I previously made a post explaining how tools of Marxist analysis can be used to analyze the dating market, and explained the incel phenomenon with historical materialism.
With this thread I aim to expand upon these concepts by applying them to crisis theory.
Take the Houllebecq pill and seize the means of reproduction | Incels.co - Involuntary Celibate
The centerpiece of Marxist theory is that the natural state of relations between the capitalist class (the exploitators) and the workers (the exploitated) is struggle, and peace between them is impossible. The reason for this is the tendency of the rate of profit to fall (TRPF), the concept that the amount of profit relative to invested capital decreases over time, which pushes the capitalist class to exploit workers, which they obviously resist. The result is not predetermined but depends on the struggle.
If we think about investment in production, we can divide it into two categories: raw materials, machinery, etc. ie "constant" capital (called constant because its value cant be anything more or less than what it is), and investment in labor, "dependent" or "variable" capital (because wages and working conditions can be manipulated). When a capitalist invests, he has to spend on new technology to protect against competition. New technology in production causes the ratio of profits to invested capital to increase (in the short term) when the value of constant capital compared to labor rises. However, we know from the Labor Theory of Value that the value of a good depends on the amount of labor required to produce it, so when other capitalists adopt the same technology, the average labor time to produce a product falls, so the value of the good and the rate of profit falls. So if a capitalist wants to keep making money when the rate of profit falls, one of the things they do is attack workers conditions (increasing hours, lowering wages, increasing efficiency, etc.). TRPF explains how profits paradoxically fall in a capitalist system when productivity increases with investment in constant capital which is necessary due to competition.
We can apply this to the dating market with females as the owners of the means of reproduction (the exploiters) and males as the sexual proletariat (the exploited), with sex being the profits divided between the exploited and the exploiters. From a teleological perspective, the reason for females to exist is sexual reproduction. The value of their production (babies) depends on the guy that fucks her. Naturally, this makes the female role inherently selective, but in the past there were limitations of how picky they could be, like economic necessity and a lack of chad in the area, which forced them to marry more and end up with their looksmatch. With women's "liberation", the sexual revolution, and the advent of rapid long range communication devices, foids can now broadcast themselves through social media and online dating platforms like tinder. Initially, early adopters were able to reach more chads this way and have more chad sex, but now that every foid in the world does the same thing, she has more competition. So instead of lowering her standards to fuck her looksmatch, she fuck less so she can exclusively fuck chad.
So what does this mean for low SMV males? For Marx, when there is more competition it causes more places to go out of business, and all the workers that become unemployed and are looking for a job lower the wages. For the dating market, when more women are only fucking chad and are off the market, all their looksmatches don't have a girl and so they have to date down. For guys whose SMV is too low to be able to date down, its over. In this way, developments in the dating market have had a paradoxical effect where people are having less sex, and for the owners of the means of reproduction to cope with it they attack the sexual proletariat and force them to bear the brunt of sexlessness.
Like the struggle between the capitalist class and the workers, the result of our struggle as sexless males vs the owners of the means of reproduction is not predetermined. We find ourselves in the nexus of a crisis, and until we can regain some control over the means of reproduction in another sexual revolution (whether it be asexual reproduction or socioeconomic changes) we will continue to be nothing but sexual proletariat.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zYL-XylC74&ab_channel=COPEandKMS
With this thread I aim to expand upon these concepts by applying them to crisis theory.
Take the Houllebecq pill and seize the means of reproduction | Incels.co - Involuntary Celibate
The centerpiece of Marxist theory is that the natural state of relations between the capitalist class (the exploitators) and the workers (the exploitated) is struggle, and peace between them is impossible. The reason for this is the tendency of the rate of profit to fall (TRPF), the concept that the amount of profit relative to invested capital decreases over time, which pushes the capitalist class to exploit workers, which they obviously resist. The result is not predetermined but depends on the struggle.
If we think about investment in production, we can divide it into two categories: raw materials, machinery, etc. ie "constant" capital (called constant because its value cant be anything more or less than what it is), and investment in labor, "dependent" or "variable" capital (because wages and working conditions can be manipulated). When a capitalist invests, he has to spend on new technology to protect against competition. New technology in production causes the ratio of profits to invested capital to increase (in the short term) when the value of constant capital compared to labor rises. However, we know from the Labor Theory of Value that the value of a good depends on the amount of labor required to produce it, so when other capitalists adopt the same technology, the average labor time to produce a product falls, so the value of the good and the rate of profit falls. So if a capitalist wants to keep making money when the rate of profit falls, one of the things they do is attack workers conditions (increasing hours, lowering wages, increasing efficiency, etc.). TRPF explains how profits paradoxically fall in a capitalist system when productivity increases with investment in constant capital which is necessary due to competition.
We can apply this to the dating market with females as the owners of the means of reproduction (the exploiters) and males as the sexual proletariat (the exploited), with sex being the profits divided between the exploited and the exploiters. From a teleological perspective, the reason for females to exist is sexual reproduction. The value of their production (babies) depends on the guy that fucks her. Naturally, this makes the female role inherently selective, but in the past there were limitations of how picky they could be, like economic necessity and a lack of chad in the area, which forced them to marry more and end up with their looksmatch. With women's "liberation", the sexual revolution, and the advent of rapid long range communication devices, foids can now broadcast themselves through social media and online dating platforms like tinder. Initially, early adopters were able to reach more chads this way and have more chad sex, but now that every foid in the world does the same thing, she has more competition. So instead of lowering her standards to fuck her looksmatch, she fuck less so she can exclusively fuck chad.
So what does this mean for low SMV males? For Marx, when there is more competition it causes more places to go out of business, and all the workers that become unemployed and are looking for a job lower the wages. For the dating market, when more women are only fucking chad and are off the market, all their looksmatches don't have a girl and so they have to date down. For guys whose SMV is too low to be able to date down, its over. In this way, developments in the dating market have had a paradoxical effect where people are having less sex, and for the owners of the means of reproduction to cope with it they attack the sexual proletariat and force them to bear the brunt of sexlessness.
Like the struggle between the capitalist class and the workers, the result of our struggle as sexless males vs the owners of the means of reproduction is not predetermined. We find ourselves in the nexus of a crisis, and until we can regain some control over the means of reproduction in another sexual revolution (whether it be asexual reproduction or socioeconomic changes) we will continue to be nothing but sexual proletariat.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zYL-XylC74&ab_channel=COPEandKMS
