Alright /pol/, redpill me on this. Why is it that no matter

File: ted-kaczynski.jpg (18KB, 272x218px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 272x218px

>>132313469
21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists’ hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.

22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.

>>132313469
>they still always have to be victims no matter what?
Because women have no actual abilities. In a pure meritocracy, women would always lose due to their physical and intellectual inferiority, so resort to trying to cheat the system and get gibs because it's easier.

>Why does absolutely everybody shill for
women?
Because it's an evolutionary instinct. Women are a limited resource and used for breeding, so are less expendable than men, so men evolved an instinct to protect women. Also during the times of arranged marriages, the parents would arrange women with husbands that made the best providers, meaning that there was selection pressure to be more of a cuck.

>>132314325

The thing is, is we can't seem to move past a point where we can embrace what you said and then fuck off with the lies. People always have to shill for women and invent ways they are oppressed in the most ridiculous and autistic ways, and then blame men for it. We just can't embrace what you said and then move on. I wonder why.

>>132316292
Wait until artificial wombs and sexbots are invented and widespread. Once that happens, women will lose their monopoly on reproduction, which will probably cause there to be fewer white knights. Once that happens, women will probably be treated as essentially weaker, dumber men.

Religious fundamentalists, who have far higher fertility rates than the general population, have much more patriarchal societies, and will probably eventually become the majority of the population. They still have a tendency to white knight for women, though.

File: turdflingingmonkey.jpg (105KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 900x900px

>>132313469
Relevant videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYJJh6zbHGM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNUThlfQ2NE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwOlpPHwt0o

>>132317718

Yeah, I was going to say, even a large chunk of /pol/ shills for women, it's that bad. They too think women are victims and that men have male privilege, that men have it too easy and that men are oppressing women by not being "real men" and other such autistic drivel.

I have no association with groups yet I am accused of being a MGTOW and an MRA. I'm just a freelance guy who occasionally talks to others for answers. I think it's very strange how western society functions in all of this and how no other civilization present or past has ever been like this. I genuinely believe women have it easier, the idea that men have it so easy stems from the basis that if men aren't pressured into "being men" then civilization crumbles. So in that sense women are the true beneficiaries there since they don't even really have to do anything and it all falls into place the way they want.

>>132313469
WAMEN

>>132318766
Why are you not a MGTOW?

>>132319407

I don't take part in any online groups. As fucking awful as the internet has been for the past few years, I can roam around anywhere I want, read up on things, consume media, use some of my namefag accounts, and so forth. I feel as though labeling myself an MRA or MGTOW would attract negative attention, and I just don't fit in with internet communities.

What still bothers me here is how many people will go against what we're talking about for the mere fact that it's common thought in western society to think that women are oppressed victims and that men are kangz full of male privilege and easy lives. That way of thinking distorts the actual conversation and makes it so we can't progress past that point, which is based on a lie.

When you walk with women, you must walk at their pace.

>>132313469
This originated back to 60's activism, a thinly veiled system of cultural transvaluation.

Some believe it's caused by an elite class of Marxists with the intent of subverting the West.

Others believe it's merely the natural path of capitalism. Internationalism requires egalitarianism and relativism, and that's exactly what has been pushed for over 50 years.

>>132319814
>I don't take part in any online groups. As fucking awful as the internet has been for the past few years, I can roam around anywhere I want, read up on things, consume media, use some of my namefag accounts, and so forth. I feel as though labeling myself an MRA or MGTOW would attract negative attention, and I just don't fit in with internet communities.
But to what extent do you agree with MGTOW philosophy, even if you don't participate in the online community? What do you think of relationships with women in general?

>What still bothers me here is how many people will go against what we're talking about for the mere fact that it's common thought in western society to think that women are oppressed victims and that men are kangz full of male privilege and easy lives. That way of thinking distorts the actual conversation and makes it so we can't progress past that point, which is based on a lie.
Remember: people are animals. In our evolutionary history. rationality was not selected for. Especially in women. Since women are hypergamous, they choose to breed with the men who give them the most free shit as possible.

File: 1434306958410-1.jpg (490KB, 838x1182px)

490KB, 838x1182px

>>132313469
Women have gotten away with too much bullshit for too long I say we start smacking bitches again.