Desperate Degenerates

I never said you said women are the problem, you reposted a tweet by Stefan that said women were the problem so I commented.
Niggers are, in my estimation, a problem. A problem does not imply a councious and independent agent, necessairly, jews and the 'capital' will run American into the ground through niggers and browns, without them a point in their history would arise alike the one in pre-Nazi germany where the tipping point is reached and the white population erases its parasitical element, such point will occur in America eventually but the outcome will be like that of South Africa, where, because of coloured races, whites wont be able to seize control by force.
This is my opinion, if you see it differently, I would like to hear it.

I don't adopt the ideas of those I agree with in principle.
Stefan thinks women are the source...or maybe he doesn't. I haven't cared to look further into his ideas.
Negroes are a proxy, used by the chosen as the front-man for their destruction of Europeans.
They are the representational victim race...and they the king of all victims.
A parasite infests a host and sues it as a means...to its end.
They remain clueless. Like women...well, most.

Like I said...they are just awakening to Nietzsche's influence.

Did Foucault invent fisting?

Quote :

Then, Saint Michel Foucault happened on the scene with his death from AIDS in 1984. Foucault’s original claim to fame was Archeology of Knowledge, published in 1971. He lectured at U.C. Berkeley as a visiting professor during the Radical Sixties, crossing into San Francisco’s Miracle Mile of S&M extremism. He and his lover back in Paris seemed quite “ordinary,” but according to Edmund White, Foucault “turned into a S&M slave” for other S&M leather men to gang fist him while trashing Folsom Street’s more derelict bathhouses and backrooms. According to White, Foucault did not contract AIDS by being fisted or wasted (he sure could have, Edmund).

While “intellectually” a historian by profession, Foucault ventured into some provocative areas with his corpus, indicting penology, psychology, and criminalization of aberrant behavior. While few read his most promising work of 1971, many became enmeshed with his relational ontology of binary differences, male/female, straight/queer, sadist/masochist, gay/lesbian, etc. And since many gays and lesbians major in English language and literature, this Postmodern bullshit from France is the elite nonsense de jour. Ironically, Foucault is not a Postmodernist, but a structuralist, from which springs his Relational Ontology in a schizo-affective, S/M binary sort of way.

Who can be more wise and worth reading than a 'man' who loves to take it up his arse?

What does it matter who votes conservative when the system isn't worth conserving. Many women only vote conservative to conserve their freedom to be parasites and whores. If you asked them how they'd feel if these freedoms were undone, or at least they had to fight to impose them, then you would see what proportion of them is actually decent.

Sharing and comparing subjective interpretation of an objective world is what debate and philosophy is about.
What do we use to evaluate which subjective interpretation si closest to a shared objective world?
The world itself.

Each subjective interpretation resulting in consequences - positive and negative - in relation to a subjective intent, a goal.
The more in error a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is in relation to the objective world determines the possibility of a negative consequence; the more in accord a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is in relation to the objective world determines the possibility of a positive consequence.

But Desperate degenerates want others to mitigate so that the negative consequences of their delusional subjective interpretation and goals be equally distributed so as to not suffer them completely.
For this reason, they inevitably evolve from Abrahamic ethics, towards Marxist ethics.
Unable to admit that they are inferior, and naive, in mind they then continue towards nihilism, when both Abrahamism and Marxism disappoint them. Their own inferiority becomes a universal truth - an absolute truth.
Wealth distribution is accompanied by guilt distribution, and shame distribution and weakness distribution.
Hierarchies are levelled down so that their own status is included in a theoretical uniformity - existing only in their mind.

DON JR: Whoopi, you defended Roman Polanski, who drugged & raped children’

WHOOPI: ‘Oh, You want to talk about this!?’

ALSO WHOOPI: "It wasn’t rape, rape. I don’t believe it was rape. They were having sex before. The world sees 13 year olds differently’

Sick.[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

To be fair, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] do mature faster than humans.

What tribe did [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Polanski ]Roman Polanski[/url]belong to?
Not Roman, that's for sure.
I wonder what the statistics are on sexual deviance and ethnicity. I see a pattern emerging. I need more data.

A Desperate Degenerate refuses to accept that a definition must be descriptive of what is observable.
It isn't arbitrary and subjective, but must describe a activity - interactivity - that can be corroborated and tested and falsified.
But the Desperate Degenerate prefers definitions that remain obscure, and vague, so that he can then claim that all is subjective, including the consequences of a judgement - particularly when the consequences are intervened upon by a collective so that the individual does not have to suffer the full brunt of there negativity.
For this reason he/she is always a collectivist of some form or another. If not Abrahamic then Marxist...or some form of humanism; any ideology that proposes an equal sharing of costs, risks, and... rewards.
The price of remaining a degenerate.

BREAKING VIDEO: A substitute teacher in Hays County, Texas, has been fired after video surfaced of her repeatedly hitting a student [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— LIVE Breaking News (@NewsBreaking) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

You can take the ape out of the jungle, but not the jungle out of the ape.
The pragmatic reality of race differences.

^To be fair, the student could have said something racist (TM).
Like that African Americans commit much more violent crimes than is the average.
What normal, average intelligent hyman bean wouldn't go swinging hearing that?

Anfang wrote:

^To be fair, the student could have said something racist (TM).
Like that African Americans commit much more violent crimes than is the average.
What normal, average intelligent hyman bean wouldn't go swinging hearing that?

Ha!!!
It's hard being mature when you are a primitive.
The boy was white...from the colour of his hand. I guess.

Satyr wrote:

A judgement is based on a triangulation.
You need three points of reference...not two and some vague insinuation; not two subjective views and nothing else...or emotion,a s the standard.
Subject/Object/Ideal.

I/Other/Goal

Always a triad.

Objectivity places the standard in world.
Subject/Motive/World
The standard is always world, because world is indifferent to all subjective interpretation, all motives, all goals.
And consequences is how world measures the subjective judgement, determining its superiority or inferiority.
Subjective Judgement/Goal/Consequences.
How do the consequences compare to the subjective judgement's expectations?

And if the Desperate Degenerate lies - self-deceives to save-face to protect his ego or his own ideals - then he isn't harming anyone but himself. He will repeat the same wrong judgements, having failed to identify his own errors, and bad choices.

Our planet teems with life. But are we a fluke, or an inevitability? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Discover Magazine (@DiscoverMag) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

For the Desperate Degenerate life is inevitable - an end, part of a universal plan.
In their self-denying humility their arrogance is transferred externally - power and pride through association.
They want to feel inevitable; part of a universal order - God's will, in a secular form.
Their eternal life is eternal return - it is believed in as an absolute repetition of the exact same...because all is exactly ordered, and will exactly repeat...infinitely.

Satyr wrote:

Sharing and comparing subjective interpretation of an objective world is what debate and philosophy is about.
What do we use to evaluate which subjective interpretation is closest to a shared objective world?
The world itself.
Each subjective interpretation resulting in consequences - positive and negative - in relation to a subjective intent, a goal.
The more in error a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is, in relation to the objective world, determines the possibility of a negative consequence; the more in accord a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is, in relation to the objective world, determines the possibility of a positive consequence.

But Desperate Degenerates want others to mitigate so that the negative consequences of their delusional subjective interpretation and goals be equally distributed so as to not suffer them completely.
For this reason, they inevitably evolve from Abrahamic ethics, towards Marxist ethics.
Unable to admit that they are inferior, and naive, in mind they then continue towards nihilism, when both Abrahamism and Marxism inevitably disappoint them. Their own inferiority becomes a universal truth - an absolute truth.
Wealth distribution is accompanied by guilt distribution, and shame distribution and weakness distribution.
Hierarchies are levelled down so that their own status is included in a theoretical uniformity - existing only in their mind.

Satyr wrote:

A Desperate Degenerate refuses to accept that a definition must be descriptive of what is observable.
It isn't arbitrary and subjective, but must describe an activity - interactivity - that can be corroborated and tested and falsified.
But the Desperate Degenerate prefers definitions that remain obscure, and vague, so that he can then claim that all is subjective, including the consequences of a judgement - particularly when the consequences are intervened upon by a collective so that the individual does not have to suffer the full brunt of there negativity.
For this reason he/she is always a collectivist of some form or another. If not Abrahamic then Marxist...or some form of humanism; any ideology that proposes an equal sharing of costs, risks, and... rewards.
The price of remaining a degenerate.

Not that I think incels are desperate degenerates.

Fuck me, low in agreeablness but also low in openess and highly neurotic, sounds like a hell to socialize with, let alone be with, I am very low in agreeablness and, unfortunately, quite high in neuroticism(though eating a lot, cutting coffee and exercising whilst watching myself has brought me down quite below average), but I am high in openess so I get along with people very well as long as they don't try to test me or behave like dickheads, I can only socialize sucesfully with feminine women and had good success in this because women are rude and impolite and too argumentative for me when they aren't feminine and submissive and it always ends abruptly when I tried in the past.

INCELS are the manifestation of the cruelty of nature. Beauty is a natural selective quality inherent in what is stronger. Therefore they hate what, or in this case, WHO is beautiful, because they know they are inferior.

If you read Elliot Rodgers manifesto, which I have, and which isn't a "manifesto" at all, but an autobiography, You'll see that what he despised was the fact that he was a sexual being, with sexual needs and impulses dependent on an external source, the female. Moreover, these inferior males are in rebellion against thier own sexuality in relation to the female who determines it.

What exacerbates thier degenerate condition is that they have a superiority complex, linked to a marginal degree of intelligence, exposing to them certain truths about strength and weakness. But they are too weak minded to manage it. So they implode or develop psychosis.

"Private Pyle" from full mental jacket is an archetypal parralel to this phenomenon. The weak who intuitively grasps the idea of strength, but is dominated and broken by it.

Kvasir wrote:

INCELS are the manifestation of the cruelty of nature. Beauty is a natural selective quality inherent in what is stronger. Therefore they hate what, or in this case, WHO is beautiful, because they know they are inferior.

And female acts as nature's agency.
Nature's cruelty is feminine because females are the agency through which it is expressed as 'choice'.

Kvasir wrote:

If you read Elliot Rodgers manifesto, which I have, and which isn't a "manifesto" at all, but an autobiography, You'll see that what he despised was the fact that he was a sexual being, with sexual needs and impulses dependent on an external source, the female. Moreover, these inferior males are in rebellion against thier own sexuality in relation to the female who determines it.

They usually become, nihilists, and anarchists.
A vindictiveness against hierarchies, including those produced by natural order.
The desire to render everything subjective or meaningless, is this vengefulness.

Kvasir wrote:

What exacerbates thier degenerate condition is that they have a superiority complex, linked to a marginal degree of intelligence, exposing to them certain truths about strength and weakness. But they are too weak minded to manage it. So they implode or develop psychosis.

Above average intelligence produces an above average self-consciousness....and this is where nihilism becomes a preferred defensiveness characteristic of higher intelligence....animals and manimals feel none of this, and have no mind to use negative absolutes to defend the ego from the implications of not being 'chosen'.

This is why the terrorists hate us. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Satyr wrote:

Sharing and comparing subjective interpretations of an objective world is what debate and philosophy is about.
What do we use to evaluate which subjective interpretation is closest to a shared objective world?
The world itself.
Each subjective interpretation resulting in consequences - positive & negative - in relation to a subjective intent, a motive, a goal.
The more in error a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is, in relation to the objective world, determines the possibility of a negative consequence; the more in accord a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is, in relation to the objective world, determines the possibility of a positive consequence.

But Desperate Degenerates want others to mitigate so that the negative consequences of their delusional subjective interpretation and goals be equally distributed so as to not suffer them completely.
For this reason, they inevitably evolve from Abrahamic ethics, towards Marxist ethics.
Unable to admit that they are inferior, and naive, in mind they then continue towards nihilism, when both Abrahamism and Marxism inevitably disappoint them. Their own inferiority becomes a universal truth - an absolute truth.
Wealth distribution is accompanied by guilt distribution, and shame distribution and weakness distribution.
Hierarchies are levelled down so that their own status is included in a theoretical uniformity - existing only in their mind.

Satyr wrote:

A Desperate Degenerate refuses to accept that a definition must be descriptive of what is observable.
It isn't arbitrary and subjective, but must describe an activity - interactivity - that can be corroborated and tested and falsified.
But the Desperate Degenerate prefers definitions that remain obscure, and vague, so that he can then claim that all is subjective, including the consequences of a judgement - particularly when the consequences are intervened upon by a collective so that the individual does not have to suffer the full brunt of there negativity.
For this reason he/she is always a collectivist of some form or another. If not Abrahamic then Marxist...or some form of humanism; any ideology that proposes an equal sharing of costs, risks, and... rewards.
The price of remaining a degenerate.

Desperation manifesting degeneration, as a way of coping.
Keeping with the 'D' theme...this Desperate Degeneracy creates Dystopian art expressing depression at the coming Dark Age devastation by divine delusions of despair,
Derangement directed towards and through the Divine, seeking a cause...someone or something to blame.

Solipsism is how high I.Q. deals with its own insecurity and sense of vulnerability.
It's a defence against self-awareness and how it exposes the mind to reality, and how it, itself, relates, compares, with this mysterious mostly unknown otherness.
Nihilism is what I've identified - diagnosed - as the ideological coping with one's own sense of insecurity. the higher the I.Q., the more pronounced this self-awareness is, and so the greater the insecurity to deal with.
The more you know and are aware of the more you suffer and feel insecure and vulnerable. More probabilities to process.
Nihilism uses inversion to cope. It inverts the noumenon/phenomenon sequence.

To not fall "victim" to these "word salad" shysters, spoken of in the vid - victims to these eternal 'victims' - do not simply learn languages, learn what language is, and how to apply and use it accurately.
Unless everyone learns how to connect words to reality, they will remain vulnerable to charlatans abusing language to exploit, manipulate and control minds.

Satyr wrote:

Sharing and comparing subjective interpretations of an objective world is what debate and philosophy is about.
What do we use to evaluate which subjective interpretation is closest to a shared objective world?
The world itself.
Each subjective interpretation resulting in consequences - positive & negative - in relation to a subjective intent, a motive, a goal.
The more in error a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is, in relation to the objective world, determines the possibility of a negative consequence; the more in accord a subjective interpretation and a subjective goal is, in relation to the objective world, determines the possibility of a positive consequence.

But Desperate Degenerates want others to mitigate so that the negative consequences of their delusional subjective interpretation and goals be equally distributed so as to not suffer them completely.
For this reason, they inevitably evolve from Abrahamic ethics, towards Marxist ethics.
Unable to admit that they are inferior, and naive, in mind they then continue towards nihilism, when both Abrahamism and Marxism inevitably disappoint them. Their own inferiority becomes a universal truth - an absolute truth.
Wealth distribution is accompanied by guilt distribution, and shame distribution and weakness distribution.
Hierarchies are levelled down so that their own status is included in a theoretical uniformity - existing only in their mind.

Satyr wrote:

A Desperate Degenerate refuses to accept that a definition must be descriptive of what is observable.
It isn't arbitrary and subjective, but must describe an activity - interactivity - that can be corroborated and tested and falsified.
But the Desperate Degenerate prefers definitions that remain obscure, and vague, so that he can then claim that all is subjective, including the consequences of a judgement - particularly when the consequences are intervened upon by a collective so that the individual does not have to suffer the full brunt of there negativity.
For this reason he/she is always a collectivist of some form or another. If not Abrahamic then Marxist...or some form of humanism; any ideology that proposes an equal sharing of costs, risks, and... rewards.
The price of remaining a degenerate.

According to Jones, in his book Degenerate Moderns Keynesian economics can be traced back to his homosexuality.
His child-less existence, his attitude towards authority and established norms, shaped his theories.

Kvasir wrote:

INCELS are the manifestation of the cruelty of nature. Beauty is a natural selective quality inherent in what is stronger. Therefore they hate what, or in this case, WHO is beautiful, because they know they are inferior.

I'm not that familiar with "Incels", who that actually is supposed to be, but, from what I have seen, Incels is a term which is thrown around by the J-left and its influenced people towards boys and men on the right who's views they despise. I mean, the whole Chad and Stacie thing is a (far)-right-wing meme, something they are or aspire to be or at least sympathise with. So it's very strange what this Dr. Todd in the video is making up or repeating - Saying that the "Incels" don't like the Chads and Stacies.
The real mass phenomenon is not Elliot Rodgers running around but a culture where the family and traditional roles have been destroyed to a large extent and where there are now many single males and females around. The Incel smear is targeted mostly at those males who want to have a traditional family structure. The proposed ideal is to not care, if you don't care about this then you are also not an Incel.

The "INCEL" acronym was coined after Elliot Rodger commited his mass shooting in California. So thats why he is associated with it. Modernists have a banal term, acronym, phrase, or meme for everything. I simply used the term, conversely, because its the term they invented. I have no vested interest in it.

If you wish to understand this phenomenon better, than read Rodgers autobiography. There, you will find the psychology of this cross section of modern inferior male on full display and it is surprisingly interesting from a studious psychological point of view. He had a weak father who openly slept around with women during his childhood and eventually Rodger developed a hatred for them. This early upbringing with strange women probably instilled his hatred for women in general later into his adulthood, to some degree. He avidly talks about hating women throughout the paper. He had obsessions with being wealthy and a deep entitlement complex of sexual access to females. But he was of weak and small stature and a runt, and this created his inferiority complex that he overcompensated for with a superiority complex and ultimately it turned vindictive. The environment he was living in, I imagine, also exacerbated his problematic psychology. He was totally detached from his family and living on a college campus of self-indulgent nihilistic hedonistic student culture which he also talked about hating. Minds like his are primitive, they don't hold anything back. So the autobiography reveals everything.

Was it really something they invented? AFAIK it blew up way after Elliot Roger and it wasn't alone: there was 'volcel' and 'incel'. It was my impression they appropriated the terms (already there in whatever circle) and use it as an 'official' state's replacement for schoolyard 'virgin' - and anti-Christian-celibacy.

They of course never mention the distinguishing term 'volcel' because they very obviously do not ever want to make that distinction, it does not support anti-white pathology. To the 'man' it's translated "virgin", to the 'woman', "creep"/"undesirable".

In general, when men reproduce, they associate their behavior with reproductive success and become more calloused in their dispositions. If lying was necessary, they are calloused about lying. If being an effeminate fag was necessary, they are calloused about being an effeminate fag. Treating sex with callous hedonism is a way to make a nation demonize reproduction.

From what I remember Incel was first used in new-right-wing circles and it wasn't about Rodgers, at least not in the beginning, not by them. Then, as usual, the term was appropriated by the J-left and used to smear right wing men who were and are mostly into self-improvement mixed with depression about the (seemingly) inevitable progressing decay. That's the timeline form my point of view, from what I have seen. Incel was not an insult at the beginning, not one with bad intentions anyway, it was humorous and maybe self-critical at times.

Yes, what Slaughtz said about it.

Besides how a specific man-child dealt with his enforced celibacy....does not the phenomenon exist?
How one deals and copes with adversity, or the injustices of natural selection, is a side-matter.
Even if the term INCEL was never coined, this would not make the phenomenon, the reality, of a majority of males being excluded from the gene-pool and of being denied sexual gratification a reality - a socio-economic reality - made possible by specific conditions - such as feminism and the decline of Paternalism.

Elliot Rodger would not exist in Paternalism but a female equivalent would be the victim of being forced to endure him sexually; forced to raise his children...and perhaps seek relief in adultery.
Feminism returned sexual power to females, essentially forcing males back into primordial competitive roles...but, this time, with the added advantages of institutional laws, and technologies that enabled females to become promiscuous with minimal risks, adding to female power. and further diminishing the options available to males...forcing males into unprecedented territories.  
Some adjusting to this new reality by emasculating themselves.....a adaptation of the beta-male strategy.

Like I said, I have no vested interest in the term or its origins. I only noticed it becoming prominent after Elliot Rodger. If it was circulated earlier, as you say, so be it. They can attach whatever label they want to subjects, most of the time they are inaccurate to describe reality anyway. "Involuntary Celibate" doesn't have shit to do with the bigger picture of generational miscegenation and feminization producing inferior males. The very idea of being "forced" into a sexual celibacy( which is oxymoronic if you are in a position of free choice), in itself, indicates the kind of deformed mentality which lacks any responsibility for itself or its actions and seeks a target to avenge its weaknesses which it is incapable of facing and curtailing on its own.

Most of MRA's and MGTOW's are Incels....but there was no word for it then. nobody had killed anyone.
There was that French dude who killed those women in that University. But he left no video manifesto.

What of female Incels...there's plenty of those...although rare.
You would have to be pretty fucked up or ugly for no man to be willing to even fuck you once....plenty of Negroes would fuck anything.
With female Incels it would have to be about relationships. So, a new term has to be invented.
Women who are unable to become involved in a stable monogamous relationship with males.