Based The entire point is to get away with being a pervert up until the day you die

[SlayerSlayer]

Diddy, Epstein, Cosby, Weinstein, R. Kelly, Woody, Polanski, Ron Jeremy, I can go on and on, they were all so close. These people lived lives where they spent MOST of it getting their ACTUAL lust fulfilled. You see. I don't hate these people because they are evil or that there is any kind of moral system. Im pissed at them because they got away with it for so long and I could never feel the forbidden illegal pleasures that they have felt. It doesn't matter what it is or if it's like an actual fetish, it's all relative to the idea of FEELING THE POWER THAT NO RULES APPLY TO YOU. I'm just glad they got caught so they feel the utter shame, discomfort, and terror of being labelled as a SEX OFFENDER., and they will DIE, knowing the world thought of them as some kind of PUBLIC RAPE TERRORIST

You also have people like Saville whom I have even more ire for because he DIED knowing he got away with it. HE TOOK UTTER GLEE IN HIS DEATHBED KNOWING HIS VICTIMS WERE TRAUMATIZED FOR LIFE AND THAT HE DIED A BELOVED FIGURE. Who the fuck cares if you get outed years later, you're atoms at that point.

AND EVEN WORSE you have people like Hugh Hefner.

He was lucky to have a non-deviant sexuality and was able to get that fulfilled in a maximal way and even go as far as to imprint your perversions into the footprint of culture. Hugh was as far as I can tell, the first modern pornographer.

I mean ever since the printing press was invented in 1440, it took a LONG ass time for widely accessable pornography to be available to wanting coomsoomers. But what Hef did was basically work at poking the moral systems in place so that he can merchandise his lust. All he had to do is live his best SEXUAL LIFE, make propaganda of it, and seek his pleasures of finding the most beautiful women to get naked for him and PHOTOGRAPH THEM, at a time when this was ridiculously taboo. AND THEN BRING THOSE SNIPPETS TO THE ENTIRE WORLD. Hef is the MOST SUCCESSFUL MAN EVER, because he is the most successful HEDONIST ever.

I MEAN FOR FUCKS SAKE-- the idea of 'Playmate of the Month' is a godstroke in hedonistic power fulfillment. Imagine getting the hottest SLUTS in America to send YOU nudes, at a time when ankles where covered up and bitches went to church; for a chance, that YOU, a known perverse and lustful man, would pick her to be slut of the month. And if she was really hot, you make her SLUT OF THE YEAR. YOUR idea of what a Stacy is, gets culturally imprinted, insofar that women across the world strive to look like YOUR ideal. And then you live in a fucking mansion and these fucking bitches cant leave you alone because they want your dick all day. And whats crazy is that what Playboy basically is, is, like "hey men of America, here's a softcore snippet, OF WHAT MY LIFE IS LIKE." And you make all your wealth perpetually that way, feeding toned down snippets of the sexual fantasies I live every day, to the masses. UP TILL THE DAY YOU DIE. And even past Hugh's death, he's still thought of and is admired as a fucking Chad. You demeaned wahmen your entire life, yet to this day many feminists even WEAR playboy, because they think the icon is cute and empowering.

Pornography is a MORAL INVENTION. A moral augmentation. Our morality is constrained, because we have things like honor, shame, laws. We don't do things we really want like murder and groping tits in order to maintain a morally upstanding status, so that we can live with less conflict from moralfags. But degerates of the 20th century like Timothy Learly, Hef, Foucault, Larry Flynt, the Fertita Brothers, these people are true mental Chads in their ability to fuck with the boundaries and are so fucking Chad that all of society goes, 'fuck yeah, I like that, let's just do that from now on.' And then laws change, and things get more degenerate, and when it goes too far, than it dials back so things get more cucked or conservative.

I feel that Hef's moral invention was extremely pleasurable for the vast majority of the male population (meaning non-faggots). When faggy moral inventions enroach on normal straight people's moral invenions, is when things will shift the other way, because some moral inventions encroach on other people's moral inventions.

So to bring this all together, what I'm trying to say is that HEF is actually what its all about. It's about being a being a pervert shamelessly and die knowing that you changed culture to accept your perversions, to the point that you are widely admired. THAT IS HEDONISTIC GODHOOD. You can fly it too close to the sun like Cosby, but when your moral inventions encroach massively, you risk reaping what you fucking sow, and crashing hard. Hef was lucky that his perversions were naturally in harmony to surf with the boundaries of what is sexually acceptable well past the limits of what I initially aimed for


If we were to compare stock analysts with perverts, its like Hef was the Warren Buffett of perverts, just the right amount of risk your entire fucking life, he will die this way most likely. And Diddy is the Sam Bankman Fried of perverts where they both just got so fucking greedy, they got sloppy and exposed bigtime. The most interesting moral innovator of our times is Luigi Mangione, he is such a fucking Chad he is making MURDER permissible, it is likely that Brian Thompson will not be the only dead CEO. I would predict that mimetically, he's shifted the game, and now going ER is oldhat. It's only a matter of time till we have a copycat. Other darktriad males have to murder bigger CEOs to out-compete Luigi.

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

So In simple words have money and status and you can get away with anything

 

[SuperKanga.Belgrade]

Very good post officer

 

[KinkyKanga]

So In simple words have money and status and you can get away with anything

 

[SlayerSlayer]

So In simple words have money and status and you can get away with anything

no it's about what is truly most pleasurable in life.

It's about not just prolonged lust fulfillment, it's about lust fulfillment that literally changes the fabric of how humans are bred

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

no it's about what is truly most pleasurable in life.

It's about not just prolonged lust fulfillment, it's about lust fulfillment that literally changes the fabric of how humans are bred

Yeah makes sense it’s within our human nature to desire lust and it gets worse as we grow older especially if we have low impulse control

 

[SlayerSlayer]

Yeah makes sense it’s within our human nature to desire lust and it gets worse as we grow older especially if we have low impulse control

thats the worst part man. I just feel more and more fear every second I am closer to my dying breath, fear about not getting my FREAK OFF (a straight one though lol)

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

thats the worst part man. I just feel more and more fear every second I am closer to my dying breath, fear about not getting my FREAK OFF (a straight one though lol)

Yeah I had similar experiences as being deprived it’s like you are about to have a heart attack

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

they are like the opposite of incels. The yin to the yang.

 

[Aerialitycel]

Very good post officer

The psyops have begun

 

[HeinzKell]

Michael Jackson is the ultimate winner of this challenge
Just become so famous and beloved that you transcend sexual assault allegations

 

[Emba]

So In simple words have money and status and you can get away with anything

 

[Aku no Hana]

So In simple words have money and status and you can get away with anything

It's not that simple though, because as he said at the beginning, the people he named (Diddy, Epstein, Cosby, Weinstein, R. Kelly, Woody, Polanski, Ron Jeremy) did not get away with it. They got away with it for a long time because of what you just said, but eventually were caught. If rich people just were able to always get away with anything for their entire lives and it were that simple, there wouldn't be the need to write much of what he wrote.

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

It's not that simple though, because as he said at the beginning, the people he named (Diddy, Epstein, Cosby, Weinstein, R. Kelly, Woody, Polanski, Ron Jeremy) did not get away with it. They got away with it for a long time because of what you just said, but eventually were caught. If rich people just were able to always get away with anything for their entire lives and it were that simple, there wouldn't be the need to write much of what he wrote.

Yes nice high iq reply so pretty much you cant get away with crime

 

[Aku no Hana]

Yes nice high iq reply so pretty much you cant get away with crime

No, it's just not black-and-white. You were right the first time that rich successful people can get away with these acts as a result of their wealth and positions. However, it's clearly demonstrated that they often will not get away with it forever and will eventually get caught, even if they got away with it for many years.

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

No, it's just not black-and-white. You were right the first time that rich successful people can get away with these acts as a result of their wealth and positions. However, it's clearly demonstrated that they often will not get away with it forever and will eventually get caught, even if they got away with it for many years.

Yes but the blackpill always hits which is what makes all of this brutal

 

[Feeshtu]

I don’t think that Hefner was really that innovative.
He just showed people what they already wanted to see.

But, he is a pioneer for being able to do that at the time he did.
A true hero for having the balls to go against the strict norms of his time.

 

[Aku no Hana]

Yes but the blackpill always hits which is what makes all of this brutal

The proper understanding which the blackpill helps elucidate is the contradictory nature of things, in this case how it applies to the very wealthy.

For the vast majority of the time humans have lived on the planet, mating was a matter of direct biological selection. Money was not yet a thing. Nothing was abstract. A man's attractiveness was simply how he looked, and ability to accrue resources was nothing other than how one related to the immediate environment. Civilization changed that, (think about hereditary lines of monarchs and aristocracy that produced one ugly ruler after another, and circles of the nobility that could be clearly genetically poor but had advantaged positions and access to the best women due to winning favor with the rulers, and how nothing like this existed in the homo sapien animal kingdom prior) but modern industrial capitalist society at this stage in the developed countries entails the most distorted, inverted, abstract, and insane premises and nature of society in history. This eugenicist-materialist place is also how one can scientifically understand the origin of the uniquely prevalent proliferation of LGBT promotion in the modern world.

Simply put, there's never been this many people, which means there's never been this many ugly people, and intermediaries in the way of natural selection that at the same time interpolate with it. (even with all the complex factors, the base mating and selection dynamics of course are always what it comes down to.)

Money and social status is a compensating intermediary that allows genetically worse men to potentially date up and reproduce with genetically superior women when they otherwise wouldn't be able to. Of course, things are so bad now that if a guy is lucky, he can find his looksmatch.

The reason many guys on this forum are wrong about things is because they just want a return to a previous phase of economic development. In the 1950's in the U.S.A., for instance, an average looking man had an incomporably easier time finding a job with an affordable salary and marrying and having children with an average looking woman. Most guys on this site are not extremely ugly, but around average or somewhat below average. The people with this mindset just wish they could compensate for their lackluster looks with money like they could before to meet a decent-looking woman, but in the present that's harder than it's ever been.

Once this is properly understood, you realize that political designations are misleading as they're almost always understood, because just about every type of person advocates this one way or another, whether any variety of Left-wing or Right-wing Conservative. For example, Stalinist Tankies are a rare sight on this forum. But the reason they idealize China is because it is in the phase of capitalist economic development that the U.S.A. was in the 50's. They refuse to acknowledge that China will inevitably go through all the same developments and changes the U.S.A. already did long ago, and hedge their bets on China somehow influencing other countries in the world to salvage their own economic reality within capitalism. In general, notice how Liberal/Conservative detractors of China in the West and China's supporters fail to acknowledge the fact that Western capitalists and China's own capitalists both collaborate and compete at once, and the nature of this contradiction.

Foids are still worse than guys with this mindset though, because as the economy worsens, their reaction is only to get pickier and pickier, kicking guys who are their looksmatches to the curb. This essay explains everything and is a must-read. They are all base, superficial, simple-minded eugenicist elitists who want to date up to the maximum extent possible, which explains all their class-based attitudes of contempt for (less unfortunate) men. This either takes the form of trying to step on others to scale up, or otherwise dragging others down with them to their level. Either way, it's exclusively from the place of selfishness, which if anything demands more false pretense that they are advocates for a more just, equal, meritocratic society.

This also explains why foids are so often bratty, mindless, and impossible to talk to. But even with guys who have a shitty political understanding (the vast majority) it's at least possible to explain your thoughts where they differ and come to some understanding, where possible.

We're living through a period of slow collapse, eventually there will simply be enough masses of men sufficiently deprived and kicked to the curb that they will not only be pushed to revolt, but have no choice because the alternative would be starvation.

I'm a very rare borderline case, because I'm actually decent looking because both my parents also were in their prime, but am a 28 year old virgin incel due to a combination of horribly shit life circumstances beyond my control. (a big one is I'm 5'5 — my father is a manlet.) I've just decided, like many others, to leave the U.S.A. for good. Which is actually not difficult: no one talks about it, but you can even buy permanent residency in the Philippines and it doesn't even cost that much. (I don't plan to go there, but the one country where I'm eligible for citizenship)

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

The proper understanding which the blackpill helps elucidate is the contradictory nature of things, in this case how it applies to the very wealthy.

For the vast majority of the time humans have lived on the planet, mating was a matter of direct biological selection. Civilization changed that, (think about hereditary lines of monarchs and aristocracy that produced one ugly ruler after another, and circles of the nobility that could be objectively genetically worse but had advantaged positions and access to the best women due to winning favor, and how nothing like this existed in the homo sapien animal kingdom prior) but modern industrial capitalist society at this stage in the developed countries entails the most distorted, inverted, abstract, and insane premises and nature of society in history. Money and social status is a compensating intermediary that allows genetically worse men to potentially date up and reproduce with genetically superior women when they otherwise wouldn't be able to.

The reason many guys on this forum are wrong about things is because they just want a return to a previous phase of economic development. In the 1950's in the U.S.A., for instance, an average looking man had an incomporably easier time finding a job with an affordable salary and marrying and having children with an average looking woman. Most guys on this site are not extremely ugly, but around average or somewhat below average. The people with this mindset just wish they could compensate for their lackluster looks with money like they could before to meet a decent-looking woman, but in the present that's harder than it's ever been.

Once this is properly understood, you realize that political designations are misleading as they're almost always understood, because just about every type of person advocates this one way or another, whether any variety of Left-wing or Right-wing Conservative. For example, Stalinist Tankies are a rare sight on this forum. But the reason they idealize China is because it is in the phase of capitalist economic development that the U.S.A. was in the 50's. They refuse to acknowledge that China will inevitably go through all the same developments and changes the U.S.A. already did long ago, and hedge their bets on China somehow influencing other countries in the world to salvage their own economic reality within capitalism. In general, notice how Liberal/Conservative detractors of China in the West and China's supporters fail to acknowledge the fact that Western capitalists and China's own capitalists both collaborate and compete at once, and the nature of this contradiction.

Foids are still worse than guys with this mindset though, because as the economy worsens, their reaction is only to get pickier and pickier, kicking guys who are their looksmatches to the curb. This essay explains everything and is a must-read.

This is why foids are so bratty, mindless, and impossible to talk to. But even with guys who have a shitty political understanding (the vast majority) it's at least possible to explain your thoughts where they differ and come to some understanding, where possible.

We're living through a period of slow collapse, eventually there will simply be enough masses of men sufficiently deprived and kicked to the curb that they will not only be pushed to revolt, but have no choice because the alternative would be starvation.

yes i hope we all come together and rebel against this fucking trash system

 

[Aku no Hana]

yes i hope we all come together and rebel against this fucking trash system

There are not yet unifying objective conditions between the proletariat (the regularly employed working-class) and the lumpenproletariat. (the unemployed which we disproportionately fall into) The current development is one of the shrinking of the middle-class (the capitalist class doesn't need them anymore) and the unprecedented reduction of living standards of the proletariat due to economic changes. Over time, the distinction between the proletariat and the lumpenproletariat will blur. Measures like UBI are there to keep things going when they'd otherwise be closer to collapse, but the sheer existence of UBI does nothing to change the trend of the reduction of living standards. This explains why the working-class also hates us, because of course most of them are normies that are married or have a girlfriend for one thing, but also they see in us a reflection of what they are afraid of becoming.

To the extent that collapse and revolt is brought up here, it's usually with the implication that enough men will just decide they've had enough of being treated as poorly as we are, exploited, taken advantage of, disenfranchised, disposable. However, revolution won't occur until push comes to shove, so to speak - until the proletariat is faced with the choice between either revolting or dying. The signs of collapse are here, but I don't think revolution to end capitalism and the downfall of states will actually occur until the 22nd century, so we won't live to see it. At this time, the illusion of democracy will have fallen, this is a prerequisite. (I don't think it will in the mean time, so all talk of Leftists of Western countries becoming one-party right-wing fascist dictatorships is wrong. If anything, contemporary corporate fascism comes through Leftists/Liberals/Progressives/Technocrats, as opposed to merely social-conservative Nationalists.) As a matter of fact, things are already unstable: the illusion things are consensual and mass participatory is the reason it hasn't collapsed yet.

Once this is understood, the rhetoric of people with various positions and how that's changed over time begins to make sense. No one goes with the grain of this, Leftists just bemoan how they're losing their middle-class positions and hope from change from within to reverse this, while Conservatives (the minority of business owners) are the "rebellious underdogs" who think if we take care of the "crony capitalists" and "globalists" then Everything Will Work As It's Intended To. The basic tendencies besides straightforward Liberals and Conservatives who support Democrats and Republicans and Leftists who merely advocate social-democracy, and Libertarians. (think: Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, Assange, RFK) My argument is none of these positions are truly to be distinguished from one another, as they all represent social groups of people who have a stake in the system and don't want it to end altogether.

As I often say, I was even kicked out of the subreddit for Leftcom Marxists who dislike Leftists (r/UltraLeft) and no, it wasn't because I brought up anything incel related but simply explained a determinist position which is that all the current orgs and parties are useless and revolution to end capitalism is inevitable but won't come through a party. These people are just Leninists i.e. Stalinists with extra steps and more pretense. These are just more insufferable middle-class idiots who want to feel like they're doing something, not people that actually want change. All these social issues are manufactured, an end to capitalism and the Communist mode of production would solve them. (unfortunately, when most hear of this they think of fascist capitalist countries like the USSR, but this is just based on a misunderstanding which isn't hard to clear up.) This simply entails unmediated access to production by all members of society, when we can produce enough food and resources for everyone there's no reason we can't have a world without slavery, classes, exploitation, starvation, deprivation and war; and work could be mitigated to the maximum extent possible. There's nothing utopian about any of this, what's utopian is thinking capitalism can last forever. If you don't have money and a stake in society, you're best off understanding and explaining this.

To be sure, the actual situation still proves otherwise, but the actual situation proves no more than it itself. The question is where will we go from here; for despite the “affluency” in a small part of the world, the human condition in general becomes increasingly more obnoxious and intolerable. Nor can this be altered within the confines of capitalism, and the end of capitalism is conceivable only as the ending of social class relations, as the abolition of the proletarian class. The one-dimensional society is such only ideologically; in every other respect it is still the capitalism of old. Ideological conformity depends on conditions of prosperity; it has no staying-power of its own. But unless all theoretical reasoning should be entirely valueless, in so far as it allows for predictability it points to the demise not only of capitalistic prosperity but also to the end of capitalism itself.

[...]

If class-consciousness depends on misery, there can be little doubt that the misery awaiting the world's population will go beyond anything thus far experienced, and that it will come to engulf even the privileged minorities in the industrially-advanced nations, who still think of themselves as immune to the consequences of their own activities. Because there are no “economic solutions” for the contradictions of capital production, “economic solutions” are being attempted by political means, but such as fit the socio-economic structure of capitalism. This means that the destructive aspects of capital production take on an increasingly more violent character; internally, by more and more waste-production; externally, by laying waste territories occupied by people unwilling to submit to the profit requirements of foreign powers which would spell their own doom.

While the general misery will increase, the special situations of “affluency” will also dissolve, as the blessings of increasing productivity are dissipated in a slaughterous competition for the diminishing profits of world production.

It is, of course, conceivable that nothing will move the working population, that they would rather accept whatever misery comes their way than rise in opposition to the system responsible for it. However, the absence of a revolutionary consciousness is not the absence of intelligence. It is far more likely that the modern working class will not indefinitely endure all that the capitalist system has in store for it; there may be a breaking-point where intelligence may come to include class-consciousness. The readiness to take revolutionary steps does not necessitate a consistent oppositional behaviour prior to the first independent act; an apathetic working class under certain conditions can become an aroused working class under different conditions. Because it is this class which will most deeply be affected by a reversal of the fortunes of capital production, or by capitalist excursions into war, it may in all likelihood be the first to break with the one-dimensional ideology of capitalistic rule.

But again, there is no certainty. There is only a chance – as Marcuse remarks in a somewhat different context. But it is only a chance not because part of the proletariat is left out of the capitalist integration process, but because capital may destroy the world before an opportunity arises to stay its hands. Integration in death is the only integration really given to capitalism. Short of this final integration, one-dimensional man will not last for long. He will disappear at the first breakdown of the capitalist economy – in the bloodbaths the capitalist order is now preparing for him. Capitalism, at the height of its powers is also at its most vulnerable; it has nowhere to go but to its death. However small the chances are for revolt, this is not the time to throw in the towel.

One Dimensional Man In Class Society by Paul Mattick, 1972

 

[justuseless]

If i were Harvey Weinstein or any of these other subhuman degenerates i would be happy to sacrifice my reputation and freedom near the end of my life for the decades spent fucking prime bitches.

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

There are not yet unifying objective conditions between the proletariat (the regularly employed working-class) and the lumpenproletariat. (the unemployed which we disproportionately fall into) The current development is one of the shrinking of the middle-class (the capitalist class doesn't need them anymore) and the unprecedented reduction of living standards of the proletariat due to economic changes.

Once this is understood, the rhetoric of people with various positions and how that's changed over time begins to make sense. No one goes with the grain of this, Leftists just bemoan how they're losing their middle-class positions and hope from change from within to reverse this, while Conservatives (the minority of business owners) are the "rebellious underdogs" who think if we take care of the "crony capitalists" and "globalists" then Everything Will Work As It's Intended To. The basic tendencies besides straightforward Liberals and Conservatives who support Democrats and Republicans and Leftists who merely advocate social-democracy, and Libertarians. (think: Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, Assange, RFK) My argument is none of these positions are truly to be distinguished from one another, as they all represent social groups of people who have a stake in the system and don't want it to end altogether.

As I often say, I was even kicked out of the subreddit for Leftcom Marxists who dislike Leftists (r/UltraLeft) and no, it wasn't because I brought up anything incel related but simply explained a determinist position which is that all the current orgs and parties are useless and revolution to end capitalism is inevitable but won't come through a party. These people are just Leninists i.e. Stalinists with extra steps and more pretense. These are just more insufferable middle-class idiots who want to feel like they're doing something, not people that actually want change. All these social issues are manufactured, an end to capitalism and the Communist mode of production would solve them. (unfortunately, when most hear of this they think of fascist capitalist countries like the USSR, but this is just based on a misunderstanding which isn't hard to clear up.) This simply entails unmediated access to production by all members of society, when we can produce enough food and resources for everyone there's no reason we can't have a world without slavery, classes, exploitation, starvation, deprivation and war; and work could be mitigated to the maximum extent possible. There's nothing utopian about any of this, what's utopian is thinking capitalism can last forever. If you don't have money and a stake in society, you're best off understanding and explaining this.

yes the future is most likely bleak for the next 10 years i hope society fully collapses at that point

 

[Aku no Hana]

yes the future is most likely bleak for the next 10 years i hope society fully collapses at that point

No, it won't happen in the next 10 years. Collapse isn't around the corner and people who say it is are incorrect to say so. (the author of this recommended article and other similar ones coined the apt term "collapsetards" on Twitter years ago to describe such people) Of course, I'd be in favor of this. But note that the "collapse is in 10 years" crowd can't actually describe soberly what this collapse would actually look like, nor analyze the conditions and how they relate to class relations that would bring this about. They simply say it will. ("a superficial instability masks a deeper stability," as he put it, though I'd add while he clearly refers to there being no threat to ruling-class power by "stability," things are in fact unstable as I said above. But they can be unstable for a long time, and will be.)

If only it were that easy and simple. It's a gradual, slow, painful drawn out process, and when it happens it will be this massive push that will completely upend the premises of society. There will be chaos and violence and a long period before true change, which can only happen with the state seizure of power in all the developed nations, then at last the abolition of the state and the proletariat-as-a-class to bring about Communism. As I said, I don't total global collapse occurring prior to the year 2100, that is to say, not in our lifetimes. Of course, I'd prefer it to. I don't see what contingencies would occur that would bring it about sooner, but of course it's all about seeing capitalism's contradictions accelerate.

Anarchists are against this as much as anyone, desiring capitalist social relations to be perpetuated indefinitely, with a utopian vision of this coming about without states. They'd would betray a revolution if they had the chance to. Their advocacy to abolish the state evenly applies to developed and underdeveloped nations for one, for another they want to abolish the state before it can properly be utilized to help bring about Communism.

A good litmus test is how people talk about Incels. Note that Anarchists, while priding themselves as being the champions of the lumpenproletariat, talk with the same derision about us as any other Leftist, Liberal, or Conservative. (they are in fact Leftists and Liberals and conservative, just not "Conservative," in the sense of being on the Right or social-conservatives.)

 

[Yournotcold0]

they are like the opposite of incels. The yin to the yang.

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

No, it won't happen in the next 10 years. Collapse isn't around the corner and people who say it is are incorrect to say so. (the author of this recommended article and other similar ones coined the apt term "collapsetards" on Twitter years ago to describe such people) Of course, I'd be in favor of this. But note that the "collapse is in 10 years" crowd can't actually describe soberly what this collapse would actually look like, nor analyze the conditions and how they relate to class relations that would bring this about. They simply say it will. ("a superficial instability masks a deeper stability," as he put it, though I'd add while he clearly refers to there being no threat to ruling-class power by "stability," things are in fact unstable as I said above. But they can be unstable for a long time, and will be.)

If only it were that easy and simple. It's a gradual, slow, painful drawn out process, and when it happens it will be this massive push that will completely upend the premises of society. There will be chaos and violence and a long period before true change, which can only happen with the state seizure of power in all the developed nations, then at last the abolition of the state and the proletariat-as-a-class to bring about Communism. As I said, I don't total global collapse occurring prior to the year 2100, that is to say, not in our lifetimes. Of course, I'd prefer it to. I don't see what contingencies would occur that would bring it about sooner, but of course it's all about seeing capitalism's contradictions accelerate.

Anarchists are against this as much as anyone, desiring capitalist social relations to be perpetuated indefinitely, with a utopian vision of this coming about without states. They'd would betray a revolution if they had the chance to. Their advocacy to abolish the state evenly applies to developed and underdeveloped nations for one, for another they want to abolish the state before it can properly be utilized to help bring about Communism.

yes sadly we might not witnesss the collapse

 

[Aku no Hana]

yes sadly we might not witnesss the collapse

Yes, the entire reason it hasn't happened yet is there aren't enough men in our despondent position. However, conditions will eventually force the majority of people into them. Revolution won't happen prior to this. (people who say "revolution can be made by a minority" don't want revolution at all, but advocate state seizure of power just as a projection of their own fantasies for power and changing the arrangement within the premises.) This is also why we get so much contempt from the rest of society. I already explained the psychological dynamic where they intuitively recognize, however unconsciously, they aren't far from being in our positions. They of course do not want this, so in the mean time they can only attack us and demonize us, but rest assured, they and the generations of their children after them will increasingly have to deal with the circumstances of deprivation and isolation they do, this is merely a sign of what's to come.

As J. Sakai writes: (a writer whose framing I dislike, but has written worthwhile material, including this breakdown of historical fascism)

The U.S. nation does have its own casualties and its broken remnants of the industrial past. These constitute an insufficient base for revolutionary change, however. Approximately 10% of the Euro-American population has been living in poverty by government statistics. This minority is not a cohesive, proletarian stratum, but a miscellaneous fringe of the unlucky and the outcast: older workers trapped by fading industries, retired poor, physically and emotionally disabled, and some families supported by a single woman. The whole culture silently reminds them that if they are poor and white the fault must be theirs. The rate of alcoholism in this layer is considerable. They are scattered and socially diffused.

 

[nevergetsanybetter]

Yes, the entire reason it hasn't happened yet is there aren't enough men in our despondent position. However, conditions will eventually force the majority of people into them. Revolution won't happen prior to this. (people who say "revolution can be made by a minority" don't want revolution at all, but advocate state seizure of power just as a projection of their own fantasies for power and changing the arrangement within the premises.) This is also why we get so much contempt from the rest of society. I already explained the psychological dynamic where they intuitively recognize, however unconsciously, they aren't far from being in our positions. They of course do not want this, so in the mean time they can only attack us and demonize us, but rest assured, they and the generations of their children after them will increasingly have to deal with the circumstances of deprivation and isolation they do, this is merely a sign of what's to come.

As J. Sakai writes: (a writer whose framing I dislike, but has written worthwhile material, including this breakdown of historical fascism)

thanks i will check him out btw you are high iq you might be the best poster ngl

 

[iRespectFatLink]

Michael Jackson is the ultimate winner of this challenge
Just become so famous and beloved that you transcend sexual assault allegations

Micheal Jackson was innocent though.

 

[erenyeager]

no it's about what is truly most pleasurable in life.

It's about not just prolonged lust fulfillment, it's about lust fulfillment that literally changes the fabric of how humans are bred

The most organic take on here. Youre good to have around because yer Avis are always funny

 

[PrototypeCel]

none of them were chad
thats where they failed

 

[PrototypeCel]

So In simple words have money and status and you can get away with anything

 

[Roastie Crusher]

no it's about what is truly most pleasurable in life.

It's about not just prolonged lust fulfillment, it's about lust fulfillment that literally changes the fabric of how humans are bred

You forget Hefner had a massive jewish apparatus on his side. The American economy was going up 10 percent per year for 15 years . Almost all men could go to college. Birth control became available. The CIA pumped LSD into the hippies.

Luigi is just a product of a fucked up healthcare system and populist rage.

If you want to fuck up normies sexually you have to unfuck them.

 

[jasonsingh40]

We don't do things we really want like murder and groping tits

World class sentence lmao!

 

[enegin2]

All I want is the government to legalize prostitution and make sex as affordable as possible. Right now the price is too high for the average men and accessing it require quite an effort

 

[ethniccel1]

nobody is stopping you from enjoying lustful pleasures in some 3rd world slum. Get your passport and $$$$$$$$ up and change your to "John Trick'nell"

 

[kay']

nobody is stopping you from enjoying lustful pleasures in some 3rd world slum. Get your passport and $$$$$$$$ up and change your to "John Trick'nell"

and end up dead in a ditch

 

[ethniccel1]

and end up dead in a ditch

oh yeah i forgot. Just be negative about every small fucking thing in life, never fucking positive about anything.

for your info there are Indonesian women praying everyday wishing for a betabuxx from the West and they give an incel babies. But anyway each betabuxx for himself

 

[kay']

oh yeah i forgot. Just be negative about every small fucking thing in life, never fucking positive about anything.

for your info there are Indonesian women praying everyday wishing for a betabuxx from the West and they give an incel babies. But anyway each betabuxx for himself

Why havent you done it then if its so easy?

If im gona betabuxx then ill betabuxx an attractive one in my country.

Whys the hassle in going abroad?

 

[ethniccel1]

Why havent you done it then if its so easy?

If im gona betabuxx then ill betabuxx an attractive one in my country.

Whys the hassle in going abroad?

Because I am a lazy fuck on neetbuxx to far gone and lazy to even try and make a difference

 

[kay']

Because I am a lazy fuck on neetbuxx to far gone and lazy to even try and make a difference

Based

 

[BricABrac]

So mods are gonna fellate chads now?

Death to all sexhavers.

 

[fastnbulbous]

So mods are gonna fellate chads now?

Death to all sexhavers.

Death to humanity and all of life, this planet must be eradicated

 

[yeetbender.koala]

oh yeah i forgot. Just be negative about every small fucking thing in life, never fucking positive about anything.

for your info there are Indonesian women praying everyday wishing for a betabuxx from the West and they give an incel babies. But anyway each betabuxx for himself

 

[NeverEvenBegan]

ALL THOSE PEOPLE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG. If anything, I envy them.

It's women who voluntarily went to these men for a good time, to look for betabuxxers or to become famous. Same thing with Harvey Weinstein. It was a mutually beneficial relationship. Foids gave him holes, he gave them movie roles.

But this mutually beneficial relationship isn't good enough for feminists and women anymore. Now they only want to get the benefits. Now they directly give women the benefits through gender quotas and affirmative action, while men die from pussy drought.

And yes, Hugh Hefner was a genious.

 

[BSGMANLET]

Yeah I had similar experiences as being deprived it’s like you are about to have a heart attack

View: https://youtu.be/UxYkB3BE5HE?feature=shared

 

[Jud Pottah]

So mods are gonna fellate chads now?

Death to all sexhavers.

Cuck thread indeed. Pinned