Brutal The industrial revolution has weakened natural selection and enabled the spread of bad genes in society, which partly explains the rise of inceldom

[subpar genes]

Once upon a time, the child mortality rate was about 50%. If a couple had two kids, one was expected to die before reaching maturity. This mechanism of natural selection filtered the genetic material of every generation and ensured that child survivors had the healthiest genes to be propagated. In other words, the children who managed to survive the harsh environmental conditions of their age had the best genetic material or at least not the worst one, which played a significant role in them growing up to have a legacy.

The 19th century brought a radical change to natural selection. The 1800s saw an industrial revolution unfolding and with it came technological advances that made food and potable water abundant, diseases easily treated and cured through vaccines and pills, basic sanitation possible, shelter more available, and governmental wealth be used to assist poor folks. For this reason, the harsh Darwinian selection pressures that characterized previous ages are gone.

Now the child mortality in developed countries is less than 1%. What this means in practice is that an incredibly high number of people with poor genetic material, who in previous generations would not have survived childhood, are free to walk among us and propagate their bad genes. And their offspring pays the price for it, including the men with undesirable physical and mental attributes like us incels.

Ask yourself: How could low-functioning autism ever survive in a pre-industrial society? How can diseases that ruin a person's health and appearance like anorexia and obesity be passed down to future generations? Why are there so many people on drugs and treatments for personality and brain disorders and would they have survived two centuries ago without the healthcare industry?

It's pretty evident that life in civilization becoming so comfortable and easy is what made the spread of bad genes possible in the first place. And not surprisingly, a lot of the bad genes are being spread by none other than women, who are never held to the same pressures as men.

I'm obviously not saying we should bring the child mortality rate back up, but something needs to be done in order to reverse this trend, and the solution can only be a little word that people fear: eugenics.

Spoiler: interested brocels

@Maki
@Needle
@luninyt
@rudy_lyon
@Grodd
@Giracel

 

[SEX NIGGA]

I disagree and would say that Sexual selection and the globalization of the mating market are the main drivers for inceldom

 

[Just say NIGGER!]

And that's a good thing. Fuck evolution

 

[rudy_lyon]

It's an interesting perspective to see on this sub that eugenics is a means of mercy to the unborn. I've never really thought of it that way. I used to say that even if we were born with poor genetics, we must endure regardless. But we'd be doing the future generations a favor. Still don't know if the solution is eugenics or radical cultural change. One is obviously more possible.

 

[AutistSupremacist]

Pol pot tried to warn us

 

[subpar genes]

I disagree and would say that Sexual selection and the globalization of the mating market are the main drivers for inceldom

Sure. What I wrote about is not the main cause of inceldom; it's a piece of the puzzle.

The reason inceldom was not as prevalent back then is not only because hypergamy had not destroyed society yet, but it's also because men had stronger and healthier genes.

It reminds me of a study which found that male bones of today are less dense and robust than male bones of the past. We are becoming domesticated and weak because of civilization, and this trend needs to be reversed by filtering the bad genes.

 

[Caichan]

Lies lol

 

[fokusin]

I disagree and would say that Sexual selection and the globalization of the mating market are the main drivers for inceldom

 

[fokusin]

The reason inceldom was not as prevalent back then is not only because hypergamy had not destroyed society yet, but it's also because men had stronger and healthier genes.

There was not "healthier genes"

 

[Needle]

Maybe then sick females have to settle down with lesser men or whatever, good post.

 

[subpar genes]

There was not "healthier genes"

Of course there were healthier genes, the ones that made a person's immune system more able to resist diseases that could kill them, the ones that made a person's brain more efficient and functional so they could overcome the hurdles in the environment, the ones that made their bodies stronger to deal with the harshness of physical labor, etc.

The bad genes do the opposite of these things, but they were filtered by the pre-industrial natural selection until technology weakened it and made the spread of bad genes much more possible.

 

[SmhChan]

Come out then. Let me curb-stomp your skull, for the betterment of humanity obviously.

 

[subpar genes]

Maybe then sick females have to settle down with lesser men or whatever, good post.

I admit to not having any clear solution to what I wrote about in the original post. Eugenics is a no-brainer. Others might offer different solutions. Either way, this dysgenic trend has to be reversed for the sake of civilization and human evolution.

 

[Wolfstorm]

I disagree, penicilin was necessary in order to end up centuries of bacterial tyranny.

What caused the decline was universal suffrage.

 

[fokusin]

Of course there were healthier genes, the ones that made a person's immune system more able to resist diseases that could kill them, the ones that made a person's brain more efficient and functional so they could overcome the hurdles in the environment, the ones that made their bodies stronger to deal with the harshness of physical labor, etc.

The bad genes do the opposite of these things, but they were filtered by the pre-industrial natural selection until technology weakened it and made the spread of bad genes much more possible.

Bad genes have always existed that is why they exist today otherwise all bad genes would have been wiped out

 

[subpar genes]

I disagree, penicilin was necessary in order to end up centuries of bacterial tyranny.

What caused the decline was universal suffrage.

I agree that giving women rights and privileges as well as enhancing hypergamy by inventing dating apps are the main cause of inceldom today.

What I wrote in the original post is only part of the puzzle, not the entire picture.

But nonetheless you can see how weakening natural selection through artificial means has fucked up the gene pool of humanity and made a lot of genetically undesirable (not talking about aesthetics) people survive.

 

[subpar genes]

Bad genes have always existed that is why they exist today otherwise all bad genes would have been wiped out

They were less prevalent back then due to natural selection, the harsh Darwinian pressures of the environment. They are more prevalent today because technological advances (which are a blessing also) have weakened natural selection.

 

[fokusin]

They were less prevalent back then due to natural selection, the harsh Darwinian pressures of the environment. They are more prevalent today because technological advances (which are a blessing also) have weakened natural selection.

The average life expectancy of those with "good genes" was not high as well, it was very brutal as there was a 50% mortality rate

 

[subpar genes]

The average life expectancy of those with "good genes" was not high as well, it was very brutal as there was a 50% mortality rate

They managed to survive and reproduce because of their healthier and more functional bodies and minds. Although the life expectancy was not the best, they lived for decades and built an incredible civilization that enabled the brightest people of society to invent and discover revolutionary things.

This reminds me of the black death, the plague that decimated almost half of the European population. I bet there was a eugenic impact behind this because those who survived it were not just lucky; they clearly were smarter, healthier and wealthier than the majority. And when the survivors of a harsh environment reproduce with each other, their descendants tend to be above average in several aspects. Just natural selection doing its thing (before we erased it, I mean).

 

[Giracel]

I don't quite agree with this, especially the last part because eugenics would necessitate that most of this forum gets killed immediately. But the Big T was definitely right that the industrial revolution was not for the betterment of mankind.

 

[Brainy]

What the world needs is national socialism and the final solution

 

[subpar genes]

I don't quite agree with this, especially the last part because eugenics would necessitate that most of this forum gets killed immediately. But the Big T was definitely right that the industrial revolution was not for the betterment of mankind.

If scientists find a way to map the bad genes in our system, they can use some technology to separate and eliminate them before inseminating our spouses. Eugenics does not have to be murderous. This fear around eugenics arose post-WWII.

 

[Giracel]

inseminating our spouses

I think we need to return to reality my nigga. But I get what you're saying, in a perfect world.

 

[subpar genes]

I think we need to return to reality my nigga. But I get what you're saying, in a perfect world.

Sucks that I've fucked it up. Writing this thread was important to me. Guess I just have to take the L like a man does.

 

[Giracel]

Sucks that I've fucked it up. Writing this thread was important to me. Guess I just have to take the L like a man does.

Don't worry, you've just started and already wrote other things that were undeniable trvth nvkes

 

[Maki]

“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind.
No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but, excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy… Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature.
…if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil.
Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind…”

- Charles Darwin 1871, The Descent of Man, Part I, Chapter 5

 

[proudweeb]

I'd argue it may have started with the agricultural revolution, 10000 years ago

eating wheat 95% of the time cant be good for you tbh

 

[Maki]

I don't quite agree with this, especially the last part because eugenics would necessitate that most of this forum gets killed immediately. But the Big T was definitely right that the industrial revolution was not for the betterment of mankind.

They wouldn’t kill you, they’d forcibly sterilize you. Not that it makes that big of a difference lol but that’s what they did in the 1930s
~400.000 people in NS Germany
63.000 in Sweden
20.000-30.000 in the US

 

[Maki]

I'd argue it may have started with the agricultural revolution, 10000 years ago

eating wheat 95% of the time cant be good for you tbh

 

[MoroccanFarmer]

There was not "healthier genes"

There was an always a genetic winner and loser

 

[BlackPilledNormi]

This mechanism of natural selection filtered the genetic material of every generation and ensured that child survivors had the healthiest genes to be propagated.

Or you would die of meningitis just because your unlucky, there are several diseases destroyed by medicine that even the strongest immune system couldnt survive

n other words, the children who managed to survive the harsh environmental conditions of their age had the best genetic material or at least not the worst one,

You just had to be lucky, aslong as you werent born with a severe mental or physical disease you would survive if you had luck and you would have died if you were unlucky

The 19th century brought a radical change to natural selection. The 1800s saw an industrial revolution unfolding and with it came technological advances that made food and potable water abundant, diseases easily treated and cured through vaccines and pills, basic sanitation possible, shelter more available, and governmental wealth be used to assist poor folks.

I would suggest to you "the condition of the working class in England" as desrcibtion of how the working class lived in the industrilization, they lived worse then medival peasants.

How could low-functioning autism ever survive in a pre-industrial society?

Pretty easy, if you can collect fruits for free lives pretty easy even with autism, most autist would probably live not worse then todays normies would in nature

How can diseases that ruin a person's health and appearance like anorexia and obesity be passed down to future generations?

Those are mental diseases and Im not sure how much influence the genes have on developing them. And obesity as a result of slow mutabolism would be an advantage in nature since you would need less nutrition to keep your body working

the ones that made a person's brain more efficient and functional so they could overcome the hurdles in the environment,

You dont have to be that smart to survive in nature, I wouldnt say that apes or wolves are that smart and they still are able to survive aslong as humans dont try to eradicate them

the ones that made their bodies stronger to deal with the harshness of physical labor, etc.

Those are mostly bad in nature since a stronger body requires more energy to function

eugenics

Thats why eunics would be a problem

Thread 'How Female Choice Led to the Extinction of the Irish Elk' https://incels.is/threads/how-female-choice-led-to-the-extinction-of-the-irish-elk.805557/

 

[Misogynist Vegeta]

Must of us don't have bad genes in a practical sense, Most of us aren't physically disabled and while many of us have autism that autism wouldn't be debilitating if wasn't for the way society treats us. To believe that we should have never been born because we are ND and ugly is to accept a simp-like mindset in which a person's only value is how much they can sexually appease women. It is in my opinion that we should reject this kind of thinking.

 

[Autistic Uggo]

I disagree and would say that Sexual selection and the globalization of the mating market are the main drivers for inceldom

 

[Gaelic-Truecel]

Some say that autism.wasn't a bad thing in ancient times. Autists would have a place in the tribe making the weapons or some other obsessive autist skill.

 

[Shark]

Some say that autism.wasn't a bad thing in ancient times. Autists would have a place in the tribe making the weapons or some other obsessive autist skill.

Cope

 

[Shark]

I'd argue it may have started with the agricultural revolution, 10000 years ago

eating wheat 95% of the time cant be good for you tbh

That's also a part of the reason I would say

 

[Grodd]

I'd say rises in inceldom has more to do with sexual selection and foid hypergamy

 

[rxkrd72]

View attachment 1705222​

Once upon a time, the child mortality rate was about 50%. If a couple had two kids, one was expected to die before reaching maturity. This mechanism of natural selection filtered the genetic material of every generation and ensured that child survivors had the healthiest genes to be propagated. In other words, the children who managed to survive the harsh environmental conditions of their age had the best genetic material or at least not the worst one, which played a significant role in them growing up to have a legacy.

The 19th century brought a radical change to natural selection. The 1800s saw an industrial revolution unfolding and with it came technological advances that made food and potable water abundant, diseases easily treated and cured through vaccines and pills, basic sanitation possible, shelter more available, and governmental wealth be used to assist poor folks. For this reason, the harsh Darwinian selection pressures that characterized previous ages are gone.

Now the child mortality in developed countries is less than 1%. What this means in practice is that an incredibly high number of people with poor genetic material, who in previous generations would not have survived childhood, are free to walk among us and propagate their bad genes. And their offspring pays the price for it, including the men with undesirable physical and mental attributes like us incels.

Ask yourself: How could low-functioning autism ever survive in a pre-industrial society? How can diseases that ruin a person's health and appearance like anorexia and obesity be passed down to future generations? Why are there so many people on drugs and treatments for personality and brain disorders and would they have survived two centuries ago without the healthcare industry?

It's pretty evident that life in civilization becoming so comfortable and easy is what made the spread of bad genes possible in the first place. And not surprisingly, a lot of the bad genes are being spread by none other than women, who are never held to the same pressures as men.

I'm obviously not saying we should bring the child mortality rate back up, but something needs to be done in order to reverse this trend, and the solution can only be a little word that people fear: eugenics.

View attachment 1705221​

Spoiler: interested brocels

@Maki
@Needle
@luninyt
@rudy_lyon
@Grodd
@Giracel

Ted Kaczynski tried to warn us all

 

[aloocard]

Don't forget genetic mutations, which can arise from nothing even in a healthy bloodline. The Industrial revolution harmed the environment and probably caused more mutations.