many more of those people out there. Take the Yellow Pill.

I respectfully disagree with your Marxist vision of history. I think the true problem of history is biology, not class warfare.

I like you (and most of the other guys here) and I hope your dislike of politics stems from a real deep understanding of it and not only some alt-light edginess.

I have spent the better part of my youth deeply immersed in politics and political fight. My "dislike" for politics is simply the result of years of analysis.

 

[Konon]

Stratospheric IQ

Let's be honest, he literally just wrote something that everyone, even normies understand. World is sort-of devided into traditionalism and liberalism. No shit, Sherlock.
Just sayin'.

 

[Fontaine]

Interesting. However, as you said it, the decisive clash ought to be either technological or militaristic, and world A will not win without having an upper hand in either of these fields.

The chances of world A are currently very slim, I won't lie. However, history is very capricious and we don't know what may unfold.

Also, I love how you divided humans in these worlds. When interacting with world B people and their creations, I feel a significant disconnect with their general perception of the world.

To me, the biggest mystery with world B people was the disconnection between their actions and their ideology. You have extremely smart and energetic inventors or CEOs, who essentially manage their companies in a fascistic and selfish capitalistic style, who publicly embrace extreme anti-racism, blank-slatism, democracy and feminism. I couldn't reconcile the two ("how could a guy as smart as Sergey Brin deny the existence of brain differences between men and women?") until I understood that everything was profoundly linked: only a feminist could invent Google. It is not about a statement of facts, but a statement of world view. Brin defends the cause of women because as an intelligent Jew, he is obligated to do so, not because he truly believes women are equal to men.

Interesting, especially the method of presentation with the buzzwords, I enjoyed that.

I think it was Oswald Spengler, famous for his Decline of the West magnum opus, who inspired me in this regard.

This theory seems to be staged from an almost exclusively American perspective, it’s impossible to deny that you have picked up on the buzzwords that most aptly define the fractioning of the nation into two politicised factions that do not allow for any diversity of opinion within their own ranks. As we know China will become the world’s largest economy during the 2020s, I believe that most of the social parameters of our future world will be mandated by their cultural and political tendencies, rather than America’s. As they are at present a largely politically illiterate nation, who can say what they will be?

I am curious about why you think that; my dichotomy certain applies to a lot of countries. For instance, France is currently separated into approximately two political currents: a mainstream liberal/leftist pro-technology current, and a fringe reactionary, luddite current where you can find both the biggest concentration of éminences grises and depressed individuals. I had a falling out with most of my ex friends over this; they embraced reactionary politics, Putinism (Putin is, bizarrely, seen as a potential savior by the French far right), etc, when I embraced transhumanism.

Factor in that the most fervent adherents to the ideologies/tendencies you listed in ‘World A’ are well into their 50s and beyond, and that the millennial population is, by a long way, majority left leaning. What you can expect is a massive shift of the Overton Window to the left between the present day and 2040, and which of the tribalistic factions you fall into will be defined along new parameters, many of which will be things you have mentioned in your prediction for ‘World B’, whilst a lot of what you spoke of in ‘World A’ will become resigned to history.

I respectfully disagree. I think world A and world B will radicalize and bring in young members in a roughly equal amount in the future. They will never fuse.

 

[Mainländer]

Both worlds are shit, but at least world A works somewhat while world B is unsustainable.

 

[Fontaine]

Let's be honest, he literally just wrote something that everyone, even normies understand. World is sort-of devided into traditionalism and liberalism. No shit, Sherlock.
Just sayin'.

It is true that there is nothing outstanding or new in what I propose. And in fact, I stole most of it from Mitchell Heisman's suicide note (a Jewish genius who wrote a 1000 pages suicide letter before blowing his brains out at Harvard in 2011).

However, most people have a very superficial understanding of all this. For instance, they think that Donald Trump is a conservative, when he is actually an extreme liberal bent on the destruction of the United States.

 

[NeiboltStreet]

I am not a big fan of this whole "left", right dichotomy, but I know it is the prevalent view.

I agree to A, but B are just the advanced means of control and replaced what used to be A. Liberal feudalism 2.0 if you will.

There is no real contradiction between the good of A (or B as well) and real leftism. (Abandoning of the privat ownership of the means of prodcuction and extension of democratic or republic principle to the economic sector and implementation of equal opportunity), Most todays (and past) problems stem from exploitation of human nature through accumulation and political use of money. If you are familiar with the Libertarian principles and add the idea that money is power and mighty persons or corporations can leverage it against the lifes of the unfortunate and accept the idea that you shouldn't own the nature given earth or it's products therefore and that you cannot buy infinite happiness anyway, congrats you are a real leftist (not a social democratic liberal capitalism rescue parachute).

I don't think Incels had it that much better in old times, if you substract the symptoms of "female degeneracy", but these don't have to be a part of a real educated advanced society and we don't need to rely on religion for this as well, this would only lead to manipulation sooner or later again (nothing wrong to have a faith though).

You all will burn your fingers on a real collaps as well. Read about historic events or watch some videos abut current wars. I know a lot of people have a pretty romantic view of this kind of situation.

If A wins the loop will close and the struggle will start again until we go to B again and over and over or we learn of the third solution C and we avoid the rise to power through money no matter if feudalist, or oligarchic, call it the Jews if you want, but there are many more of those people out there. Take the Yellow Pill.

Endgame for the west will be Japan, Brazil or a Near Eastern style uprising.

I like you (and most of the other guys here) and I hope your dislike of politics stems from a real deep understanding of it and not only some alt-right edginess. Yes our chances to change anything are low but politics are everything. I know I won't convince anyone with my pitty words here but maybe I can show you a third option and if you are curious you might educate yourself on the topic.

TL;DR A is cope, B is cope too. And the pendulum will swing forth and back with periods of chaos between until we approach the underlying coreroot of these problems. Swaying the media and political will through money, no matter if by private persons or corporations, no matter if Jew or not. Aka human nature and the working points in our current system. Socialism and in the long run Communism will fix those and I am talking about the scientific definition not of liberalism or what some stalin dude did.

I am a low lifer and I don't now if I should send this, tbh. Most of the time I am in a state of total mental surrender.

Also high IQ

 

[Kirito3]

Both world hate ugly men and the winner will still hate ugly men so this has little bearing. We and society are like syrup and water, no matter what way you shake or mix the bottle we will always find ourselves at the bottom.

 

[incel-american]

Einstein IQ OP.

 

[Legionarivs]

Fontaine can I ask you in which country do you live and if you're involved in any political party/organization?

However I like basically every thread made by you and I think you're very IQ, but I don't understand why you aren't anti-semite anymore. I mean, the fact that some Jewish authors wrote based stuff, or that some Orthodox Jews with traditional values still exist, can't cope the actual fact that the vast majority of Jews living in the West are undermining our nations from inside with their ultra-liberal and degenerated propaganda.

 

[Deleted member 677]

Anti-capitalism is far-left, not conservative. That needs to be switched.

 

[SwordsmanAlt]

Who will win in your opinion?

The true winner would be a systhesis of the two world's into one.

But since that's impossible thanks to the giant dichotomy and refusal of acceptance of certain ideas from either factions due to a cultish mindset on top of a "us vs them" mentality - I don't see anyone truly winning.

 

[Legionarivs]

Anti-capitalism is far-left, not conservative. That needs to be switched.

Sure, indeed (((Soros))) and company are notoriously conservative people lulz

 

[Fontaine]

Both worlds are shit, but at least world A works somewhat while world B is unsustainable.

Psychologically, world A is undeniably the best. Human nature is most adapted to world A. Nothing more reassuring and pleasing than working as a humble woodcutter with your friends in a small Romanian village lost among the misty mountains, looking forward to a nice family meal in front of a roaring chimney fire come the evening.

The promises of world B are mainly anxiety or anger-inducing, mainly because their fruit isn't there yet. Those who like the most the promises of world B are women, mestizos, cowards, Jews and homosexuals for a reason: they stand to lose the most in a return to world A.

I would argue the place of ugly men is in world B with the rest of the "rabble"... But not everyone shares my opinion.

Both world hate ugly men and the winner will still hate ugly men so this has little bearing. We and society are like syrup and water, no matter what way you shake or mix the bottle we will always find ourselves at the bottom.

I would argue world B loves ugly men and secretely works for their eventual liberation. On the other hand, the people of world B are still too afraid to say it publicly. At this stage, the liberation of ugly men is the most controversial of all liberations; far more controversial than the liberation of homosexuals and transsexuals.

 

[Gyros_Pretcel]

The Right and Left distinction is perfectly valid, to my mind; however, one must understand that the true distinction between the two is the attitude towards death. The Right wants to perpetuate and rationalize death through tradition and religion, while the fundamental project of the Left is Eden on Earth through technological means; as some intelligent conservatives have observed, immanentize the eschaton.

So you had surrendered and had to pack out the big copes like resorting to some just afterlife?

I respectfully disagree with your Marxist vision of history. I think the true problem of history is biology, not class warfare.

That's the whole point of my answer and all what you write screams MARXISM to me 24/7. What do you think is the reason of accumulation of capital and inequality and longing for power? The wish of safe passing down of your genes through irrational means if necessary and which were not "envisaged" in our original Ape nature (A very good example for this is getting fat). Society should have been able overcome with the current ressources and possibilities. Inceldom, hypergamy etc. have the same roots. We don't live in ape material world anymore and more progressive systems were implemented in history over and over and worked much more effective every time as well.

I have spent the better part of my youth deeply immersed in politics and political fight. My "dislike" for politics is simply the result of years of analysis.

The joke is (If I take your sentence literally) I spent the most time in my life in the opposite world of history, biology and psychology and much later in politic theory. Basically a bottom up approach. The political world is fucked but that doesn't change that it naturally dominates everything. I guess you know the von Clausewitz quote? "War is the continuation of politics by other means." The same is true for the reversed statement. Even before the stoneage humans fought for control and orders. That's politics in itscore. Wherever humans interact no matter how > Politics. You can't go without it. Doesn't mean I am a fan of it.

I generally can't agree more with you, but the real chasm in the end which parts the right and the left, is not nature itself but Appeal to Nature.
You say, embrace it because it can't be changed. You scapegoat a wrong history of examples with liberalism, wrong portrayal forged through liberal propaganda of leftism, misclude us for liberals or don't even acknowlede us at all (yes the liberals got so far, we are not even seen as a leggit or existant). We, contrary to popluar believe, see human nature in the same way like you. But we have the evidence on our side , humans build unnatural systems, humans controled their nature to a degree, left economic systems worked, we advanced our society. Rightism is fatalism and doubling down on nature for pseudo reasons. I really thougt you made the connection at some point, but then you slipped to copes. Both systems A and B are just different sides of the same coin. If you don't see how people were manipulated through A as well for the same biologicla reasons and how the current economic system is based on lies, just like the feudal one idk. You made really good threads about the flaws of capitalism and human nature, but I don't see the solution in going back, if we have the same flaws there.

I am sorry, if I conflate you with some wrong political picture here, don't take the "you" literal in the last paragraph pls, it is meant in a more general manner. I see the social question as a class question (and therefore biological) as well. So everything right of non capitalism is inherently rightwing for me.

 

[Fontaine]

Fontaine can I ask you in which country do you live and if you're involved in any political party/organization?

I live in France and am not involved in any political organization. I think all French political parties are either powerless or retarded, and so far facts have always proved me right.

I don't understand why you aren't anti-semite anymore. I mean, the fact that some Jewish authors wrote based stuff, or that some Orthodox Jews with traditional values still exist, can't cope the actual fact that the vast majority of Jews living in the West are undermining our nations from inside with their ultra-liberal and degenerated propaganda.

Being an anti-Semite would require me to root for world A; I don't. At this stage, I am neutral. I root for both sides.

 

[Legionarivs]

I live in France and am not involved in any political organization. I think all French political parties are either powerless or retarded, and so far facts have always proved me right.

What do you think about GUD/Bastion Social?

Being an anti-Semite would require me to root for world A; I don't. At this stage, I am neutral. I root for both sides.

Well, I tought you would stand for world A since you look like to have a more socially conservative mentality from your posts I've read here.

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

I am curious about why you think that; my dichotomy certain applies to a lot of countries. For instance, France is currently separated into approximately two political currents: a mainstream liberal/leftist pro-technology current, and a fringe reactionary, luddite current where you can find both the biggest concentration of éminences grises and depressed individuals. I had a falling out with most of my ex friends over this; they embraced reactionary politics, Putinism (Putin is, bizarrely, seen as a potential savior by the French far right), etc, when I embraced transhumanism.

Your curiosity is warranted, because evidently my lack of knowledge about French political affairs has left me with egg on my face. I do continue to believe however, that China will have a bigger say in the changing face of this world over the coming century, and we have no idea what kind of society they will have become. All we can do is hope for the best.

I am always surprised to hear about how extremely nationalistic some can be in France. I had always considered it to have a more cultured and mature population that of the UK or US, where patriotism is viewed as an intrinsic virtue. I sincerely hope that humanty’s Inherent tribalism is one of the first things that transhumanism can relieve us of, if it is indeed capable of doing so.

 

[Fontaine]

What do you think about GUD/Bastion Social?

Insignificant parties that will never go anywhere. French far right militants can't even control their own women; how could they control a country?

Well, I tought you would stand for world A since you look like to have a more socially conservative mentality from your posts I've read here.

I think that, in the absence of "total world B", "total world A" is indeed preferable to a partial world B. However, I do not believe in the political chances of "total world A" after the utmost disaster of Hitler's defeat.

 

[Cybersex is our hope]

World B cannot phisically win against world A cause of systemic lower T and lower strenght. Moreover... ma T of the inventions of world B wouldn't be possible without the social order and channeling of world A.

They are imploding. Lol can you fathom a phisical confrontation between contrapoints and the golden one? Just LOL

 

[Gyros_Pretcel]

Psychologically, world A is undeniably the best. Human nature is most adapted to world A. Nothing more reassuring and pleasing than working as a humble woodcutter with your friends in a small Romanian village lost among the misty mountains, looking forward to a nice family meal in front of a roaring chimney fire come the evening.

The promises of world B are mainly anxiety or anger-inducing, mainly because their fruit isn't there yet. Those who like the most the promises of world B are women, mestizos, cowards, Jews and homosexuals for a reason: they stand to lose the most in a return to world A.

I would argue the place of ugly men is in world B with the rest of the "rabble"... But not everyone shares my opinion.

I would argue world B loves ugly men and secretely works for their eventual liberation. On the other hand, the people of world B are still too afraid to say it publicly. At this stage, the liberation of ugly men is the most controversial of all liberations; far more controversial than the liberation of homosexuals and transsexuals.

I usually try not to write in your threads because I feel stalkerish, I am physically to weak and I hate myself but agreed again. *flips table*
What you describe is found in the core texts of Marxism and Anarchism. It's called capitalistic alienation. Traditional structures alone won't change it, if you don't change the power structures. (Same for transhumanism btw).

Incels are at home in world B, but I don't think we will get the necessary help, because it'll be simply to costly to acknowledge without socialism. (I already hear it coming muh taxmoneyz, muh redistribution)

 

[Legionarivs]

Insignificant parties that will never go anywhere. French far right militants can't even control their own women; how could they control a country?

Very high IQ, I think exactly the same about Italian far-right movements like CasaPound. Their female members indeed act as much bitchy as degenerate feminists.

 

[Gyros_Pretcel]

Being an anti-Semite would require me to root for world A; I don't. At this stage, I am neutral. I root for both sides.

That's good to hear. I sometimes didn't know where to locate you.

Your curiosity is warranted, because evidently my lack of knowledge about French political affairs has left me with egg on my face. I do continue to believe however, that China will have a bigger say in the changing face of this world over the coming century, and we have no idea what kind of society they will have become. All we can do is hope for the best.

I am always surprised to hear about how extremely nationalistic some can be in France. I had always considered it to have a more cultured and mature population that of the UK or US, where patriotism is viewed as an intrinsic virtue. I sincerely hope that humanty’s Inherent tribalism is one of the first things that transhumanism can relieve us of, if it is indeed capable of doing so.

I don't think so tbh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment

I'd put my money on China as well. The EU is to splitted.

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

I respectfully disagree. I think world A and world B will radicalize and bring in young members in a roughly equal amount in the future. They will never fuse.

On what grounds though? If one spends a large time on forums like this it is easy to imagine that the political sympathies of the millennial population are inclined to the right with a splattering of far left and sizeable portion of alt/far right. In reality, conservative millennials are far more moderate than their conservative parents were, and far, far fewer in number than centrist and left leaning millenials. Many of those extreme right ideologies have a very loud online presence, particularly in circles like the one we sit in now, but they are not indicative of most young people around at the moment.

Though Jordan Peterson may make a headline when he says something controversial and furious debate erupts in the YouTube comment section, it is merely a microcosm of an irrelevant debate happening at the fringes of society. The truth is that the vast majority of young people are actually not very politically minded. With the trivialisation of society comes ever stronger distraction by even more captivating entertainment media as technology. They’ll be far too busy indulging themselves to align with a binary political faction. This won’t be like the last days of Weimar with a surplus of ideological young men, young people are not idealistic anymore, they care about music and culture, not politics.

 

[Fontaine]

I usually try not to write in your threads because I feel stalkerish, I am physically to weak and I hate myself but agreed again. *flips table*
What you describe is found in the core texts of Marxism and Anarchism. It's called capitalistic alienation. Traditional structures alone won't change it, if you don't change the power structures. (Same for transhumanism btw).

I have never read Marxist texts, only indirect analyses, but what you say doesn't surprise me. Sigmund Freud also saw the modern world as a place of alienation. But in fact, factory workers were as much alienated in Soviet Russia as they were in America; so much for communism... The root of alienation is technology, not the economic system.

Incels are at home in world B, but I don't think we will get the necessary help, because it'll be simply to costly to acknowledge without socialism. (I already hear it coming muh taxmoneyz, muh redistribution)

If world B wins, money won't be an issue at some point

On what grounds though? If one spends a large time on forums like this it is easy to imagine that the political sympathies of the millennial population are inclined to the right with a splattering of far left and sizeable portion of alt/far right. In reality, conservative millennials are far more moderate than their conservative parents were, and far, far fewer in number than centrist and left leaning millenials. Many of those extreme right ideologies have a very loud online presence, particularly in circles like the one we sit in now, but they are not indicative of most young people around at the moment.

Though Jordan Peterson may make a headline when he says something controversial and furious debate erupts in the YouTube comment section, it is merely a microcosm of an irrelevant debate happening at the fringes of society. The truth is that the vast majority of young people are actually not very politically minded. With the trivialisation of society comes ever stronger distraction by even more captivating entertainment media as technology. They’ll be far too busy indulging themselves to align with a binary political faction.

True; in fact I would say politics is essentially a hobby for unhappy persons; I have never seen someone happy who cared deeply about politics. Normies will stay mostly neutral because they are happy for the most part.

 

[A10n3]

Nice post.
I am definitely for World A but I think we have already lost the War, except for a miracle, which history is surprisingly rich of.
Seeing how the Military-Industrial Complex, Globalization, the power of Banks, mass-medias, social-engineering/mind-control, lobbies and Deep States are actively propelling what's left of our "Western Civilizations" into the Apocalypse of Trans-humanism, eugenism, cryogenetic, basically the so called "End of History" we were promised after WW2, or New World Order if you prefer, which I would gladly rename it as our friend Huxley Aldous did in his brillant novel : Brave New World.
So OP, I think I read from you that you were now into transhumanism. Are you refering to something similar from the dystopia displayed in that novel, or into something else?
I have recently read Brave New World, and eventhough I wouldn't like to be deprived of my whole culture and freedom of thought, I couldn't help but notice that, in this maybe prophetic world imagined by Huxley, we incels would actually be much more happy than we currently are.

 

[BradPitt]

I have a question.

The fuck is "antebellum"?

 

[Legionarivs]

I have a question.

The fuck is "antebellum"?

It's Latin, it means "pre-war".

 

[Gyros_Pretcel]

I have never read Marxist texts, only indirect analyses, but what you say doesn't surprise me. Sigmund Freud also saw the modern world as a place of alienation. But in fact, factory workers were as much alienated in Soviet Russia as they were in America; so much for communism... The root of alienation is technology, not the economic system.

Soviet russia had a command economy and evolved from an agrarian, near monarchist society. But I partly agree. Early communism (socialism etc.) aims at minimizing the time necessary spent in technologic production for everyone equally, not abandoning it. Consumerist propaganda is reduced (grey pill), monopolies have better vertical scaling, cooperatives are more effective and intellectual potential is unleashed worldwide with comparable standards. That helps to have more free time as well or to reach the goal of a post scarcity society faster. Just btw I heard from my uncles in law from the east there was already less overtime and you felt more equal and less mogged in the workspace. A better work enviroment seems to work more or less at some big tech companies as well?

And guess what is the inherent endgoal of communism? No money and not just because.

If world B wins, money won't be an issue at some point.

That's the question. You simply don't make the connection between biology, hoarding of riches and political power? If you really believe that much in the human lizard brain, you should be concerned imo. You are familiar with the condition of our democracies? Republican (in the scientific sense) fake democracy, lobbyism, white collar crime, nepotism, cronyism? Basically all reasons, that libertarians ironically use to further the dismantling of the state (but fail or pretend not to see the big second actor on the stage)?

Who says more people with the current capitalist ideology won't go full retard with their money copes aka "crazy millionaire game"? Who says we will reach this level without adressing economic inequality and instable economic systems to avoid new revolutions, economic collapses or "beta uprisings"? Who says the appeal to nature and just world retards (There are plenty of them under the rich) will not just let the poor people suffer, because "they deserve it"? Who says people want to wagecuck eight hours plus a day without getting their fair share?

The current system is just a fake cardboard facade to hide what is really going on. Where do you think this whole left versus right bullshit comes from? How come the elites (just take a look at american foreign or german history) resort to facism once a real left power rises?
The most right of the once anticapitalist left (now socdems or liberals) got corrupted by the rich once the old system crumbled. There are tons of historic accounts of libertarian early and mid 20th century manipulation of the politics, which resulted in a deceptive implementation of a "compromise", simply because the elite didn't want to let go of their power and lead later in the eighties to thatcher and reagan. Republican's mid century agendas are considered socialist today. JFL.

I wish they were, but B aren't the good ones.

 

[Anger]

World is A is our greatest hope but sadly whe already lost the war and now the juden are working with satan to enslave us and harvest our suffering

 

[jerrycan dan]

The last thing you listed about world B is also the solution to world B. World A spent the 19th and 20th centuries getting outcompeted by World B for a reason, if you leave it up to any kind of peaceful competition between the two of them World A will win because it is the better self-propagating system in the short term (think about how the pozzed liberal USA outmuscled the comparatively traditionalist, anti-capitalist USSR through economic and cultural warfare). If you want World A you're gonna have to violently destroy World B somehow.