Dark Enlightenment

[iamnotback]

CoinCube, your idealistic, effeminate, socialist nonsense is not worthy of a response other than this.

>It would be really nice if Libertarians stopped worrying about Stalin and started worrying about more current threats to liberty.

Wow, you really don’t get it, do you? Communist memetic weapons are the greatest threat to our liberty. Stalin is dead but the program he and Lenin wrote colonized the minds of the American left, notably including that feminist subgroup you are rightly worried about. See, there was this guy named Gramsci who figured out that the most effective way to Communize a free society is (listen carefully) to destroy the cultural foundations of political liberty.

The OGPU/NKVD/KGB-programmed Left has been executing that program faithfully ever since, and continues even though the puppetmasters are gone. Thus, third-wave feminism. Thus, postmodernism, and critical legal theory, and every form of victim studies, and the welfare state, and “gun control”, and “deep ecology” and half a dozen other symptoms. They can’t be fought effectively in isolation, but only by understanding what was done to us, and why it was done, and how, and repudiating not just the symptoms but the whole volk-Marxist disease behind them.

Yeah, you think I’m paranoid. But the same rhetorical tropes and the same fantasies and the same enemies list continually recur in all these movements. That is what shows us where and how the memetic weapons were originally aimed – they’re the makers’ fingerprints, or more like DNA that leads straight back to Marxism – and yeah, usually quite specifically to Stalinism.

It’s nothing as simple or as easy to fight as a conspiracy. It’s become a virus passing from mind to mind. In the judgmental language of social conservatives, it’s moral rot; they have that almost right, except that they think that appeals to religion and traditional values can cure it. In this belief they are sadly and desperately wrong; that attempt filed decisively before 1980, arguably as early as 1969.

When we libertarians express our understanding of the uberpattern, you think we sound like “Birchers”. That’s not our blindness, it’s yours. You’ve spent your whole life hearing that it’s not hip to speak of Marxist subversion, that’s something only old fuddy-duddies do. That was part of the program.

So, you think this is all ancient history? Here’s a test: try to find a “social justice warrior” who will say anything seriously critical about Communism. Or praise capitalism.

The KGB agent who defected told us that it will require generations of reeducation to recover from what they've done to us:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA&feature=youtu.be

This is so true. That is why we just need to discard all the idiots, because they are hopelessly brain washed.

You'll never get that done if you don't get control over the females. Period.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOEweZtlonQ  <--- note religion is also a form of mind control employed!

[1715026516]

1715026516

[CoinCube]

CoinCube, your idealistic, effeminate, socialist nonsense is not worthy of a response...

 
"Is there no one else!"
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8N6W1Zm8P4A
 

[iamnotback]

CoinCube thinks women are victims who need protection from the State and that religion can fix it because men are the weak gender and must fear God so they don't abuse women. (Why he ignores the first and most fundamental teaching of Genesis is another symptom of the Gramscian infection)

Everyone who has studied politics knows damn well what “The Left” means, (except for the part where they pretend that National Soc‍ialism isn’t on the left). It is a coalition of “victim groups” and their alleged protectors, who seek greater government control to redress the alleged historical harm done to those groups and punish the “oppressors” thereof.

Anyhow, this description might have value in the US, what I doubt. It does not fly in the rest of the world, where Left is aligned with Labour and Union parties.

If you don’t think Labo(u)r defines workers as oppressed and employers as oppressors, you aren’t paying attention.

CoinCube has a philosophy which is precisely opposite of reality. He thinks he can achieve a better world with weak males and religion. God help him! Without strong males, he is culturally and philosophically enjoining a collective gulag.

Afaics, CoinCube is mind controlled with the Gramscian infection, probably originating from his highly educated mother and/or his attending very "good" schools (i.e. liberal Gramscian infection indoctrination camps).

>communist subversives mixed in with (and manipulating) supporters of limited and valid causes

It’s actually worse than that. The Gramscian infection consumes worthy causes, chews them up and remakes them in its own pro-totalitarian image. I have seen this happen multiple times.

But some causes were never worthy to begin with. Gun control is perhaps the most obvious example.

For a worthy cause in the end stage of Gramscian consumption, consider the U.S. antiwar movement. It is right that we should have a vocal, principled domestic constituency against unnecessary military action. But we have no such thing.

Instead, we have a kind of sock puppet that becomes dead silent when a Communist-indoctrinated President is in the White House, raising not so much a peep at drone-strikes a go-go or multiple failed interventions in places like Libya, or at boots on the ground right now in Iraq.

Wars are protested only when doing so serves the purposes of the Gramscian long march. This isn’t even hidden well any more: scratch an “anti-war” demonstration and you find a Stalinist political group like International ANSWER at the bottom of it. And the mainstream media doesn’t care about this – infected themselves, they see no enemy to the left, ever.

This is very poignant example of how the Gramscian infection is so pervasive. CoinCube is a highly respected member of this forum, has degrees in both math & a medical doctor. It pains me to come to this realization.

Whereas, I am a lowlife piece-of-shit with no credentials. I attended inner city, shitty schools. I've wasted much of my life farting around in the Philippines making very many mistakes.

I prefer if CoinCube and I will stop, because otherwise this will only get worse from here. I am unable to deny what I see. Sorry I must be a man at this point.

I don't wish to personalize it beyond this. This is my best and last attempt to shock CoinCube and wake him from his infection. I know there is no hope though because his indoctrination began in his formative years and it is impossible to undo that wiring.

[CoinCube]

CoinCube thinks Some women are victims who need protection from the State and that religion can fix it because men are weak and must fear God so they don't abuse women...

CoinCube also thinks Some men are victims who need protection from the State and that religion can fix it because women are weak and must fear God so they don't abuse men.

[iamnotback]

CoinCube thinks SOME women are victims who need protection from the State and that religion can fix it because men are weak and must fear God so they don't abuse women...

CoinCube also thinks SOME men are victims who need protection from the State and that religion can fix it because women are weak and must fear God so they don't abuse men.

There are no victims in nature. Only winners and losers.

Men understand this.

[CoinCube]

There are no victims in nature. Only winners and losers.

Men understand this.

Yes I know this "wisdom" I have heard it from the most "successful" man in history.

"Man's highest joy is in victory: to conquer one's enemies; to pursue them; to deprive them of their possessions; to make their beloved weep; to ride on their horses; and to embrace their wives and daughters."

Genghis Khan


I reject this "highest joy" and the worship of nature. We have the potential for so much more.

[iamnotback]

Big Joe is a man.

Real men are hungry for the truth.

We have the potential for so much more.

So go do it. And leave the men out of your idealistic gulag. Otherwise, we will have to defend ourselves.

[CoinCube]

Ultimately my friend our difference is one of religion. You have chosen, perhaps by default, to worship nature.

Worship of nature might work for a lesser mind but you are too intelligent and too questioning for it to serve you well.

You can worship nature in the quest for genetic success, but you have read Dyson and understand that the darwinian interlude is ending making genetic success ultimately meaningless.

You can worship of nature in the hopes of cultural supremacy, yet with time and progress cultures will blur and merge.

Thus you have made a final stand upon the fortress of masculinity. The concept of strength in the face of adversity, victory over defeat, and honor before dishonor.  You will find no solace here.

Strength is useless without leverage, victory cannot be achieved without purpose, and honor is meaningless without law.

Worship of nature is a glass wall a ideology without friction. You will be better off if you choose to reject nature in favor of something better. However, that choice is ultimately up to you.

I have said everything I wish to say on this topic. This will be my final post in this thread.

[igatcha]

Ultimately my friend our difference is one of religion. You have chosen, perhaps by default, to worship nature.

Worship of nature might work for a lesser mind but you are too intelligent and too questioning for it to serve you well.

You can worship nature in the quest for genetic success, but you have read Dyson and understand that the darwinian interlude is ending making genetic success ultimately meaningless.

You can worship of nature in the hopes of cultural supremacy, yet with time and progress cultures will blur and merge.

Thus you have made a final stand upon the fortress of masculinity. The concept of strength in the face of adversity, victory over defeat, and honor before dishonor.  You will find no solace here.

Strength is useless without leverage, victory cannot be achieved without purpose, and honor is meaningless without law.

Worship of nature is a glass wall a ideology without friction. You will be better off if you choose to reject nature in favor of something better. However, that choice is ultimately up to you.

I have said everything I wish to say on this topic. This will be my final post in this thread.

Enjoy Hell, you sadist loser.

[iamnotback]

Everyone who has studied politics knows damn well what “The Left” means, (except for the part where they pretend that National Soc‍ialism isn’t on the left). It is a coalition of “victim groups” and their alleged protectors, who seek greater government control to redress the alleged historical harm done to those groups and punish the “oppressors” thereof.

...

It’s actually worse than that. The Gramscian infection consumes worthy causes, chews them up and remakes them in its own pro-totalitarian image...

For a worthy cause in the end stage of Gramscian consumption, consider the U.S. antiwar movement. It is right that we should have a vocal, principled domestic constituency against unnecessary military action. But we have no such thing.

Instead, we have a kind of sock puppet that becomes dead silent when a Communist-indoctrinated President is in the White House, raising not so much a peep at drone-strikes a go-go or multiple failed interventions in places like Libya, or at boots on the ground right now in Iraq.

Wars are protested only when doing so serves the purposes of the Gramscian long march. This isn’t even hidden well any more: scratch an “anti-war” demonstration and you find a Stalinist political group like International ANSWER at the bottom of it. And the mainstream media doesn’t care about this – infected themselves, they see no enemy to the left, ever.

This is very poignant example of how the Gramscian infection is so pervasive...

Humans lack immunity to the Gramscian virus because they all want more power than they really have, so they live vicariously via the victimization causes of the collective.

"Man's highest joy is in victory: to conquer one's enemies; to pursue them; to deprive them of their possessions; to make their beloved weep; to ride on their horses; and to embrace their wives and daughters."

Genghis Khan

This is caused by the same lust for power that causes the disease you have. This is why failed collectivists turn to a lust for blood at the their end game collapse.

But whereas, you collectivists only destroy yourselves, Genghis Khan actually united many of his tribes and achieved opening up trade between West and East, thus raising the standard-of-living for many humans (not just his own).

What Genghis did was necessary because of Coasian costs that needed to be overcome.

What apparently drove Genghis to start his crusade was watching all the infighting amongst their tribes and the poverty that resulted.

You have chosen, perhaps by default, to worship nature.

How can one worship reality? Worship implies faith. I don't need faith to tell me reality exists.

The reason you idealist nutcases always destroy your collective selves (over a long enough time horizon) is you lust for power that you don't have, i.e. you lust for the crab bucket mentality to drag other men down (how dare they have more than one wife when you only have one) and have control over the competition for females by restricting weak men (subconsciously it appears you may be actually wanting to raise your status in the society by removing the viability of others). Genghis has real empire building power. You (and I) don't. That probably pisses you off and you want to find an easy way to gain leverage. So you reach out for the collective victimization drug.

What you don't realize is that your philosophy is very Evil, which is the philosophy (morals) you claimed religion would make absolutely differentiated between good and evil.

I have formulated a theory as to perhaps why highly educated men fall to the left. And that is because they are not very masculine and didn't develop their athletics and their streetwise bad boy methodologies in order to compete for the woman's hypergamy. Thus they want to develop some power which is exclusive to their tribe of academic, effeminate "men". They probably also feel that bad body mannerisms are demeaning and beneath their social status. They want to elevate their the faction of society where their credentials and social skills are well developed, but employing the collective to eliminate the other social stratas. I think this theory is very plausible.

[iamnotback]

...you have read Dyson and understand that the darwinian interlude is ending making genetic success ultimately meaningless.

Disagree. The genetic competition between species is much too slow to compete with the cultural evolution within the human species, but since humans can control their genetics then genetic advantages can possibly interplay with a cultural advantage. Specifically I am thinking about engineering such a culture, where the men will select for genetics both for the women brought into the culture and donated sperm (not just their own).

Dyson is pointing out that the genetic interplay with culture could get much more interesting. You are playing with an outdated tool religion. Give men the capacity to understand how they can maximally compete with a multi-generational strategy that is decentralized and nearly invisible (impossible to detect and defeat).

I am competitive. I want to compete. Especially against the socialists. What always disappointed me about the prospect of offspring is they were making me less competitive and not more so. I think there may be a solution. But it is complex and I am old. So I may punt. Yet I am open sourcing the ideas.

...in the hopes of cultural supremacy, yet with time and progress cultures will blur and merge.

If cultures blur and merge, then Dyson is incorrect. Instead we should see a proliferation of competition between cultures now. Technology now enables cultures to compete in different ways which weren't possible in the past.

Thus you have made a final stand upon the fortress of masculinity.

For that to be true, competition must also die, which is impossible.

Testosterone is associated with risk taking, wider distribution of IQ, strategy+sacrifice instead of complacency, etc..

Worship of nature is a glass wall a ideology without friction.

You've got that backwards. Your philosophy of bringing everything into an equality and fairness total ordering that is a static which allows friction to not exist (thus your desire can never exist unless we no longer exist, as the future and past would need to collapse into undifferentiated). Inequality and partial orders (competition in a free market) are necessary to have a differentiated past and future, i.e. the irreversibility of thermodynamics.

[criptix]

Can you point to a paper that corrolates high iq with high testosterone?

Im wondering because SEA besides ashkenazi jews have in average an iq that atleast is one or two standard deviations higher then all other ethnicities.
And their testosterone level is way lower then any other group.
(E.g. blacks highest testosterone level lowest avg iq)

I have the impression that one of the traits corrolated to high iq is low testoterone levels.

[iamnotback]

Can you point to a paper that corrolates high iq with high testosterone?

Im wondering because SEA besides ashkenazi jews have in average an iq that atleast is one or two standard deviations higher then all other ethnicities.
And their testosterone level is way lower then any other group.
(E.g. blacks highest testosterone level lowest avg iq)

I have the impression that one of the traits corrolated to high iq is low testoterone levels.

I wrote that testosterone is correlated with higher spread (i.e. higher standard deviation) of IQ, which is not a necessarily a higher average IQ. Testosterone is associated with higher risk taking and higher variance.

I did not write higher testosterone, rather just testosterone. I was referring to distinction between genders.

As for higher comparative testosterone amongst the males of different racial groups, I wouldn't be surprised if very high testosterone is associated with lower IQ, because it would seem to me this excess physicality and violence is driven by a society in which many men are impregnating the woman at the same time, i.e. a very primitive society that is not breeding for IQ.

I was also thinking about that, how excess testosterone can be counter productive to mental work. I know that when I am healthy, one of my problems is that my testosterone is so high that I find it difficult to sit still and do mental work until I first go exhaust myself in sports. And if I skip my sports for more than a day or two, I become very aggressively moody and could easily get into a fight. I am ~52 and ill, yet my testosterone was measured to be 23 out of 25. So yeah, testosterone has its downsides.

It is interesting that perhaps by breeding for higher IQ, this may breed out too much testosterone which perhaps may lead to Frankenstein effeminate outcomes? Isn't it interesting how there is no equilibrium or homeostasis point, but a range of possibilities. Yup sounds like nature.

Watch how the black people react to these racial jokes (testosterone?):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzgoYDHydBs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT3eDtCZ4t8&t=25s

I have noticed that black women on average have much more lean muscular shoulders than many white women. I have seen some strong (especially nordic) white women though.

Today a dark-skinned Indian guy (taller than me) tried to walk directly at me pretending he didn't see me and as he got closer I realized what he was doing was trying to act tough and I was watching his face for him to make eye contact but he purposefully didn't and so at the last moment I decided not to avoid running into him and he at the very last moment made an evasive maneuver and then I turned around ready to make eye contact and fight. But he just kept on going ignoring me. This is an example of what you see in those videos. Very high testosterone is sometimes difficult to control. I am sick and taking very strong medicines so I was surprised that happened. I didn't really like it, because the last thing I need is to be getting into fights. But I've noticed the arrogance of the Indian nationals here is starting to get to me. So I better make sure I avoid them.

Here in the Philippines if you act arrogant, especially not in a place guarded by security guards, you are risking someone attacking you with a machete, especially here in Mindanao. I would like to think of myself as a more civilized person, yet I noticed I had that reaction. Perhaps it is my Cherokee native blood?

I wrote this:

...is inherited from the primitive, post-paleozoic, hunter-gatherer time period when mortal danger was omnipresent. Fear stimulates a fight-or-flight adrenaline spike in response to extreme stress. Adrenaline rushes are thrilling and addictive, especially when the threat is low-grade, not thoroughly exhausting, and thus repeatable because it only exists in the imagination. Adrenaline (plus cortisol) shuts down rational thought in the pre-frontal cortex. Production of the steriod cortisol spikes to redistribute more energy to the muscles and nerves, depleting energy from the immune system, digestion, and toxic waste processing necessary to maintain health.

[iamnotback]

Everyone who has studied politics knows damn well what “The Left” means, (except for the part where they pretend that National Soc‍ialism isn’t on the left). It is a coalition of “victim groups” and their alleged protectors, who seek greater government control to redress the alleged historical harm done to those groups and punish the “oppressors” thereof.

...

It’s actually worse than that. The Gramscian infection consumes worthy causes, chews them up and remakes them in its own pro-totalitarian image...

For a worthy cause in the end stage of Gramscian consumption, consider the U.S. antiwar movement. It is right that we should have a vocal, principled domestic constituency against unnecessary military action. But we have no such thing.

Instead, we have a kind of sock puppet that becomes dead silent when a Communist-indoctrinated President is in the White House, raising not so much a peep at drone-strikes a go-go or multiple failed interventions in places like Libya, or at boots on the ground right now in Iraq.

Wars are protested only when doing so serves the purposes of the Gramscian long march. This isn’t even hidden well any more: scratch an “anti-war” demonstration and you find a Stalinist political group like International ANSWER at the bottom of it. And the mainstream media doesn’t care about this – infected themselves, they see no enemy to the left, ever.

This is very poignant example of how the Gramscian infection is so pervasive...

Humans lack immunity to the Gramscian virus because they all want more power than they really have, so they live vicariously via the victimization causes of the collective.

A socialist from the Netherlands seems to agree with my theory:

"Every political movement claims they are under attack from the evil others. That is not a prerogative of “The Left”. Just read Bannon and the KKK.

The Left and Right are also struggles over the spoils of the economy. You seem to have a fairly simple idea about how these spoils should be divided.

His perspective is framing as a righteous struggle as if the economy belongs to the collective and not to the owners of things, but my theory is framing it as a self-destructive theft and lust.

The minanarchist perspective is that the collective has no (or very minimal) rights. Whereas, the Left and Right can both be statist (Left much more so) wanting to leverage the power of the collective. Any way, I agree it is a competition and a war between competing strategies.

My theory is emphasizing the power lust of humans which leads to this Iron Law of Political Economics:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984

[criptix]

-snip-

Of course you are right with your statement, i somehow managed to totaly misread your sentence their. I must have been still half asleep ugh.


Talking about breeding for high iq and designer babys this could be very interesting for the future:

In women higher testosterone is associated with better mental rotation, in men lower testosterone is associated with better spatial abilities. This seems to be true both for actual testosterone (Moffat and Hampson, 1996) and for prenatal testosterone (Grimshaw et al., 1995).

On the effects of testosterone on brain behavioral functions

[trollercoaster]

Back to the top you go, imo this is the most important thread in this forum, everything else can be traced back to the principles discussed here.

[iamnotback]

@iamnotback (last reply, i promise)

the fact that you keep calling my opinion "leftist" makes clear how your "limited intellect" actually stops you to get out of the box

i have to agree with you when you say "leftism results in megadeath every damn time throughout human history", this is damn right! every social structure that allows centralized power is doomed to fail.

we are here because we are fascinated by decentralization but we still make the same mistake and we are still the same humans that created the need for centralization.

this thread makes me sick!
the rampant and ignorant sexism together with limited personal views makes me think that we are still very far from a Change.
if you don't get what i mean i would not be surprised.

The term sexism is only uttered by a leftist. There are two axis on a typical political philosophy chart. You can be economically conservative and socially liberal (but this is lying because social liberalism destroys economic conservatism).

Stand back and let nature do its thing.

Sexism is natural because it is a fact that women and men are not equal. Statistically women are greater at what women do best and men are greater at what men do best. There are probably exceptions on an individual basis. If this damned fact offends you, then it isn't my fault that you are irrational.

Sexism doesn't mean I condone any violence against women. It just means I rationally don't try to lie to myself about damned facts. You prefer to lie to yourself. The common trait of a leftist is irrationality and lying.

It is a fact that women are going to use their assets just as men use their assets. This is nature. No amount of leftist bullshit is going to change nature.

So stop berating me for your own fucking ignorance and irrationality. You are so fucking arrogant which associates you with the other pinheads here who are below your apparent intellect. Maybe you can correct this deficiency if you can objectively read.

I actually love women more than you do, because I don't lie to them about the reality of nature. You leftists lie to them and destroy them. That is a statistical fact. (I make no claims about whether I have ever lied about anything, rather I am speaking to issue of lying to women about statistical equality of men and women, or even equality between any two people as no one is equal)

Japan has an existential crisis. The youth don't procreate. The economy is deflating.

DooMAD went to one of those sites that produces a political philosophy profile and I think this is a useful taxonomy. CoinCube would I guess be on the right, upper quadrant. Eric S Raymond would be closer to me I think.

The view of the world through the eyes of Anonymint:



The only "justifiable" standpoint in your view is at the very "right" of the chart from your (literally) skewed perspective.  Everyone and everything else is communist.  Your bitter tone implies frustration that the rest of the world doesn't share this perspective.  So you lash out at all the "leftists" even though you apparently mean to include people who would be viewed as right by those on the left.  The only ones who aren't "leftists" are the hardline libertarians.  The average person will never see it, but in your world Hitler and Gandhi are two peas in a pod.  Augusto Pinochet and the Dalai Lama are equally authoritarian.  They're all communists.  

Thank you. I think that chart is a reasonably accurate representation of my perspective. Thank for putting in the effort to make that.

I don't think it is accurate to say that I wouldn't praise some of the traits of those who are on the same side of either axis as myself, even though they are on the other side of the other axis from values. So while I might condone some of the social liberalism of Gandhi, I would disagree with the economic totalitarianism. Ditto while I admire some of Thatcher's views, I wouldn't agree with totalitarian restriction of social values. Having said that, I do admire some conservative social values, such as I think abortion and birth control are self-destructive on a statistical basis, but I am not going to join some religion which tries to control the freewill of people.

Note however, there is distinction between having these values and needing to interact in a society that for the most part doesn't share these values.

My values free me from needing to control what other people do on a societal level (might be different in my interpersonal relationships). Economic right means I accept the natural law will impact the outcome, so nothing I need to control. Ditto my interpretation of social liberalism is that we all reap what we sow. Abort your children, you'll likely end up in a life lacking meaning.

The social conservatism and liberalism axis seems to not capture accurate the distinction between those who lie and those are objective. Why is that? The liberals lie to women about equality. The conservatives lie about the diversity of strategies in nature.

[iamnotback]

Goodbye 8 month pregnant, good girl mother:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soXJe04e3lo

Hello intoxicating feral female to ruin your career:

https://youtu.be/sRjQDJewt8Y?t=73

[iamnotback]

Why CoinCube is incorrect.

And I am inviting CoinCube to come back and defend his stance, despite him pledging to stop in this thread.

I know CoinCube will say that is why we need religion, but again the 160 IQ genius Eric Raymond has pointed out that religion has failed to rectify such issues. Sorry there are no absolute solutions. We have the diversity of nature and competing strategies.

[iamnotback]

I had linked from this thread to the following prior discussion

I am not sure if I know James A Donald's precise thesis, but what I think I know of what he wants, leads me to some disagreements with him.

I believe he thinks we can have societal change across all white men in the USA and that we can forcibly revert woman's suffrage and sexually repress women on a large societal scale. If so, I believe he is not realistic, nor would that be an optimal strategy. The Mormons are perhaps closer to what I think may be realistic and optimal (although I don't claim to know much about them). A set of beliefs that are taught and followed on a voluntary basis is more powerful, decentralized paradigm shift.

JAD writes (has he been reading what I wrote after I sent him a link?):

The urban gene shredder

The discussion on the Jewish question raised several interesting and important issues, which tended to be drowned out by obsessive and repetitious discussion of the kill-them-all-and-take-their-stuff option.  (If you think too much about outgroups, it is bad for your mental health.)

One of which is that Latin America browned out and went down the shithole because brownish people in the countryside reproduced and whitish people in the cities did not, and were replaced by brownish people from the countryside.   Failure of elite reproduction.

But failure of elite reproduction is going to make us stupid even if the city imports fresh elites from a white countryside.  Pretty soon we will need Jews to rule us (descended from rapidly reproducing orthodox urban Jews) just to keep the electricity and water going, just as Nigerians need whites and Chinese to keep the electricity and water going.

Mormons manage to reproduce in the cities.  Right wing Jews manage to reproduce in the cities.

Men and women want to form families, but fail because of prisoner’s dilemma.  There is an obvious state level solution to this:  Empower husbands, disempower women.  Authorize more violence by husbands, both in that they should be allowed to physically discipline wives and children, and in that they should be allowed to kill adulterers.  Also death penalty for sleeping with another man’s wife, regardless of who carries the death penalty out. Enforce chastity on women, with “Homes for Wayward Girls”, similar to the female factory in late eighteenth century Australia.  Lower the legal and social status of women.  Prohibit women from exercising authority over men, other than their sons.  Generally encourage manliness.  Legalize dueling.    Give property owners broader police authority. Videos should depict feminine women, manly men, patriarchal families, and obedient and respectful children.

Orthodox Jews and Amish are successful in reproducing in substantial part because they keep their kids out of an education system hostile to males, manliness, and household formation.  Reversing credential inflation is important.  Girls should finish formal education at puberty, and men not long thereafter.  Engineers educate themselves informally all their lives.  Everyone should do the same.  It is easy now in the age of the internet.   Unfortunately businesses are legally compelled to rely on educational credentials.

Trump’s family successfully reproduced in a society hostile to males and family formation, possibly because the Trump dynasty is uncomplicatedly and straightforwardly patriarchal.  A large part of this is sheer force of personality, which men can and should cultivate.  Be like Trump.  Trump Trump Trump.

But force of personality will not do you much good if there are no marriageable women, and there are no marriageable women in Silicon Valley.  Look at Zuckerberg’s wife and Bill Gates’ wife.  In Silicon valley, the pump and dump lifestyle is simply the only viable strategy, because we have a social order dedicated to making women unmarriageable.

Fathers need to protect daughters from this social order, but it is hard for them to do so.  If you are a silicon valley engineer, and you want to get married, need to take a year off and go for a trip around the world.

The discussion of polygamy is fascinating! So Islam promises you virgins in heaven and a patriarchal, polygamous society generates for you virgins in this life.