Copy/Pasted from a post on WallStreetOasis (forum for people working in finance)


I see many kids opening topics about it. Without my personal opinion, I will try to explain all of my knowledge on this topic.

In the mid-1900s the US government realized that overpopulation was going to be a problem in the future. They had to find a solution for this. At that time, Jews had influence over most of the western countries, so the solution had to be with them.

Rockefeller Foundation and Planned Parenthood were the biggest contributors to this project. The original plan was to implement a child policy that was going to include high taxation for parents and benefits for childless couples. But certain organizations had better plans that would require less money and provide more control. They convinced the government and these foundations to brainwash the whole western population. The new plan was truly evil, as it will cause depopulation in the near future, it was also going to turn our society into something degenerate.

Feminism, Homosexualism, Poverty

Most important thing was to destroy traditional family values. For this to happen women had to be equal, encouraged to not have children, and they had to make them believe slaving their life away for corporations was better than taking care of their children with their own values. This also caused public education to become a brainwashing tool for the government, and caused corporations to pay lower salaries.

The second step was to encourage homosexualism and transsexualism. With men having low T levels because of environmental and other external reasons, and women seeing feminity as evil, this was easy to accomplish with constant exposure from the media. Just think about twenty years ago, how many people were bisexual/trans/lesbian/gay then? and look around you now. This is the accomplishment of the masterminds of this planet.

The third step was to destroy the working and middle classes. By lowering the quality of public education, public healthcare, and social benefits they were simply destroyed. As the purchasing power became lower, the middle class and upper-class started to have fewer children to keep the quality of their lifestyle. As they started to work longer hours, they started to value their money more too. By doing this, the government caused stupid unsuccessful people to continue having multiple children while the successful ones are having fewer children or not at all. This also caused men to have less willingness to marry because of stupid child/spousal supports even though 'feminism' means equality...

All of this, and more of it caused our society to turn into something like this.

To the young men who are reading this post, I would advise you to marry a Christian woman if you're planning to have children. If you want to enjoy your life without any children, get a girlfriend/wife that is bisexual and open to **** other women with you.

To those who think that you can stop these people, and save humanity. You simply can't do it. The things they're doing may cause so many people to suffer without realizing it, but it will cause humanity to advance faster. Also, I doubt that even Joe Biden knows the name of these people. It's not Rothschilds or other people like them. Just try to enjoy your life until you die, but choose the red pill.



https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/foru...nerate-society

Clifs ****ggot

i really think it would all be solved if you eliminated birth control srs.

puts women back into their biological role

and men too but a little less so

Elite trader was the misc of finance forums back in the day. Used to have a warning on the front page about how it's a toxic cesspit. Totally dead now, RIP in peace.

white people have invented everything in the last 500 years

When we are extinct there will still be a billion Africans a billion Indians and a billion Chinese

Tell me how that advances civilisation?

The “elites” have fallen prey to the same IQ defection everyone else has
Look at the plans laid by the elites back in the 1900s…. Now look at the blubbering fools we have in charge today

This is really old news; we already knew all of this.

The remedy is to just simply not be a part of it. Reject modernity. However most men -- even the ones who complain about the state of the world -- refuse to cut porn, stop fuking around, cut alcohol, cut weed, devote themselves to a higher purpose, etc

No, u haven't. And you personally haven't invented shot except for crappy chest tats.

This really is the answer...Jesus too.

It advances it for the only people who matter - ELITE MOGGERS.

Their concern is only accumulation and preservation of wealth.

I agree with everything you said excepting this, isn't this degeneracy as well?Also, about the quote below.They're not "people" running the show. We are in Lucifer realm. Sorry to say it but it's written in the bible. God cast Lucifer down to earth along with the other fallen angels. These fallen angels can take the form of men. A lot of their followers are legit demons who possess powerful figures in society. **hint**hint**hint**Hitler tried to stop them. If you want to see some of the scariest and most evilest **** in your life, do some research on the <insert people Hitler slaughtered> and their "murder rituals." These guys make the Mexican cartels look like kindergartens.

Also to add on to this, these fallen angels are located here IN earth today as we speak. They're within the core of the earth, Agartha/Shambala. Ever felt like Hinduism was demonic?



Look familiar? That's the Hindu god Shiva, statue form in front of CERN. Now why would a European Organization for Nuclear Research have a statue of a Hindu god in front of their site? Because these mother fukers are fallen angels. Look up Shambala. The Indians believe in that ****. There's a bunch of fallen angels living inside the inner earth, ancient India sees them as dieties. The elites today see them as advanced human beings. In reality, they're fuking demons that God kicked out of his kingdom. Now they're hiding out inside the earth and monitoring us from above in their modern day UFOs.

Because westerners have turned from God and America stopped being a Christian nation.

Imagine writing 3 page essays as social media in 2023.

Women do contribute a lot.


My impression is they are important for some levels and need guardrails.

didn't the bible say something about bad will be good and good will be bad...

meanwhile...

nuclear family = bad
drug use = normalized/good
mental illness = normalized
men becoming women = normalized/good
homosexuality = normalized/good
porn/smut/onlyfans/gambling = normalized/good
breakdown of male/female relationship = normalized
hookup culture = normalized/good

What's the last shoe to drop? Obviously the normalization of ****philia.

Perhaps once that happens we have a day of reckoning from forces beyond this reality.

Copy pasted mate

Women ARE the resource. They are what almost every man is competing for and the most valuable commodity of any organized society. Women are at the finish line, waiting for the winners. 90% of women pass their genes, whereas the majority of men do not.

Asking what women provide, in the context of masculine traits, isn't a fair question. Their place in the world has nothing to do with engineering things, politics, blue collar labor, fighting wars, coming up with mathematical theorems, or any other biological division of labor that falls on men. They have a completely separate lane.

Absolute rubbish make believe fantasy, he has no proof or knowledge and made a “common sense” link based on outcomes and not knowledge.

I encourage you to read this and understand it’s the natural outcome of a people who have lost freedom, lost the power process, and are slaves to technology. There isn’t an overarching cabal, it’s just how things are going to go unless we can truly overthrow modern industrial society.


https://besser.tsoa.nyu.edu/howard/A...manifesto.html

Are you a Christian?

I was deceived into delving into the occult a bit too much and I say that Jesus Christ is the only way to God.

So that leaves no room for Hitler to save anybody.

Hinduism is a heathen religion aka paganism, so of course it's western equivalent of satanism.

Amen Brother,
Hope your having a Good Friday.

Cliffs?

Think you're were replying to yourself lol

The warning sign must have did them in. Misc has no warning sign and it's still alive

I'm not even religious and I've been thinking this lately. Even if you don't believe in religion, it's scriptures were meant to keep society civilized and fair. But now the elites/big corps in power manipulate and take advantage of the masses by pitting them against each other.

Watch The Century of the Self documentary on YouTube. "A deep examination about the rise of psychoanalysis as a powerful means of persuasion for both governments and corporations, and how it later helped influence the contemporary society of lifestyles and marketing." You think that chit just went away? It has evolved.

Some tidbits I guess

35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.

36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.

37. Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.

30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.

31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumbnail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.

32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.

51. The breakdown of traditional values to some extent implies the breakdown of the bonds that hold together traditional small-scale social groups. The disintegration of small-scale social groups is also promoted by the fact that modern conditions often require or tempt individuals to move to new locations, separating themselves from their communities. Beyond that, a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system and only secondarily to a smallscale community, because if the internal loyalties of small-scale communities were stronger than loyalty to the system, such communities would pursue their own advantage at the expense of the system.

59. We divide human drives into three groups: (1) those drives that can be satisfied with minimal effort; (2) those that can be satisfied but only at the cost of serious effort; (3) those that cannot be adequately satisfied no matter how much effort one makes. The power process is the process of satisfying the drives of the second group. The more drives there are in the third group, the more there is frustration, anger, eventually defeatism, depression, etc.

60. In modern industrial society natural human drives tend to be pushed into the first and third groups, and the second group tends to consist increasingly of artificially created drives.

61. In primitive societies, physical necessities generally fall into group 2: They can be obtained, but only at the cost of serious effort. But modern society tends to guaranty the physical necessities to everyone [9] in exchange for only minimal effort, hence physical needs are pushed into group 1. (There may be disagreement about whether the effort needed to hold a job is "minimal"; but usually, in lower- to middle-level jobs, whatever effort is required is merely that of OBEDIENCE. You sit or stand where you are told to sit or stand and do what you are told to do in the way you are told to do it. Seldom do you have to exert yourself seriously, and in any case you have hardly any autonomy in work, so that the need for the power process is not well served.)

100. FIRST PRINCIPLE. If a SMALL change is made that affects a long-term historical trend, then the effect of that change will almost always be transitory -- the trend will soon revert to its original state. (Example: A reform movement designed to clean up political corruption in a society rarely has more than a short-term effect; sooner or later the reformers relax and corruption creeps back in. The level of political corruption in a given society tends to remain constant, or to change only slowly with the evolution of the society. Normally, a political cleanup will be permanent only if accompanied by widespread social changes; a SMALL change in the society won't be enough.) If a small change in a long-term historical trend appears to be permanent, it is only because the change acts in the direction in which the trend is already moving, so that the trend is not altered by only pushed a step ahead.

101. The first principle is almost a tautology. If a trend were not stable with respect to small changes, it would wander at random rather than following a definite direction; in other words it would not be a long-term trend at all.

102. SECOND PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is sufficiently large to alter permanently a long-term historical trend, then it will alter the society as a whole. In other words, a society is a system in which all parts are interrelated, and you can't permanently change any important part without changing all other parts as well.

103. THIRD PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is large enough to alter permanently a long-term trend, then the consequences for the society as a whole cannot be predicted in advance. (Unless various other societies have passed through the same change and have all experienced the same consequences, in which case one can predict on empirical grounds that another society that passes through the same change will be like to experience similar consequences.)

104. FOURTH PRINCIPLE. A new kind of society cannot be designed on paper. That is, you cannot plan out a new form of society in advance, then set it up and expect it to function as it was designed to do.

105. The third and fourth principles result from the complexity of human societies. A change in human behavior will affect the economy of a society and its physical environment; the economy will affect the environment and vice versa, and the changes in the economy and the environment will affect human behavior in complex, unpredictable ways; and so forth. The network of causes and effects is far too complex to be untangled and understood.

106. FIFTH PRINCIPLE. People do not consciously and rationally choose the form of their society. Societies develop through processes of social evolution that are not under rational human control.

107. The fifth principle is a consequence of the other four.

111. The foregoing principles help to show how hopelessly difficult it would be to reform the industrial system in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing our sphere of freedom. There has been a consistent tendency, going back at least to the Industrial Revolution for technology to strengthen the system at a high cost in individual freedom and local autonomy. Hence any change designed to protect freedom from technology would be contrary to a fundamental trend in the development of our society. Consequently, such a change either would be a transitory one -- soon swamped by the tide of history -- or, if large enough to be permanent would alter the nature of our whole society. This by the first and second principles. Moreover, since society would be altered in a way that could not be predicted in advance (third principle) there would be great risk. Changes large enough to make a lasting difference in favor of freedom would not be initiated because it would be realized that they would gravely disrupt the system. So any attempts at reform would be too timid to be effective. Even if changes large enough to make a lasting difference were initiated, they would be retracted when their disruptive effects became apparent. Thus, permanent changes in favor of freedom could be brought about only by persons prepared to accept radical, dangerous and unpredictable alteration of the entire system. In other words by revolutionaries, not reformers.

114. As explained in paragraphs 65-67, 70-73, modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations, and his fate depends on the actions of persons remote from him whose decisions he cannot influence. This is not accidental or a result of the arbitrariness of arrogant bureaucrats. It is necessary and inevitable in any technologically advanced society. The system HAS TO regulate human behavior closely in order to function. At work people have to do what they are told to do, otherwise production would be thrown into chaos. Bureaucracies HAVE TO be run according to rigid rules. To allow any substantial personal discretion to lower-level bureaucrats would disrupt the system and lead to charges of unfairness due to differences in the way individual bureaucrats exercised their discretion. It is true that some restrictions on our freedom could be eliminated, but GENERALLY SPEAKING the regulation of our lives by large organizations is necessary for the functioning of industrial-technological society. The result is a sense of powerlessness on the part of the verage person. It may be, however, that formal regulations will tend increasingly to be replaced by psychological tools that make us want to do what the system requires of us. (Propaganda [14], educational techniques, "mental health" programs, etc.)

115. The system HAS TO force people to behave in ways that are increasingly remote from the natural pattern of human behavior. For example, the system needs scientists, mathematicians and engineers. It can't function without them. So heavy pressure is put on children to excel in these fields. It isn't natural for an adolescent human being to spend the bulk of his time sitting at a desk absorbed in study. A normal adolescent wants to spend his time in active contact with the real world. Among primitive peoples the things that children are trained to do tend to be in reasonable harmony with natural human impulses. Among the American Indians, for example, boys were trained in active outdoor pursuits -- just the sort of thing that boys like. But in our society children are pushed into studying technical subjects, which most do grudgingly.

116. Because of the constant pressure that the system exerts to modify human behavior, there is a gradual increase in the number of people who cannot or will not adjust to society's requirements: welfare leeches, youth-gang members, cultists, anti-government rebels, radical environmentalist saboteurs, dropouts and resisters of various kinds.

119. The system does not and cannot exist to satisfy human needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to be modified to fit the needs of the system.This has nothing to do with the political or social ideology that may pretend to guide the technological system. It is the fault of technology, because the system is guided not by ideology but by technical necessity. [18] Of course the system does satisfy many human needs, but generally speaking it does this only to the extend that it is to the advantage of the system to do it. It is the needs of the system that are paramount, not those of the human being. For example, the system provides people with food because the system couldn't function if everyone starved; it attends to people's psychological needs whenever it can CONVENIENTLY do so, because it couldn't function if too many people became depressed or rebellious. But the system, for good, solid, practical reasons, must exert constant pressure on people to mold their behavior to the needs of the system. To much waste accumulating? The government, the media, the educational system, environmentalists, everyone inundates us with a mass of propaganda about recycling. Need more technical personnel? A chorus of voices exhorts kids to study science. No one stops to ask whether it is inhumane to force adolescents to spend the bulk of their time studying subjects most of them hate. When skilled workers are put out of a job by technical advances and have to undergo "retraining," no one asks whether it is humiliating for them to be pushed around in this way. It is simply taken for granted that everyone must bow to technical necessity. and for good reason: If human needs were put before technical necessity there would be economic problems, unemployment, shortages or worse. The concept of "mental health" in our society is defined largely by the extent to which an individual behaves in accord with the needs of the system and does so without showing signs of stress.

128. While technological progress AS A WHOLE continually narrows our sphere of freedom, each new technical advance CONSIDERED BY ITSELF appears to be desirable. Electricity, indoor plumbing, rapid long-distance communications ... how could one argue against any of these things, or against any other of the innumerable technical advances that have made modern society? It would have been absurd to resist the introduction of the telephone, for example. It offered many advantages and no disadvantages. Yet, as we explained in paragraphs 59-76, all these technical advances taken together have created a world in which the average man's fate is no longer in his own hands or in the hands of his neighbors and friends, but in those of politicians, corporation executives and remote, anonymous technicians and bureaucrats whom he as an individual has no power to influence. [21] The same process will continue in the future. Take genetic engineering, for example. Few people will resist the introduction of a genetic technique that eliminates a hereditary disease. It does no apparent harm and prevents.much suffering. Yet a large number of genetic improvements taken together will make the human being into an engineered product rather than a free creation of chance (or of God, or whatever, depending on your religious beliefs).


Will call it good there I guess, I highly recommend reading the whole thing. Bolded some of the more relevant parts but you should really understand the entire message dr. Kaczynski put together for us.

Bump before bed

I need sum cliffs!

Read briefly through that, but isn’t it agreeing to what was posted in the OP?

Post cliffs fkcn retard

Agreed. As much as I enjoyed bangin sloots, birth control and abortions has really destroyed society 100%. I think that only land owners should be allowed to vote. Srs... At the very least, I don't think you should be allowed to vote if you've accepted any kind government welfare or assistance in the past 4 years. Only people contributing to society should be allowed to vote. This could also disincentivize the government to push services onto people.