Sacrosanct Elimination the Defeatist Heresy

I started a comment to CH’s post “What Produces Female Beauty?,” but it’s another diatribe and harangue that I can surmise few if any would actually want to read. So the better part of valor…

Everyone is ignoring how evolution and selection bias works. No place simply produces more beautiful women to any meaningful degree, percentage, amount. There are fluctuations as statistical noise that doesn’t count. What matters is the elimination bias. The special ingredient of the process of evolution at all is elimination. The bias is expressed as failure, ultimately the failure to reproduce. The ugliness infecting the West is beautiful by the immediate standards of success vs. failure. Evolution does not care if winning is losing something precious. When Daddy Gov steps in, or virtue signalling Xians, the overhead of self-reliance makes self-reliance (in men) a mild or moderately dysgenic trait.

There must be many, many Boolean trials that end in abject failure for evolution to go anywhere, up or down, which is not exactly the life people want to live. Individuals are not the centerpiece of evolution, but evolutionary processes are inherently selfish, as in The Selfish Gene. Traits and behaviors as design attributes are the centerpiece. The elimination of, say, non-beautiful women, the topic du jour on CH’s blog, cuts against the Churchian beta grain there and any BP emotionalism. Evolution is eliminating functional traits without remorse for the individual. Evolution does not care about human progress either, and yet fosters it like a bitch fosters her relationship with a beta orbiter, temperamentally. Mother nature is a bitch.

Likewise, most organisms don’t care about the progress of humanity, and why should they if that progress is not their personal progress? Subhumans don’t care about the art and science of cooperation, the economy, culture, etc., except to the extent that others as good sucker fodder do. The army of shit has given you a bastardized morality to control you, to eat you. To acquire your concentration of calories and any other social utility you are.

The elimination principle is inherent in natural/evolution law and its law of conservation. For example, the only culturally and progressively sound conquest is one that eliminates the culturally distinct other men at least and colonizes the acquired territory with the men of the victors’ culture. Not only are there opposing genes to eliminate or fight anew but opposing memes that bitter defeat will surely create. History is a record of human programming of human behavior as well as a record of human behavior itself. Another example, mass education does not raise mean IQ, as we see all to clearly. Elimination of low IQ people and reproduction of high IQ people with those redirected means raises mean IQ if you’re mixing apples and oranges. More precisely, it makes the higher IQ trait more prolific and abundant and potentially synergistic.

Jews could not be dumb by natural law after Herod’s Temple was razed in 70 AD, so they are not. A Jew thereafter had to be competent with Hebrew and Jewish culture AND the host language and culture to function, to survive. Many Jews defected. Those who stayed could only be emotionally zealous and intellectually cunning. The Jews’ detachment from all land not Israel keeps those of their diaspora detached from the welfare of their host culture, system, and people, with the usual spread of outliers of course, statistical noise.

Failure is not an if but a how.

Libtards pretend failure can be eliminated to cannibalize their psychologically abused hosts. Any functional social system manages failure somehow. You see how garden variety producer white men have failed by design? Elimination is not avoidable for evolutionary systems and life on earth is an evolutionary system. For cooperative behavior to thrive, uncooperative behavior must perish before it. Conquest never sleeps.

Civilized men, patriarchs, must manage failure as part of a systemic design or else fail to be civilized men, patriarchs. It’s the feet-of-clay thing. Game is a microcosm regulated by the same law, and a sphere where you can have some control. Scarcity or abundance mindset? What is failure with a woman? Not getting the lay? Or not selling your soul? Taking care of #1 is not something nasty to eliminate from humanity but yourself first, they say. It is something to democratize back to normal by breaking the BP matrix of lies. Organisms are not healthy if they don’t look out for #1. If you want my cooperative value, what’s yours? Do we barter value for value in an ongoing relationship? If thinking men answer these questions correctly by their social actions, healthy bias pruning will follow. The acorn tree starts small, but that’s were we are right now. If we are better than libtards, we can play their game better than they can. Therein lies the crux of morality if there is any. If failure does not favor true progress by the welfare of producers, it favors parasites. This painful round of several lifetimes has purged universal caring from producer Western men, and good riddance. The cog can’t be dropped soon enough.

Unplug. Side step. Ride. Rebuild.

Yours in patriarchy,

—‘Reality’ Doug, 8 September 2017


About ‘Reality’ Doug

I'm feed up with herd people, so civil and uncivilized, these feckless barbarians with manicures. Where is Galt's Gulch? and where are the people to go there? Who am I? Who is John Galt?
Gallery | This entry was posted in Philosophy and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s