To answer your question at the conclusion, yes you are onto something (too put it mildly). I found your writings on here from Lionel Nation, he posted it on one of his daily video blogs (The Real American Conspiracy: Stupidity and Greed). That was fantastic as well, so I subscribed to you, then checked out this article.
Besides loving your writing style and how you break up and analyse each subject with clarity, the depth at which you delve into these modern concepts are currently unparalleled. I have not seen any contemporary blogger, podcaster, or writer accurately describe these conflicts.
For instance you write
"In a society where legal and judicial dynamics within the marital system favor the mother – in custody, alimony, and child support – said male is further disincentivized to follow the mandate pressed upon him by his DNA; i.e. avoiding copulation for fear of child-bearance. Reproduction becomes a net-loss, even a death-sentence, on the cash flow of one’s life."
This is certainly the root of many problems in the masculine side of life. Not only does this fact go against the make-up of what it means to be a man. It lowers man to value money over family, a legal system that enforces selfishness, victim-hood, and materialism. Yes such traits have always existed, but what happens when the system is presented to large swathes of men in such a way? Not only men but what does this do to women on a large scale? We already know I suppose.
Another good passage you write,
"Resources should be easier to acquire for those of capability, for those that provide value to a society and therefore earn from said society’s market, funneling capital towards them in exchange for their efforts. But they should not become easier to acquire for those that provide no value; the liars and the frauds that hijack the money printer."
What you are describing is a form of meritocracy. I did not read your article about CAS (Part 1) yet, but from your Stupidity and Greed article I understand it at a simple level for now. How would you apply CAS to this subject? Would you say that this system that promotes the ruination of masculinity to this degree has been a result of greed and stupidity, or is there some merit to this being by design?
Sure CAS can work when talking about the individuals working under those with power. However how can CAS work when those at the top can coordinate agendas such as this to the lower rung?
What man (at the lower rungs of the power structure) would willingly be okay with this system, what benefits would they see? How can they even make such decisions when the system ruled by the elites enforces it's made-up morals and dogmas down their throats from birth?
This next paragraph you wrote not only illustrates the insanity that occurred with feminism, it perfectly describes our current volatile political climate on all fronts:
"Rather than carry discussion over nuance and specificities, and having fair discussions over consequences being rooted in the failings of cultural norms, or individuals. What happens when generations are raised and taught to doubt, and despise their own existence over a sex that was determined by fate or random chance? I should think that many, many women would understand how this feels, so why was the same standard not expressed upon their actions?"
The one thing I would argue is sure, many women may understand how this feels. Maybe women from an older generation? How would this apply to young females who have not suffered any of the ailments of their predecessors (if those ailments are what is claimed stretching back to the last 70-90 years of "progress"). Younger generations raised with a cultural silver spoon in their mouths? Could this create an air of superiority?
Nonetheless from basic observation, the unjustified rhetoric has certainly caused a deep scar in the minds of many young men and women, and for what? Too further look into this, maybe using your CAS concept, what is the male-female situation in other countries. Is this an issue in western countries only (I suspect mostly though not entirely sure), if so, what does this entail?
I would love to write more but I think I've taken !such of your time already. Love your writings can't wait to see more!
I've come to a very similar conclusion and finally decided to write about it, and just now found your article on ZH, definitely a grand scheme :P
this artificial world on which we're guided by subjective metrics(fiat economy) is nothing more than a bouncy castle we've inherited from predecessors that had no such luxury, of ignoring whats outside of our collective
fiat economies pit a collective's own people against each other, because its metrics are guided by its own self reflection, they think they're winning, but they're just shuffling resources around instead of producing anew, with some outside plunder like wars and international feudalism this can go on for quite a while, but outsiders eventually toughen up or get depleted
Natural selection means people have evolved to be good at fiat, the self-consuming system, but the outside world still exists, today's idiocracy is what happens when the collective illusion guiding us, fiat, can no longer get the real world that constrains us to do as we say, implosion ongoing as we speak
To answer your question at the conclusion, yes you are onto something (too put it mildly). I found your writings on here from Lionel Nation, he posted it on one of his daily video blogs (The Real American Conspiracy: Stupidity and Greed). That was fantastic as well, so I subscribed to you, then checked out this article.
Besides loving your writing style and how you break up and analyse each subject with clarity, the depth at which you delve into these modern concepts are currently unparalleled. I have not seen any contemporary blogger, podcaster, or writer accurately describe these conflicts.
For instance you write
"In a society where legal and judicial dynamics within the marital system favor the mother – in custody, alimony, and child support – said male is further disincentivized to follow the mandate pressed upon him by his DNA; i.e. avoiding copulation for fear of child-bearance. Reproduction becomes a net-loss, even a death-sentence, on the cash flow of one’s life."
This is certainly the root of many problems in the masculine side of life. Not only does this fact go against the make-up of what it means to be a man. It lowers man to value money over family, a legal system that enforces selfishness, victim-hood, and materialism. Yes such traits have always existed, but what happens when the system is presented to large swathes of men in such a way? Not only men but what does this do to women on a large scale? We already know I suppose.
Another good passage you write,
"Resources should be easier to acquire for those of capability, for those that provide value to a society and therefore earn from said society’s market, funneling capital towards them in exchange for their efforts. But they should not become easier to acquire for those that provide no value; the liars and the frauds that hijack the money printer."
What you are describing is a form of meritocracy. I did not read your article about CAS (Part 1) yet, but from your Stupidity and Greed article I understand it at a simple level for now. How would you apply CAS to this subject? Would you say that this system that promotes the ruination of masculinity to this degree has been a result of greed and stupidity, or is there some merit to this being by design?
Sure CAS can work when talking about the individuals working under those with power. However how can CAS work when those at the top can coordinate agendas such as this to the lower rung?
What man (at the lower rungs of the power structure) would willingly be okay with this system, what benefits would they see? How can they even make such decisions when the system ruled by the elites enforces it's made-up morals and dogmas down their throats from birth?
This next paragraph you wrote not only illustrates the insanity that occurred with feminism, it perfectly describes our current volatile political climate on all fronts:
"Rather than carry discussion over nuance and specificities, and having fair discussions over consequences being rooted in the failings of cultural norms, or individuals. What happens when generations are raised and taught to doubt, and despise their own existence over a sex that was determined by fate or random chance? I should think that many, many women would understand how this feels, so why was the same standard not expressed upon their actions?"
The one thing I would argue is sure, many women may understand how this feels. Maybe women from an older generation? How would this apply to young females who have not suffered any of the ailments of their predecessors (if those ailments are what is claimed stretching back to the last 70-90 years of "progress"). Younger generations raised with a cultural silver spoon in their mouths? Could this create an air of superiority?
Nonetheless from basic observation, the unjustified rhetoric has certainly caused a deep scar in the minds of many young men and women, and for what? Too further look into this, maybe using your CAS concept, what is the male-female situation in other countries. Is this an issue in western countries only (I suspect mostly though not entirely sure), if so, what does this entail?
I would love to write more but I think I've taken !such of your time already. Love your writings can't wait to see more!
I've come to a very similar conclusion and finally decided to write about it, and just now found your article on ZH, definitely a grand scheme :P
this artificial world on which we're guided by subjective metrics(fiat economy) is nothing more than a bouncy castle we've inherited from predecessors that had no such luxury, of ignoring whats outside of our collective
fiat economies pit a collective's own people against each other, because its metrics are guided by its own self reflection, they think they're winning, but they're just shuffling resources around instead of producing anew, with some outside plunder like wars and international feudalism this can go on for quite a while, but outsiders eventually toughen up or get depleted
Natural selection means people have evolved to be good at fiat, the self-consuming system, but the outside world still exists, today's idiocracy is what happens when the collective illusion guiding us, fiat, can no longer get the real world that constrains us to do as we say, implosion ongoing as we speak