How is it possible, that people with socially incapacitating disabilities are conveniently ignored? I am not even sure at this point if normies including those in the social service system speak the same language as me.
They just push their bullshit advice and if you refer to your own several previous bad experiences with it and ask for a course correction, they just pretend your attitude resulting from not really being on board was the problem and that critique is just unnecessarily inconveniencing them for trolling purposes or sth (quite the opposite I used to be bluepilled about mental illness). Starting to believe this is really about making you stfu and punishing you for daring to act up and question anything. You are supposed to be happy, no matter what. If you are not it is your fault and you have to be corrected. You can comply as much as you want in the end, you will get the boot if it didn't work. If necessary they will beat you with a stick until you are happy. This is nothing but extortion lol. They try to break you, so you stfu.
How did this happen and why is this even a thing though real treatment would be macroeconomically probably cheaper? (It is really the same with inceldom, I don't have the article anymore, but if you look at the associated cost of being ugly you would assume the government would do something. If someone can find it it was in some business magazine)
TL;DR. This is no open scientific dialectic process, but just a top down approach. It's just action based on how much pittance the rich are willing to part with. If the measurements are instead damaging under an optic umbrella of (not functional) help, it is even better for them and they will stay in place. The system will only act once a critical mass of dissidents is reached. Demoralizing people is a critical part to finally reach stability. The only way is to democratize the keys to political power; material power and stop its influence in its roots. Scraps don't adress the this problem and might even be just a temporary feint and fake compromise; Absolute power needs to be adressed directly, giving us more gibsmedat won't change it. Neurodiverse people have been historically on the forefront for political change. It was only a matter of time until the evolutionary process neutralized them (otherwise we would have gotten more uprisings resulting in more adaption).
The thing is I am not even antijewpills, but the blatant incapacity for rational thought or self critique makes it impossible to get proper treatment.
The only solution I see is total disassociation. But I doubt that will happen. No energy anymore and time destroyed any opportunity.
But I will have to set a warning example how society treats neurodiverse people.
Be it by law or law of nature.
This is not really because I am incel.
But what it is about has certainly been a contributing factor to my inceldom and certainly part of the solution.
They just push their bullshit advice and if you refer to your own several previous bad experiences with it and ask for a course correction, they just pretend your attitude resulting from not really being on board was the problem and that critique is just unnecessarily inconveniencing them for trolling purposes or sth (quite the opposite I used to be bluepilled about mental illness). Starting to believe this is really about making you stfu and punishing you for daring to act up and question anything. You are supposed to be happy, no matter what. If you are not it is your fault and you have to be corrected. You can comply as much as you want in the end, you will get the boot if it didn't work. If necessary they will beat you with a stick until you are happy. This is nothing but extortion lol. They try to break you, so you stfu.
How did this happen and why is this even a thing though real treatment would be macroeconomically probably cheaper? (It is really the same with inceldom, I don't have the article anymore, but if you look at the associated cost of being ugly you would assume the government would do something. If someone can find it it was in some business magazine)
The answer is help was never supposed to change anything in the first place. Let me explain. There is something like a political natural balance (not in a positive sense) an equilibrium. Society will change until it reached a stable mass. Under normal circumstances people like us would organize and burn down (or change) the system through mass action. You would assume every time a problem of human suffering like this arises society would just allocate the necessary ressources to solve the problem, as the economic cost has to be paid on a macroeconomic level anyway. But instead the cost gets privatized instead. BUT THE MONEY IS GONE ANYWAY. It is just the people holding the local assets like to not change the running system and avoid reacting to new problems, because this would shake the economy (in a positive) nd make room and oportunity for merrit. They want to instead keep milking their priviliged position adapted to the STATUS QUO. Once a true danger to the system in from of uprising or real organization arises the financial aristocracy will over the influence of our politicians just throw as much scraps down the pyramid that the the social order can be maintained and a critical mass sof dissidents is not reached. The thing is the money does not necessarly even have to be used to positively influence the people's life, if it becomes so bad, that they get demoralised they got what they wanted as well and nooone will ever ask questions again until a new critical mass is reached and this cycle of political evolution repeats. BUT ALWAYS UNDER THE BOO OF THOSE WHO CONTROL THE ECONOMY. This is not an open scientific approach. It is enforcing a stable paradigma under the control of our elite via trial and error. Always when the pleb asked the rich to give away the keys to the parliament (their assets) and democratize them so an equality of power can exist, they engineered a certain part of the pleb to stand for a "coMprOmiSE". But if one group has all the power in its hands there can be no compromise in policy. It is just an act of mercy by the peopple in control and at that temporary. If we look back at history the is also another characteristic besides tradcuckery contemporary with the post war golden years. That is labor rights, which were mostly rolled bakc over the years. You can say what you want but america was economically on the level of bernie sanders (and it stil wasn't enough, because the elites didn't hand over the keys to power). To adress the incel problem we have to make room in the heads of people for political action. The demoralized pleb won't do anything otherwise. Also we have to support LGBTQ (sorry but it is true), why? I don't say their struggle is fake, but it is certainly being exploited as a vehiclle for fake controversy and at that one that will never question work relations nor the keys of power. (A homo ca still be a good slave or paid off). We gotta move to the next level in this game somehow. This is just the lobby to the boss fight.
I believe it is in our interest to take these keys back. Single people or small groups shouldn't be able to influence politics through the ownership of the media, ownership of people via extortion under penalty of economic destruction or corporate propaganda in the workplace, lobbyism, direct corruption, nepotism or if it just is friendly affiliation.
This is not like some cabal of Jews or rich people sits in a room and says we have to do xyz. It is a natural process of adaption. People on an individual level who have the keys, unknowingly have the keys, think they have the keys or will have them in the future, just say themselves: "I don't want to part with my resources, better throw down some more scraps." This is all what happens and leads (in)action as a whole. Sure there are some individuals like Koch or Murdoch, who have a more organized approach, but it's not like they are all in the cahoots together like in those lizard/illuminati council memes. I mean who knows, but at least there is no direct evidence to that.
Also I think the revolutionary potential in not neurotypical people, especially intelligent ones is naturally high and dangerous, because they have no social filters. They system histroically had to deal with them until through accident they found a way to minimize their functionality in society.
I believe it is in our interest to take these keys back. Single people or small groups shouldn't be able to influence politics through the ownership of the media, ownership of people via extortion under penalty of economic destruction or corporate propaganda in the workplace, lobbyism, direct corruption, nepotism or if it just is friendly affiliation.
This is not like some cabal of Jews or rich people sits in a room and says we have to do xyz. It is a natural process of adaption. People on an individual level who have the keys, unknowingly have the keys, think they have the keys or will have them in the future, just say themselves: "I don't want to part with my resources, better throw down some more scraps." This is all what happens and leads (in)action as a whole. Sure there are some individuals like Koch or Murdoch, who have a more organized approach, but it's not like they are all in the cahoots together like in those lizard/illuminati council memes. I mean who knows, but at least there is no direct evidence to that.
Also I think the revolutionary potential in not neurotypical people, especially intelligent ones is naturally high and dangerous, because they have no social filters. They system histroically had to deal with them until through accident they found a way to minimize their functionality in society.
The thing is I am not even antijewpills, but the blatant incapacity for rational thought or self critique makes it impossible to get proper treatment.
The only solution I see is total disassociation. But I doubt that will happen. No energy anymore and time destroyed any opportunity.
But I will have to set a warning example how society treats neurodiverse people.
Be it by law or law of nature.
This is not really because I am incel.
But what it is about has certainly been a contributing factor to my inceldom and certainly part of the solution.
Last edited:
