Blackpill The 99% are the true bad guys of history

[Disillusioned]

Not the 1%. They haven't contributed anything to culture or history and if anything are the root cause of almost all the evils in the world, such as hunger, genocide, war, etc. None of those would exist if the world was populated only by the 1% which thanks to it's vastly superior IQ and intelligence would probably just resolve most things peacefully. The only real reason they use their power for evil is because they have to in order to keep the 99% under control. Remove the 99% and you basically have world peace and high culture.

EDIT: Decided to highlight this post and my response to it:

It seems to me that all conflicts have their root in selfishness, which in turn is a trait that's been bred into all known, sentient living organisms on planet earth. I fail to see how wiping out 99% of humanity would lead to world peace. People of high IQ aren't exempt from corruption, if anything, history has proven the opposite. In your fictional scenario, a new aritocracy would simply emerge, as is in line with human nature, that would then oppress the general public by any means they could, not because they're necessarily evil, but because there's tremendous financial gain and power in doing so.

But the thing is, almost all of the evils of the 1% have something to do with having to get around the shortcomings of the proles. Politicians and marketers lie largely because the proles are too stupid to respond to reason. Do you think these people behave the way they do just for fun? Of course they don't. The proles are dumbfucks who only want to be comforted with lies, and thus the powerful tell them comforting lies. It's not their fault, because they did not write the rules of the game. They just follow them.

Also consider that we live in a world with limited resources, and the only reason this is a problem is because there are too many people. If the world population consisted of only the most intelligent 1% then the world would be a utopia and everybody would be living in a state of super abundance.

Even things like religion were invented largely to protect the proles from their own stupidity, because merely giving them rational reasons to not go do stupid shit doesn't seem to work.

 

[NoMoreSlaving]

Not the 1%. They haven't contributed anything to culture or history and if anything are the root cause of almost all the evils in the world, such as hunger, genocide, war, etc. None of those would exist if the world was populated only by the 1% which thanks to it's vastly superior IQ and intelligence would probably just resolve most things peacefully. The only real reason they use their power for evil is because they have to in order to keep the 99% under control. Remove the 99% and you basically have world peace and high culture.

top 1% IQ is 137.5


Not even incels have such a high IQ

 

[FukkenLoser]

Fontaine wouldn't have posted something so stupid tbh, starting to have my doubts

 

[Insomniac]

Fontaine wouldn't have posted something so stupid tbh, starting to have my doubts

So no Tom Cruise?

 

[FukkenLoser]

So no Tom Cruise?
View attachment 63936

google image of tom cruise?

 

[Insomniac]

google image of tom cruise?

I use DuckDuckGo m9

 

[Deleted member 12355]

It seems to me that all conflicts have their root in selfishness, which in turn is a trait that's been bred into all known, sentient living organisms on planet earth. I fail to see how wiping out 99% of humanity would lead to world peace. People of high IQ aren't exempt from corruption, if anything, history has proven the opposite. In your fictional scenario, a new aritocracy would simply emerge, as is in line with human nature, that would then oppress the general public by any means they could, not because they're necessarily evil, but because there's tremendous financial gain and power in doing so.

 

[FukkenLoser]

I use DuckDuckGo m9

 

[TheReaper]

modus operandi:
- talk shit about large groups of people
- wait for a reaction
users only need to read your thread titles to understend it

 

[Disillusioned]

It seems to me that all conflicts have their root in selfishness, which in turn is a trait that's been bred into all known, sentient living organisms on planet earth. I fail to see how wiping out 99% of humanity would lead to world peace. People of high IQ aren't exempt from corruption, if anything, history has proven the opposite. In your fictional scenario, a new aritocracy would simply emerge, as is in line with human nature, that would then oppress the general public by any means they could, not because they're necessarily evil, but because there's tremendous financial gain and power in doing so.

But the thing is, almost all of the evils of the 1% have something to do with having to get around the shortcomings of the proles. Politicians and marketers lie largely because the proles are too stupid to respond to reason. Do you think these people behave the way they do just for fun? Of course they don't. The proles are dumbfucks who only want to be comforted with lies, and thus the powerful tell them comforting lies. It's not their fault, because they did not write the rules of the game. They just follow them.

Also consider that we live in a world with limited resources, and the only reason this is a problem is because there are too many people. If the world population consisted of only the most intelligent 1% then the world would be a utopia and everybody would be living in a state of super abundance.

Even things like religion were invented largely to protect the proles from their own stupidity, because merely giving them rational reasons to not go do stupid shit doesn't seem to work.

 

[hapa_incel]

and people bitch about eugenics being immoral. eugenics is the ultimate solution. we either accept it or resort to nuclear war and kill everyone.

 

[Deleted member 14577]

Fontaine wouldn't have posted something so stupid tbh, starting to have my doubts

Not Fontaine.

 

[Deleted member 12355]

But the thing is, almost all of the evils of the 1% have something to do with having to get around the shortcomings of the proles. Politicians marketers lie largely because the proles are too stupid to respond to reason. Do you think these people behave the way they do just for fun? Of course they don't. The proles are dumbfucks who only want to be comforted with lies, and thus the powerful tell them comforting lies. It's not their fault, because they did not write the rules of the game. They just follow them.

Also consider that we live in a world with limited resources, and the only reason this is a problem is because there are too many people. If the world population consisted of only the most intelligent 1% then the world would be a utopia and everybody would be living in a state of super abundance.

Even things like religion were invented largely to protect the proles from their own stupidity, because merely giving them rational reasons to not go do stupid shit doesn't seem to work.

eh, it's not simply a matter of 'choosing the most pragmatic workable option'. In the real world, there are conflicting interests. Different people have different ideas about how their respective countries should be ruled. The issue is that sometimes these visions conflict with the economic interests of "the elite". Are you somehow suggesting it'd be more mathematically sound to bend over backwards and allow yourself to be plundered and raped by the rootless cosmopolitan hyenas you so affectionately refer to as the "elites of the world" simply because they might be more intelligent than you? The elites couldn't care less about which mathematic formula (indeed, if there even exists such a thing) that would guarantee the most prosperous society. That's never what their aim is, and that's why they sugarcoat their goals by misleading the public into thinking they're fighting for something entirely different from what the goals of "the elites" actually are. As far as your claim that people would live in a state of super abundance were humanity's population to be reduced by 99%, I'm not so sure about that. Wealth has a funny way of distributing itself that doesn't make much sense to much of anyone. The only way in which one could explain such an uneven distribution is human greed. For instance, 9 of the world's richest people have more combined wealth than 4 billion of the world's poorest. There is no reason these 9 people would need that much wealth, and yet they do everything in their power to acquire even more. Given that this is the case, who could really say how the resources would be distributed if 99% of humanity died off. I can easily envision a scenario in where the remaining 1% start warring over the remaining resources because human greed is truly endless.