Truthfulness, reality, politics, the Red Pill

This is another garbage politics essay, so you might as well go read the Ms. Slav saga, which is much more interesting and features a bunch of hot sex too. Plus girl management, which I may be doing somewhat poorly in her case. Also, no one has the attention to read and think about anything in depth, including this missive, which is why politics look like they do. That is not an endorsement of your side, by the way.

A commenter addressed a side note stashed into another post,

“It’s weird and incongruent to be interested in truthfulness and reality while at the same time admiring one of the greatest grifters in U.S. history.”

Thank you for this. One of the things that drives me absolutely nuts about TRP is the insane and completely irrational devotion to conservatism and [well-known political figure] in particular. You’re spot on: it’s 100% incongruent.

TRP, boiled down to its essence, is about the rational application of power and action to improve a man’s life with specific regard to his sex life, understanding the world, not as we’re told or want it to be, but how it actually is in reality.

I wrote a post on the reddit sub the other day I eventually just decided to take down about why guys shouldn’t be so freaked out about feminism and to focus on the signal vs. the noise–as in, how to discern if a woman actually is actually a crazy, man-hating feminist, or if she’s merely someone who nods to the notion but doesn’t actually care. TL;DR–most women, in my experience, don’t actually give a shit, and in fact want alpha Chads with a dominant frame because #evolution.

The reaction I got was no upvotes and guys questioning whether or not I was a woman. I don’t really care–simply trying to contribute, but what I’ve found is that if you go against the orthodoxy in any way, dudes get super defensive.

I’ve been thinking about this and have concluded a couple things, including that a) most people want to divide themselves into tribes and then go whack the other tribe over the head with sticks, and b) politics is one of these areas, like religion or philosophy, where belief is almost totally removed from and segregated from consequences. If you have made game or low masculine value, chicks won’t f**k you. I also think most guys are more apolitical than conservative, but if you post typical us-vs-them political things, people get riled up and have to stick their oar in. Politics is the noisy screaming in the street, with people rushing to see the fight, while thinking happens with the guy sitting in the coffee shop, reading a book and thinking about the book while 100 people stream past him towards the square.

There are some other things going on too…

1. The crazy social justice warrior and angry feminist left is legitimately awful. So guys think, “What is the opposite of that? Let me go do that instead.” No one thinks about things for themselves. Most people select either|or, instead of looking for third ways, or simply saying, “Neither.” If SJWs are on the left, then I must be on the right, right? Errrrrr… no… but that is how the typical person thinks.

2. Most people want a “system” to follow. Religion used to provide this. Today, religion is mostly dead, and so guys find politics instead. Once a typical person buys into a political party or system, they stay with that system, even when it is bad, or has bad outcomes. It’s useful to think to yourself, “If I didn’t know the source of quote x, and it came from a guy on the other side instead of the guy on my side, what would I think of it?” This goes back to politics as a team sport instead of independent thinkers.

3. Keep in mind that TRP and seduction probably selects for guys who have been unsuccessful with or hurt by women. Probably guys with bad childhoods too. Guys who are getting what they want from dating, women, etc. are probably not spending a lot of time debating pickup tactics online or getting super angry about politics they barely affect.

4. It turns out that the core elements of game and pickup, while not exactly “easy,” can be mastered and, once mastered… there is not a gigantic amount to say. Thus lay reports becoming kind of repetitive. Once a guy is getting laid, what else can he talk about… how feminism sucks, or politics? Then that attracts other guys.

5. Certain current U.S. political leaders are doing serious, long-term damage to the American system itself and to the right/Republican party. This is not coming from a leftist or SJW, by the way. That nihilistic trolls might embrace him, makes sense. That anyone who is not a nihilistic troll might, makes no sense, but who said the world had to make sense?

Not me.

Unfortunately, “The Twitter Takeover of Politics Is Just Getting Started.” The level of political thinking of Red Pill / player guys is barely better than the SJWs and leftists who have become The Great Satan. Everyone is looking to hit the other team on the head with rhetorical sticks, while the other team is looking to hit “us” on the head with sticks. The clearest manifestation of this is the bizarre glee about the grifter who is presently on top of the United States’s Executive Branch.

At the same time, most people’s political knowledge is abysmal. Don’t take my word on this, read The Myth of the Rational Voter instead. In fact if you have not read this book, go read it before you consider commenting on this essay. That you probably won’t, is indicative of the problem.

To quote myself, “Markets are beautiful because they separate the lies people say (meaning, most of what people say) from what people actually want.” Politics have attenuated markets of sort in the form of voting, which is better than nothing, but it’s still pretty crappy. People are very insulated from their decisions. If you make bad game and life decisions you will not f**k hot chicks. Bad political decisions take a long time to propagate (remember that Chavez was initially legitimately elected in Venezuela, for example, and Nixon was legitimately elected in the United States). So people use politics as a signaling mechanism and are rather insulated from most political decisions. The kinds of people who take to Twitter to be SJWs on the left, then get image-matched by people who take to Twitter to be right-wing trolls and agitators on the right.

You may also notice that, in any forum devoted to a topic with good feedback loops, a political discussion descends into idiocy. Game and RP is no different. With game, the feedback loop is short and clear. A guy who improves his game knowledge, sees changes quickly. In politics, the feedback loop isn’t there; a guy who improves his political knowledge… sees nothing change. He may vote a little bit differently but still suffers from the myths of the irrational voters, mentioned above. The historical knowledge isn’t there. Neither is the incentive to improve. The market quality isn’t there. Voters are attenuated from individual decisions, and guys writing online about politics are also attenuated.

You put all these effect together and you get guys spouting “conservative” “Red Pill” slogans. No one can get past their identity to look at the data, to quote myself again. People who can do that, who can think in terms of systems, who can process past events and see how they might be able to apply to the future… those people are rare. People who can parrot back identity-bashing slogans… they are common. Including in the Red Pill.

Most RP/seduction guys have failed at normal dating, are too low status to achieve their desires in normal dating, or are otherwise dissatisfied with what they’re getting. Often, they’ve never learned what women are actually attracted to, or how to be attractive to women. Then they think, “If that is a lie, what else is a lie?” Thus, the spread to politics.

Now that you understand why RP guys can get taken in by marketing grifters and confidence men, can you can vote appropriately, or work on building your business, or go hit on chicks instead of screaming about politics online.

Today, the real question is about how the liberal west is going to respond to the rise of China. Neither the grifter in the White House nor Britain obsessed with Brexit is even thinking about, let alone dealing with, this issue. We squabble, they work. Think about that.

“The Woman Worried She’ll Never Meet Her Polyamorous Boyfriend’s Parents”

The Woman Worried She’ll Never Meet Her Polyamorous Boyfriend’s Parents” might be an example of a guy doing polyamory from the superior position. He’s f**king at least two women. The one writing the story is deeply into him. She seems to be retained without too much work on his end. Without the polyamorous frame, she would probably not be f**king him as regularly or easily.

I don’t want to make too much of this story because, without knowing more about the looks of everyone involved, and other aspects of the guy’s situation, he could be acting from a pretty inferior position. Based on the information provided, though, he seems to have at least two chicks well inside his frame.

More women are being psychologically prepped for open relationships by articles like this. Guys should be considering whether they want to present this kind of frame.

What flaking looks like from a woman’s perspective

I like this series it seems that I’m doing on flaking from a woman’s perspective. Many guys seem to have a bad or incorrect mental model of women’s lived experience. Women can get dates or casual sex any time they want. So letting a particular date go is of no consequence, like with this chick.

8:30 p.m. Getting dressed for this date that I’m kind of dreading. We’ve already pushed it back and now I’m tired and don’t feel like having to be “on” to meet someone new.

9:30 p.m. I ride two stops on the subway and realize the bar he’s picked is going to take an hour to get to. I text him to let him know I just can’t do it tonight. He’s super understanding and we agree to meet later in the week.

Then

2:10 p.m. Remember that I’m supposed to go on the rescheduled date with Hinge guy tonight. I text him and explain that I’m taking a step back from dating and focusing on myself. He’s surprisingly chill about it.

Of course, that actually means she’s f**king a guy she likes. No one takes “a step back from dating” if they have an opportunity to date the man/woman of their dreams. Typically, a girl is f**king someone. You should try to make that someone you.

This guy is “chill,” which is smart. If her main f**k buddy departs, he might get a random text saying they should “reconnect,” etc.

“How America Grew Bored With Love” and needs GAME

How America Grew Bored With Love is about how America is now excessively sterile because guys have no game and women are cunts. Guys reading this cannot help the latter problem but can improve the “no game” problem. The article echoes much that you have read here:

Erich Fromm, a Jewish psychologist and philosopher who moved from Germany to New York to escape Nazi persecution, wrote in his brilliant and forever salient book The Art of Loving that love, like any art—engineering, painting, playing an instrument—requires knowledge and effort.

“Our whole culture,” Fromm explained, “is based on an appetite for buying.” As a result, most people think of love only as an acquisition—how can they be loved—rather than learning how to love another. Falling in love is involuntary, but to protect and preserve a more mature and long-term love, the lover must have the discipline, maturity, and faith to “stand in love.”

That’s right: love is a SKILL, not just “something that happens,” contrary to what you have heard from the feminist culture at larger. It is especially a skill for men. Men engineer love/lust in women. Game shows guys how to do this, at the physical and emotional levels. Most guys don’t learn this skills, so they putter around playing video games and watching porn instead of f**king live chicks, which requires that they leave their hourses.

Guys should be careful with their money. If you don’t have money, “No money” becomes your one and only abiding problem that must be solved before all others. I have written a number of finance and career posts, most notably arguing that most guys allocate their money poorly. Most guys spend too much on housing (especially buying McMansions in suburbs or exurbs) and on transport (hot chicks don’t actually care what kind of car you drive). Money should be spend on food (good nutrition), gym (sometimes including personal training if you can find a personal trainer), and to a lesser extent good-quality clothes that fit your body.

Money should not be spent on an expensive “name brand” car. Right now, three to five year old used cars are a fantastic deal. Better yet, get a three-year-old Zero Electric bike for $5,000 and spend nothing on maintenance and almost nothing on fuel while making your date’s eyes bug out. Money should not be spent on a woman’s desire to compete with other women for housing. Much of my best game has been done in a studio apartment in a desirable location that was close to one or two good bars. Beginners in the game think about what to say to a chick, intermediates and above think about logistics because we know chicks are fundamentally irresponsible and want the bang to “just happen.” So we set up the conditions necessary to make it “just happen” for her because we “have some wine” at home.

Dating and impressing chicks costs far less than the typical guy thinks. The typical guy wastes too much money on the wrong stuff. The minimum you need is very minimal. Cleanliness and interpersonal affect are 10x more important than a stereotypically “impressive” car or house. Fromm was right decades ago and he is still right today. The capitalist marketing machine wants you to spend as much as possible and smart guys resist firmly. Smart guys spend time dead lifting more than time shopping.

Stevie Wonder sang in what is now a terribly unfashionable song, “Love’s in Need of Love Today,” that Americans might not have much love for love, and might have lost their desire to watch or listen to depictions of love, because love is subversive to its empire of ego.

This song is not unfashionable. It is true and that’s why it is still good. But it’s also true that guys need either no/very little ego (in the Stoic case) or titanic ego to succeed today. I try to have no/little ego but acknowledge that the “titanic ego” guys can succeed. Most guys have too much ego, in the wrong dimensions, to succeed.

I think love is fantastic, but I am also a realist in that love should not lead to marriage because modern, legal marriage is a catastrophe for men. Instead, I advocate that men do love but without marrying or even necessarily being monogamous.

Men cannot allow themselves to fall in love with a woman before she falls in love with im. Men also must know that most women will fall “out” of love with him before he does with her. Men also need to know that cohabitating will typically kill love, even as women push for cohabitation. Remember how Fromm argued that love is a SKILL? It is a skill most women don’t have and don’t or can’t understand. As a guy, we must be better. Feminism argues for “equality,” but equality must be earned, not given, and very few women earn it. Guys should know this.

Women still want and yearn to yield to a high-status man, but most men have not learned to be men, leaving women frustrated and un-f**ked. When women encounter a man who behaves like a man, they are often flustered, aroused, and confused because it happens so rarely. Game teaches guys how to be guys in a culture that is stupidly pushing guys to be androgynous quasi-humans who hide their dicks. To love requires experience, passion, and getting out of your apartment, out of your video games, out of your movies/TV, and into the real world. It requires the ability to endure pain and rejection, which most modern guys are too fragile to do.

The concept of “gender nonbinary” and the like has become popular in recent years. I reject that utterly. I am extremely gender binary. I’m a man, and feminine women are attracted to masculine men. If you want ugly, fat, mannish women, be androgynous. If you want feminine, attractive women, be a man. You won’t learn how in (most) school, except sometimes from physical education and some science classes. Chicks are waiting out there to be f**ked by a man who is a man.

Go get them.

We’re discouraging marriage and families at every level

We’re discouraging marriage and families at every level, then we’re surprised when people stop doing both. That is the point of the new Dalrock post, along with the fact that some of these ideas are bleeding into the larger media ecosystem. I’m not a big fan of him and his relentless coverage of the relentless internecine battles among religious persons, but I subscribe to his blog and find this piece worth passing along.

Victoria’s Secret knows that women want to be sexy

Victoria’s Secret knows that women want to be sexy and get that top guy. You wouldn’t know it, though, from this stupid New York Times article about the company.

The marketing of Victoria’s Secret has been nothing if not consistent. The company’s fashion show this month, complete with skinny models, push-up bras, thongs and strappy stilettos, was a near carbon copy of the one it first mounted in 1995, albeit with more feathers, sequins and wings. And its adherence to that vision of sexy will not be compromised.

Women, however, are not stupid. They know guys like boobs, butts, and height-weight proportionate women, and they will buy products that accentuate these ideas. If I were at Victoria’s Secret, I’d double down on being hot.

Women know that top guys have choices, and women know guys like youth and beauty. Women know that they are competing against other women for top guys. Older women at the New York Times may not want to acknowledge this, and they may not like it, but it remains true.

Smart companies may pay lip service to the bullshit in social justice warrior twitter and at the New York Times, but they know that their core clients remain in the game. The fight against lingerie will never be won by fat chicks or older writers at the New York Times, for the same reason fat acceptance will never happen.

Immigration, identity, knowledge part 2

Warning: as with “Get past your identity and look at the data,” “The stink of poly-ticks is high in this post, which has little to do with actual game, so you may want to skip it.” You’ve been warned. You should read “Ms. Slav story updates: Enter new girl Peaches” instead.

There are few fields with larger gaps between the “Twitter world” and the “knowlede world” than immigration. Most people who live in the latter don’t do Twitter as “Twitter natives” do. Among historians, anti-immigration sentiment is almost entirely absent. Why? For one thing, the data show that “Immigrants are doing a great job of becoming Americans.” Plus, historians know that the arguments against immigrants have always stayed the same and have always been wrong. Like Henry Cabot Lodge’s famous speech 1896 speech, “The Problem of Immigration”:

other races of totally different race origin, with whom the English-speaking people have never hitherto been assimilated or brought in contact, have suddenly begun to immigrate to the United States in large numbers. Russians, Hungarians, Poles, Bohemians, Italians, Greeks, and even Asiatics, whose immigration to America was almost unknown 20 years ago, have during the last 20 years poured in in steadily increasing numbers, until now they nearly equal the immigration of those races kindred by whom the United States has hitherto been built up and the American people formed.

In other words, we gotta kick out those foreigners who are different than us. Today, of course, their descendents are making the same anti-immigration arguments that are common on Twitter. Lodge also says:

It is not necessary to enter into a discussion of the economic side of the general policy of restricting immigration. In this direction the argument is unanswerable. If we have any regard for the welfare, the wages, or the standard life of American workingmen, we should take immediate steps to restrict foreign immigration. There is no danger, at present to all events, to our workingmen from the coming of skilled mechanics or trained and educated men with a settled occupation or pursuit, for immigration of this class will never seek to lower the American standard of life and wages

It is necessary; immigration improves American lives and immigrants don’t compete for the jobs Americans do. Funny stories like, “Farmers Finding Few Americans Willing To Do Jobs Immigrants Do” are common. I have friends in the restaurant biz. Try hiring native-born Americans to be dishwashers. The places in the United States with the highest immigration rates also have the strongest economies.

No one arguing against immigration is highly knowledgable about history, or the way their arguments have been used for the last one to two hundred years, and they’ve been wrong the whole time. And anti-immigrant rhetoric is rarely if ever supported by (real) research in peer-reviewed journals. For example, The welfare impact of global migration in OECD countries finds that immigration improves GDP and “recent migration flows have been beneficial for 69% of the non-migrant OECD population, and for 83% of non-migrant citizens of the 22 richest OECD countries.”

We are seeing immigrants create new jobs. Immigration does not create crime and if anything immigrants have lower crime rates, on average, than native-born persons. So why do these memes persist? It seems that humans like to sort ourselves into tribes and it’s fun to create out-groups, and immigrants make handy out groups. Normal people don’t go trolling through the literature and instead form their views on single-hit sensationalist stories and the like. Most people also don’t think about history or their own families’s histories, which, in the United States, always includes immigration somewhere (unless a person is Native American).

The United States is not an ethno-state. It is a set of ideas and ideals. It is also a machine for taking in disparate people and turning their children into Americans (some of whom will in turn adopt anti-immigrant rhetoric). We should be happy this process works and works well. We should also be attentive to the kind of evidence cited by anti-immigrant types. Yes, there are sensationalistic stories about individual bad acts. Just as there are… sensationalistic stories about individual bad acts by people born in the United States. But the anti-immigrant rhetoric is almost totally absent among historians and economists. We should be thinking about why that is. Yes, it’s possible that there’s a giant conspiracy theory. Or, more likely, knowing history makes people chill out about the supposed foreign invasion.

In good news, American support for immigration is at all-time high. I doubt this is because of a newfound love for and knowledge of history, but it is nice.

Overall, Western Civilization is a hardy weed and normal people around the world want TV, convenient food, and hot sex.

I don’t expect to change hearts and minds because almost no one thinks statistically or attempts to systematically review what data exist.