A poor Chad lives a better life than a wealthy incel. Marx was wrong. Capital does not mean anything. Only SMV (Sexual Marketplace Value). Agree in your country?No Pussy No Peace
Wealthy "incels" don't exist
>>199237756
>>199237800Okay a Chad with 0€ in his bank lives a better life than a incel with 70,000€ in the bank
What if you fetishize being a pussyfree incel
>>199237756i partly do
>>199237756>Marx was wrong.>Capital does not mean anything. Only SMV>Agree in your country?Yes, but it's much deeper than this. Sexual competition is actually what determines macro-economic conditions. House prices, food prices etc are all determined by the intensity of sexual competition because in a society capable of producing enough for everyone, the only incentive to accumulate "more than you need" is to gain a sexual advantage.Money isn't real. It's just an abstraction. What matters is the real resources that money represents. Nobody is motivated by money because money is only a means to an end with no intrinsic value of its own. Most resource needs are absolute. You don't need more than others, you just need enough. This applies to food, shelter etc. The only resource that doesn't work like this is attractiveness because to be attractive you must be more attractive than others. Economic accumulation is the most reliable method to make yourself more attractive because it doesn't rely on genetic lottery RNG. I always need more than you and you always need more than me. This leads to infinite demand and infinite demand will always exhaust any finite supply. Most of what we call "the economy" is just a mating ritual. I don't endlessly accumulate food and housing because I need it for personal use, rather I accumulate them because I need to make myself more attractive than you. If you are starving and homeless while I have all the food and houses then I am more attractive than you. The reason prices are outpacing wages is because sexual competition is more intense and this forces men to engage in "unnecessary" accumulation. This accumulation then leads to scarcity of resources that in principle should be abundant, which means higher prices, which in turn means you need to work longer hours to afford the same stuff. When they said you would go to hell for casual sex, this is what they actually meant. Hell is the mating ritual economy.
>>199237756On a recent rewatch of the first 4 Digimon seasons for nostalgia reasons, this was the only good one, by far.
>>199240094In fact this was basically what was seen in the mouse utopia experiments. Material resources were made so abundant as to be practically infinite. Contrary to materialist intuition however, the resulting mouse society was more competitive, not less. This same dynamic is likely why industrialization has made human societies more competitive. The illusion of a paradox exists because materialists incorrectly view scarcity of food, shelter etc as the origin of competition. In reality sex is the origin of competition, and resource scarcity is what forces sexual species to cooperate in spite of their inherently competitive reproductive mechanics. In human societies, once resource scarcity has been "solved", there is nothing left to do besides compete for sex, and thus cooperative behavior tends to vanish in post-scarcity societies. This tends to result in cyclic evolution:1. Economic cooperation leads to resource abundance2. Resource abundance creates conditions which favors competing for sex3. Competition creates resource scarcity4. Resource scarcity creates conditions which favor economic cooperationRepeat.This is why every historical account of societal collapse focuses so much on sexual degeneracy, seemingly at the expense of economics. It's not that they were neglecting economics, it's that they understood that most economic competition in developed societies is actually just indirect sexual competition. Of course in underdeveloped societies economic competition might have non-sexual origins, but this is a transient early stage. In an early stage economy you compete for scarce resources because you are hungry, cold etc. In a late stage economy you compete for abundant resources as part of a mating ritual. Late stage economic competition is about signaling sexual fitness, not about satisfying material needs.
>>199241270If this were true all niggers would be 10/10 gigachads but that is not the case. Also, a sizeae proportion of sheboons do not want their own men, how can tgat be if they didn't give a shit about resource accumulation for so long?They evolved in a place where they didn't even need to practice agriculture because fruit was so plentiful.
>>199237756based
>>199241440>Also, a sizeae proportion of sheboons do not want their own men, how can tgat be if they didn't give a shit about resource accumulation for so long?Because most women don't actually care about the resources themselves. All they care about is having sex with the high status males in the tribe, and their brains evolved to equate more resources with higher status.This is why nobody in Africa gave a shit about their economic conditions until they came into contact with Europeans and Arabs. If Ngubu has the biggest pile of rocks in the tribe then he is the high status male and all the negresses want him. Ngubu is happy because he is a high status male and gets to have sex with all the negresses, and the negresses are happy because they are having sex with a high status male. This all changes when Europeans and Arabs start showing up. They have fancy clothes and iron tools and big ships etc. Now the negresses have something else to compare Ngubu's big pile of rocks to. The big pile of rocks doesn't seem so impressive any more. Now Ngubu is unhappy because he is worried that he is no longer the high status male. Now the negresses are unhappy because they are worried that they are having sex with a low status male. Nothing about the tribe's material conditions have changed. They still have the same amount of food and rocks as before, but now they are no longer happy because it was never about the food and rocks. It was all about status, and status is all about how you compare to others.This is why the the sexualization of society has always been associated with social decay. Sexualized societies prioritize comparing yourself to others over absolute conditions. If it's better to be the biggest man in the mudhut village than the average man in a spacefaring civilization then your society will never make it to space. People will just keep fighting over rocks forever.
>>199240094>If you are starving and homeless while I have all the food and houses then I am more attractive than you.Explain Charles Manson
>>199237756>Agree in your country?no you absolte fucking retard I do not agree with your laughable position at all. no offense meant
>>199241270>mouse utopia experiment>expects to be taken seriously
>>199241440>>199242108Societal advancement requires that men adopt the mindset of>I would rather be average status in an advanced society than high status in a primitive societyand to achieve this you need some mechanism for regulating sexual competition because sexual competition is what causes people to focus on comparative status over the absolute state of society.This is where marxism and the left as a whole dropped the ball and why their theories will never guide people towards a cooperative economy. They naively convinced themselves that sexual "liberation" would mean less consumerism because if people are enjoying sex then they have no need to engage in consumerism for entertainment. They completely neglected the competitive psychology surrounding sex and the fact that most consumerism is actually just mating ritual behavior driven by sex. The reason men buy big cars and fancy clothes and go out drinking every weekend and have subscriptions to netflix/amazon/etc is to make themselves stand out to women. Sexual liberalism turns the economy into a mating ritual which in turn leads to more consumerism and more corporate profits, which is why the corporations are always fighting for and against the same things as the "anticapitalists" today. Leftists oppose sexual conservatism because of incorrect assumptions made over 100 years ago, while corporations oppose sexual conservatism because they directly benefit from the mating ritual economies that emerge under sexual liberalism.
>>199242331All else equal.If we are economically identical but you are better looking, more charismatic etc then you win. If we are equal in looks, charisma etc but I have all the food and houses while you are malnourished and homeless then I win. If you are better looking, more charismatic etc then I need an economic advantage to achieve equality, and I need a massive economic advantage to win.
>>199237800Elliot Rodger
>>199242720>and I need a massive economic advantage to win.But is it really a “win” to be a Beta Bux? I want my girlfriend or wife to actually love me, not to love my wallet.
