Adopting the worldview of an educated Northerner of the early twentieth century could be an effective alternative to the false dichotomy of Millennial candyland and Zoomer oral culture. It is probably unfortunate that the great Liberal Consensus collapsed at the same time as American attention spans. That said, you are correct in asserting that the science regarding racial differences in intelligence quotient distributions will probably provide little benefit to those too dumb to know the difference between a bell curve and a Dirac delta function. However, the myriad studies demonstrating complete progressive domination of fields such as anthropology strongly imply that much work remains to consign tabula rasa to its rightful grave. Therefore, this information must be presented in a way that appeals to the serious student of social sciences, rather than the Tik-tok addled brain possessed by the lower orders of Zoomer.
I agree with most of your descriptive claims about reality, but this article is at bottom just a particularly high verbal IQ rendition of old-man-shakes-fist-at-the-neoalt-right paradigm. In practice, nobody you meet in real life—across the status spectrum—is formally eugenicist. Women and normie men don’t even describe their own views propositionally, not even to themselves. You’ve accurately classified a subset of the population, but it’s a very narrow slice indeed. Even the outrageously uncouth low-mid status men you meet at the gas station are implicitly Straussian without realizing it, even if they would characterize themselves as very conservative.
The more interesting thing here is your take on the shortcomings of the way zoomer men interface with the zeitgeist. Your critiques are probably correct—in the strong sense of being genuinely right—but your prescription is more like a description of how things could be better rather than an instruction with meat on the bone. Nearly every mid and late zoomer guy is balls deep into despair, even if his life has all the decorations that would have forestalled this condition in other generations. To wit, the recruitment chair of Sig Nu at an SEC school who crushes 10/10s at will can and does enjoy honest conversation with bottom feeder incel rejects—even in public, with the associated status hit. This is because of a commonly shared terror between these men that fundamentally transcends everything that even the highest IQ sperg could encode actuarially. (Ironically, in their exchange such men are actualizing the theoretical limit of egalitarianism as applied to the current models of society.) In particular, I reject your implicit characterization of the zoomer masculine orthodoxy as a sort of rationalistic response to unfavorable social conditions overlayed atop a kind of ironic, low agency cockroachy epistemic foreclosure of their own. Instead, I view the zoomer disposition as itself a sort of low-transcendental response to an anti-transcendental preverbal horror. But maybe this is my own self-serving gyration masked only by my distance as a pre-9/11 zoomer male.
Ultimately I am narrating the Zoomer impulse as I experience it--which is to say from the perspective of a solipsistic theory unc--under which it definitely feels like foreclosure. But I can see how from the Zoomer male interiority it seems like something completely different.
The thing I want Zoomer boys to understand is that a better world is possible.
Yes AWALT--but some are a LOT more Like That than others and the best Millennial chicks were probably the least Like That in history. But you never saw that because you grew up listening to Millennial guys who got dealt a bad hand and didn't nab a chick our age at a time when they were still sweet and pliable, but plenty of guys did and essentially became happy boomers in 2012. Hell, a bunch of them married the best of your women during covid and caught the last chopper out of 'nam, and if I hadn't been such a narcissistic pusshound in those years I'd have done the same and would sound like Peter Banks or Drunk Wisconsin.
Point is if we do a hard reign in of porn and swipe apps and short form video and infinite scroll we actually could create a world for Gen Beta (your kids and at this point mine as well) that is closer to the one I grew up in than the one you and your successors grew up in and is thus still gay and unfair and hellish cause that's life nigga but also slightly less so which is very obviously desirable.
Agree with your bottom line, with the caveat that your description of me (qua me) is completely off the mark on account of my early position in the zoomer timeline (e.g. finished high school before covid) as well as certain individuated factors (grew up in a high trust, high functioning homogeneous suburban utopia). In particular, I was spared from any manosphere content during my formative years and instead spent my free time split between anime, sportball, and roleplaying as a neurotypical—some sort of chimeric faggot who accidentally became substantive enough to contain a dialectic within himself (here you see what I have in common with millennial men). I claim that this arrangement is actually optimal for an autistic man, but was only barely possible 15 years ago and is literally possible now. In a solipsism of my own, I’m really only grieving the delta between Right Now and the world that socialized me.
But anyway, I appreciate what you are saying and by interpreting “you” to be a generalized stand-in for zoomer men, the right audience would feel validated (which is gay but necessary, if you are serious about being Straussian about this).
Yeah I tend to think of Zillennials / High Zoomers as just slightly more neurotic and less narcissistic Late Millennials and if anything probs closer to my experience than I am to the avg 1993 guy given my own Peter Pan tendencies. But the post-9/11 cohort is different qualitatively in very deep and unsettling ways.
"That means when you’re an open eugenicist you’re kind of just telling the world that you’re defective in some way, and Hitler himself would have killed you" I would have gotten a doctor's note from Hans Asperger actually
I skimmed a few spots. Yeah, people are eugenicists anyway. Yeah, it's antisocial to bring that into public discourse (public-public, online public isn't so bad). But also I don't know that eugenics as top-down policy is really a big thing. In a monarchy or similar static government, it would be good to try to reverse dysgenic trends caused by, say, population and lifestyle distributions. But you wouldn't say that you were doing that.
see if even my second most spergy and engaged Zoomer reader can't sit and read the whole thing what hope do the rest of you have? We need to send you niggers to concentration camps to literally make you concentrate.
Adopting the worldview of an educated Northerner of the early twentieth century could be an effective alternative to the false dichotomy of Millennial candyland and Zoomer oral culture. It is probably unfortunate that the great Liberal Consensus collapsed at the same time as American attention spans. That said, you are correct in asserting that the science regarding racial differences in intelligence quotient distributions will probably provide little benefit to those too dumb to know the difference between a bell curve and a Dirac delta function. However, the myriad studies demonstrating complete progressive domination of fields such as anthropology strongly imply that much work remains to consign tabula rasa to its rightful grave. Therefore, this information must be presented in a way that appeals to the serious student of social sciences, rather than the Tik-tok addled brain possessed by the lower orders of Zoomer.
I agree with most of your descriptive claims about reality, but this article is at bottom just a particularly high verbal IQ rendition of old-man-shakes-fist-at-the-neoalt-right paradigm. In practice, nobody you meet in real life—across the status spectrum—is formally eugenicist. Women and normie men don’t even describe their own views propositionally, not even to themselves. You’ve accurately classified a subset of the population, but it’s a very narrow slice indeed. Even the outrageously uncouth low-mid status men you meet at the gas station are implicitly Straussian without realizing it, even if they would characterize themselves as very conservative.
The more interesting thing here is your take on the shortcomings of the way zoomer men interface with the zeitgeist. Your critiques are probably correct—in the strong sense of being genuinely right—but your prescription is more like a description of how things could be better rather than an instruction with meat on the bone. Nearly every mid and late zoomer guy is balls deep into despair, even if his life has all the decorations that would have forestalled this condition in other generations. To wit, the recruitment chair of Sig Nu at an SEC school who crushes 10/10s at will can and does enjoy honest conversation with bottom feeder incel rejects—even in public, with the associated status hit. This is because of a commonly shared terror between these men that fundamentally transcends everything that even the highest IQ sperg could encode actuarially. (Ironically, in their exchange such men are actualizing the theoretical limit of egalitarianism as applied to the current models of society.) In particular, I reject your implicit characterization of the zoomer masculine orthodoxy as a sort of rationalistic response to unfavorable social conditions overlayed atop a kind of ironic, low agency cockroachy epistemic foreclosure of their own. Instead, I view the zoomer disposition as itself a sort of low-transcendental response to an anti-transcendental preverbal horror. But maybe this is my own self-serving gyration masked only by my distance as a pre-9/11 zoomer male.
Extremely useful feedback.
Ultimately I am narrating the Zoomer impulse as I experience it--which is to say from the perspective of a solipsistic theory unc--under which it definitely feels like foreclosure. But I can see how from the Zoomer male interiority it seems like something completely different.
The thing I want Zoomer boys to understand is that a better world is possible.
Yes AWALT--but some are a LOT more Like That than others and the best Millennial chicks were probably the least Like That in history. But you never saw that because you grew up listening to Millennial guys who got dealt a bad hand and didn't nab a chick our age at a time when they were still sweet and pliable, but plenty of guys did and essentially became happy boomers in 2012. Hell, a bunch of them married the best of your women during covid and caught the last chopper out of 'nam, and if I hadn't been such a narcissistic pusshound in those years I'd have done the same and would sound like Peter Banks or Drunk Wisconsin.
Point is if we do a hard reign in of porn and swipe apps and short form video and infinite scroll we actually could create a world for Gen Beta (your kids and at this point mine as well) that is closer to the one I grew up in than the one you and your successors grew up in and is thus still gay and unfair and hellish cause that's life nigga but also slightly less so which is very obviously desirable.
Agree with your bottom line, with the caveat that your description of me (qua me) is completely off the mark on account of my early position in the zoomer timeline (e.g. finished high school before covid) as well as certain individuated factors (grew up in a high trust, high functioning homogeneous suburban utopia). In particular, I was spared from any manosphere content during my formative years and instead spent my free time split between anime, sportball, and roleplaying as a neurotypical—some sort of chimeric faggot who accidentally became substantive enough to contain a dialectic within himself (here you see what I have in common with millennial men). I claim that this arrangement is actually optimal for an autistic man, but was only barely possible 15 years ago and is literally possible now. In a solipsism of my own, I’m really only grieving the delta between Right Now and the world that socialized me.
But anyway, I appreciate what you are saying and by interpreting “you” to be a generalized stand-in for zoomer men, the right audience would feel validated (which is gay but necessary, if you are serious about being Straussian about this).
Yeah I tend to think of Zillennials / High Zoomers as just slightly more neurotic and less narcissistic Late Millennials and if anything probs closer to my experience than I am to the avg 1993 guy given my own Peter Pan tendencies. But the post-9/11 cohort is different qualitatively in very deep and unsettling ways.
"That means when you’re an open eugenicist you’re kind of just telling the world that you’re defective in some way, and Hitler himself would have killed you" I would have gotten a doctor's note from Hans Asperger actually
I skimmed a few spots. Yeah, people are eugenicists anyway. Yeah, it's antisocial to bring that into public discourse (public-public, online public isn't so bad). But also I don't know that eugenics as top-down policy is really a big thing. In a monarchy or similar static government, it would be good to try to reverse dysgenic trends caused by, say, population and lifestyle distributions. But you wouldn't say that you were doing that.
>I skimmed a few spots
see if even my second most spergy and engaged Zoomer reader can't sit and read the whole thing what hope do the rest of you have? We need to send you niggers to concentration camps to literally make you concentrate.
I'll read your Elliot Rodger article as penance.
I agree. We do. I do. We all need to read Wittgenstein for 6 months and come up with original innovations or whatever you said recently.
But my disengagement here is more about the topic. Feels like punching eugenicists gets obligate applause, and it's not that popular anyway, is it?
fair point and yeah I'm lowkey kind of just trying to see if a 2024-style WB article can still go viral or if I'm in an inmendham ghetto
It can. The experiment is worth conducting.
Online anon, anyway. Online named is a good way to bring it right into public-public.