I haven't slept for multiple days because of this thread
Yeah i rather want a gf, But fuck man everything is built to prevent me from getting laid
yes
What I mean is that multigenerational families cannot endure outside of a mostly agrarian society like India. As soon as you fully industrialize and people start moving about to follow work, multigenerational families die out and the monogamous couple becomes the nuclear family. It is an inevitable consequence of salaried work
Yes, because India is archaic and therefore still mostly agrarian. I do not mean this in a bad way. I do like India. It is saner than the West
They used to, because until recently, societies were still mostly agrarian
This will not come back.
Let's make a country where everything helps you to get laid
@K9Otaku Teaching positive personality traits in early childhood is more important than a mother having a phd in pedagogy and teaching calculus to five year olds. A school system for boys can do the rest.
Okie
Its not about personality faggot
I'm talking studying, not sex
Everything you do is looks based not personality, You mentioned personality, Dont sneak away faggot
You say "too long" at everything. That means explaining myself is a waste of energy.
Looks causes parents and teachers to pay more attention to attractive children and help them more. That can increase the intelligence of attractive people.
However, I am not aware of a genetic link between attractiveness and intelligence. Plenty of dumb Chads, plenty of smart incels. Plenty of smart Chads, plenty of dumb incels.
I believe @13k might disagree with me. I would love to hear him out.
Call it Mark Rodgerism and i might be on board otherwise fucken sie off
Not liking it because of the name is NPC behaviour.
Your all NPCs to me, And im all NPCs to you, So whats the fucking deal nigger? Call it Mark Rodgerism or fuck off
Replace "Marxism Rodgerism" with "Government Enforced Monogamy" (GEM) in your brain.
If you're facially deformed or scarred, not even patriarchy or economic collapse will get you laid. Incelistan with Marxism Rodgerism will.
What do you think @Burnscarcel ?
You have to realize that this is a legitimate question. If you call it "Marxism-Rodgerism" and put up the portraits of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao (+ER) on your banner, you are sending the signal that everything these guys wrote or said (or did) is going to have an influence on what you are proposing.
Some people are going to like it and some will not, but you have to be honest about what you are selling: Is it a form of Marxism or is it not? It is just a matter of being open about what you are actually proposing.
Admittedly it started as a meme that I started taking more and more seriously
Indeed
It's also to troll Jordan Peterson fans
@zangano1 Read my signature and tell me what you think
I am definitely not part of that crowd. JP is a clown
seems like a good idea, I dont see why anyone wouldnt agree with it tbh
Vote Yes if you want the government to get all men married and make sure no man is left behind. All cheaters are imprisoned or executed.
Money was only ever a means for the proletariat to attain sex, reproduction and family. Money itself is not the end goal of the proletariat.
the end goal is sex, family, and reproduction.
In Marx's time, it meant capital, since wives would be had by anyone with the means of supporting a family. Today, not so much.
Therefore,
We must seize the means of reproduction.
Simple as that.
I for one do not agree with it because:
- It is impossible, except in the very long term
- Marxism has always failed every time it has been tried
- As a result of 1. and 2. it is a cope and a meme
Shout out to you for voting Yes, may St. Oreoman bless you with big booty bitches.
Just like economic Marxists who want to end free trade, I want to end free sexual selection for women. They will not get to choose. They will not get to stay volcel. The Incelistan government will guarantee a virgin wife for each man.
Vote Yes if you want a virgin wife!
I've literally laid out my plan and why it's possible in the Marxism Rodgerism FAQ. It's very realistic. Islamic terrorist groups are already doing it, the difference is they allow polygyny.
The USSR doesn't even have anything to do with this. All the Leninist countries were feminist, Incelistan is not.
Did you also write his wiki page?
So it's Incelistan without "Big Love" now?
Last edited:
Then you cannot call yourself Marxist and you cannot put Lenin's face (not to mention Stalin's and Mao's) on your banner.
All political systems derived from Marxism have been feminist. The "cultural Marxists" of the Frankfurt School (who are still very influential in bluepilled Academia) were uber-feminists. They are at the origin of the current wokeness/bluepill dogma.
You have painted yourself in a corner with this "Marxist" label. You cannot get rid of it because its edginess is what attracts the simpletons who vote "yes" in the poll but, at the same time, it contradicts everything you stand for.
Snark isn't an argument. It's woman behaviour. Look at all the subreddits with "snark" in the title.So it's Incelistan without "Big Love" now?
I don't even understand your Big Love comment. Want to quote a previous comment of mine so I can clarify?
Who hired you for the Fun Police?
Cucked hard by his government subsidy wives. All 3 of them...
View: https://youtu.be/tcdpUu7jPJY
Kidding...He's Mormon.
We can call your idea "The Black Friday Wife subsidy". It would be nice, but ain't going to happen. Even in our imagination.
Cucked hard by his government subsidy wives. All 3 of them...
View: https://youtu.be/tcdpUu7jPJY
Kidding...He's Mormon.
We can call your idea "The Black Friday Wife subsidy". It would be nice, but ain't going to happen. Even in our imagination.
If it would be nice, vote Yes
Well idk. Are we just here to be edgy and trigger IT?
Shouldn't we try to make sense sometimes?
So you caught onto my Black Friday idea? It really would not work. You are simply missing the point. You would be consumed by 3x the cuckedness and feminism. If your system proposes one-wife, fine, but there is no way to actualize a system in which I as the government provide you with a decent wife (and at the same time) everyone else with a decent wife, SOMEBODY is going to get a shit wife. 1 in every 5 men, so, not too different from how it already is, that's what I'm likely to think.
The Enlightenment in general lead to feminist beliefs. I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater and advocate for a return to theocracy or monarchy. Marxism is not the progenitor of feminism. All the wokeness that you see today is a repeat of what feminists were doing in Ancient Greece, no joke.
Fakecel volcel arguments.
Ad hominem attack. Attempt to obfuscate the point(s).
Are all Australians like this? Nah.
This thread is 21 pages long. I've already answered the points you brought forward. You're just a bad faith actor and were never worth any effort or time.
Calling you a volcel isn't an ad-hominem. By rejecting a system what would give you a wife, you automatically become a volcel.
22 pages.
What would make me worth the effort and time? If I converted to Marxism-mlcurryism? Sorry I take your idea very seriously, and that's what scares me.
So it's convert or die eh?
If that system worked without the consequences we've been laying out, then I would accept it. Till date, I see now avenue forward in what you have proposed.
The enlightenment is the beginning of bullshit in Western Culture
Theocracy never existed and Monarchy is just Chad-rule so, no, not an option
However, I am not sure exactly what kind of "baby" is left once you have thrown the bullshit bathwater out.
No, but it helped propagate it, especially under its "critical theory" version from the Frankfurt School after WWII
I think you are misinformed. Don't take it badly. I know history quite well and I do not see any trace of "feminism" in Ancient Greece. Greek men were often effeminate and pedophiles but women almost never appear as such in Greek texts so I do not see what you have in mind.
It became 22 pages with my last reply. Incredibly petty observation/reply/behaviour from you. It's clear you're Gish galloping me out of an egotistic need to feel like an intellectual. Nothing short of artificial wombs, cloning, and gene editing can supply a 10/10 woman to every man, and I've already expressed my openness to using Incelistani resources to achieve that over the long term. By refusing anything less in the interim, you've outed yourself as a volcel.22 pages.
What would make me worth the effort and time? If I converted to Marxism-mlcurryism? Sorry I take your idea very seriously, and that's what scares me.
So it's convert or die eh?
If that system worked without the consequences we've been laying out, then I would accept it. Till date, I see now avenue forward in what you have proposed.
Zeno declared that men and women were equal, and even suggested that they should dress alike. He received criticism for saying that modesty was unnecessary and that “no part of the body should be completely covered.”
Zeno of Citium - New World Encyclopedia
www.newworldencyclopedia.org
There is nothing left to say, your arguments were already deconstructed/debunked and you are relentless so come what may.
I'm resorting to comedy because you keep going with an idea or set of ideas which have (again) been thoroughly debunked. It's not the best behavior, I'll admit, but you're slowly becoming a clown so you get a clown in return. I listened to your claims, there seems to be nothing worth pursuing. If you change your formulation of Marxism-Rogerism-mlcurryism with a new idea, I'll listen again. I have no problem listening to your new ideas.
I never said every man should get a 10/10, I said (several times) that I don't even believe that what you're proposing could get more than 1 out of every 5 men a 5/10. We already discussed how CRISPR is a really long way away from anything like that, so then why continue with a strategy that we know will likely fail?
And because of what I just stated above, I have outed myself as being someone who wants to pursue discussion of ideas (unlike Marxism-mlcurryism) which will not end in mediocre outcomes (at best) and catastrophe (at worst).
Last edited:
Here's a Roman: https://iep.utm.edu/musonius/#H5
That's not feminism. The guy just wants to educate noblewomen in philosophy so that they can properly manage their estate. In any case, this did not have any success. No one paid any attention to this Musonius
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
