Ukrainian Ambassador freaks out, telling Elon Musk to ‘F– Off’ after he catually outlines the obvious fair and honest way to peace with Russia on Twitter, without the fake dog-and-pony show by SoCo in politics
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 month ago (0 children)
"Both candidates?" What the fuck? There were dozens of candidates, including several Russophilic ones. The fact that only pro-Western candidates got lots of votes means that these are the policies that millions of Ukrainians wanted, whilst Illia Kyva (Socialist Party, apparently also an FSB operative) received 5,869 votes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Ukrainian_presidential_election#Results).
So you're suggesting that millions of Ukrainians had no right to elect a pro-Western leader of their choosing for their own country and comrade Kyva with his 5k of votes deserved the post instead? And who is this "We" you're referring to? If you're an American and hate your own country, feel free to get lost and emigrate to Pyongyang or Moscow.
What the hell are you talking about? Are you one of those fellas who cannot locate Mexico on the map? Maybe try checking the map of NATO members in Europe, check the variety: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO#/media/File:NATO_30_Members.png
Mail in voting wasn't even an issue when Lithuania elected a nominally center-left government in 1992, i.e. mostly formed of former Communist Party members, which declared NATO and EU membership as the country's strategic aims. And which ever "strings" this country and ones with similar historical experience elected they all indeed supported this strategy. Now after Putin's "special military operation" started in February 2022, hitherto neutral Finland applied for NATO membership too and even most of the radical left https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_Alliance_(Finland) voted in favour.
No-one "handpicked" Zelensky. Poroshenko, his predecessor (both of these 2 were elected in democratic, competitive elections), would as an incumbent with proven pro-West allegiance have been the safest bet, no? But he lost to Zelensky who was an opposition candidate - a media star with no political experience. Both in 2014 and 2019, Russophilic candidates could run and won a relatively small share of votes these times. The reason being obvious: the Russian Federation had been essentially waging a so-called hybrid war against this country, and former pro-Russian voters had switched en masse to more pro-Western positions.
[–]JosephDeMaistre 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 1 month ago (0 children)
Healthcare would be affordable, if you had European-style universal healthcare, which the GOP moneybags keep labelling "socialist". According to everything you posted just now, pretty much all civilized countries have been "socialist" since about 1900.
Btw, in the genuinely socialist Cuba, healthcare is very much affordable, except that it's actually crappy.
All the politicians you listed as akin to Putin in evilness were democratically elected and when some of them ran again and lost then they handed power to the next popularly elected leader. Only a moron could see them on the same footing as Russia's dictator. When Bush Jr. was president and launched the misguided invasion of Iraq, did he send critics of war to prison? Did he have his political opponents poisoned? Even if he had wanted to he couldn't, because America is a functioning, competitive democracy. Just like Britain and France.
They are not "stationed" anywhere. Russia ran out of its peace time army so dramatically that it was withdrawing from Syria in August and even from its semicolonies Tajikistan and Kyrghistan.
Random men with military experience are handed over the notice that they need to show up in the military commissariat to be sent to war pretty much anywhere: work place, at home, queing at Georgian or Kazakh border, wherever. Even Russian state media reports this and admits "occasional mistakes that will be rectified promptly", let's say, invalids or pensioners being summoned to army or whatever.
Lmao at "America pushing socialism" trope. A country that by now has the most brutally unrestraint capitalism in the Western world (compare with Germany, France, Britain, let alone these Scandi nanny states) is "pushing socialism"? Did Revolver News tell you that or are you an autodidact?
Funny how you Putin worshippers basically fall into 2 extreme camps: far right like you on one hand and the Old Left leftovers (pun intended) on the other side. Which, I believe, leaves any sane person in the middle?
US imperialism vs. Soviet imperialism? Look, we can play the apples and oranges game endlessly. Not a single country ever joined the Soviet bloc willingly. Let's say, a country with a functioning democratic system where people have a reasonable choice.
Now how does this compare to lots of ex-socialist, now functioning democracies joining the camp of "US imperialism"? Why is that? You're still arguing that all superpowers are pretty much equally good and bad?
As to the standard leftist counterpoints (I initially thought you're some alt-wrong antisemitic zealot like the other guy opposing me here, hence "globohomo" trope, I do apologize, I was a moderate lefty in my youth myself): USA propped up the right-wing dictatorships in Latin America to avoid them going communist, in case the establishment couldn't see any alternatives. Venezuela had left populist tendencies but CIA didn't launch any coup there, it continued to be a 2-party democracy. Support for hard-right regimes however included massively turning blind eye to human rights violations. And even then, Dems under Carter began to pressure the most obnoxiuous regimes, regrettably Carter didn't get the second term.
After the Cold War was over, the US didn't support any far-right movements any more and left the Latin America alone. And now you have Nicaragua and the Venezuelan dictatorship, which lets people die of malnutrition in a country that once had a GDP per capita higher than that of West Germany!
Of course Kennedy had to care, because even under the "liberal" Khruschev the USSR was a nasty imperialist country, a cancer. How does this compare with Ukraine? suppose it had been accepted to NATO. So which threat would it posed to anyone? americans launching missiles to target Moscow, so as to "spread NWO and globohomo"?
Are you a complete idiot? Russian best troops are (were) its professional soldiers (mercenaries). These ones failed pathetically to achieve the initial objectives (capture of Kiev/Kharkiv), and are now losing ground in the North-East (dramatically) and South (the latter losses not so dramatic tho). Mobilization means sending poorly trained cannon fodder to combat, somewhat reminiscent of Iran's human waves tactics in Iraq-Iran war.
"Militiamen" you're referring to were used in Donbass indeed and about half of them are dead or injured.They didn't achieve anything. Crucial for the initial Russian offensives were its peace time units (professional soldiers, like the US has them). They failed and Putin had to order a mobilization of random men with conscription experience, because the loss of man power alone became an issue. These are more numerous than professional soldiers, but way less qualified and even less motivated.
"free from globohomo and jews" - oh, I see! Putlerites still cannot make up their mind: trope 1) "Ukraine bad - Ukraine has Azov Nazis!" - trope 2) "Ukraine bad because it's run by "Jews"".
So which way is it then? Or both simultaneously, i.e. anything goes as long as it could smear Ukraine and whitewash Putin?
If this "domination" makes world a better place, I don't see why not. Of course I'd prefer to see healthy competition, like say EU vs. USA, but no, I don't think the "collective West" (as Putler refers to his adversaries) vs. Putin-Xi Axis would be such. I'd much rather see the latter two monsters GTFO.
So you're advocating the isolationist line or something? Right now USA has been lend-leasing like it tried to do to so as to help Britain (and later Soviet Union) even before the official declaration of said policiy, let alone official entry to war. Like, Nazi Germany also was a striving power combatting the Anglo-Saxon hegemony. And of course the "first nations to fall away" were Czechoslovakia and then Poland. so are you like rationalizing aggression or merely supporting do-nothing policies?
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 1 month ago (0 children)
The difference of course being that USA is a wealthy democratic country, and Ukraine is a rather poor democratic country, whilst the USSR was a very poor tyranny and Cuba was a GDP-wise wealthy country with many poor social indicators that the Soviet-aligned communist tyranny there ruined completely. You're drawing false analogies.
ActuallyNot is ofc right - in theory: but the only realistic solution would, alas, be Finland after Winter War: it managed to survive but had to cede some territories. The thing is, Putin has very little to lose. He CANNOT "lose". He's playing va banque for months. Unless he's overthrown (and almost certainly killed in the process, which would be awesome!) or the US would resort to nuclear threats (up to threatening with pre-emptive strikes) - which is impossible in the current climate, where the president has clearly dementia and the US/West has been pathologically altruistic for decades (remember the excessive concern for our enemies' casualties in Afghanistan etc. to the detriment of our troops efficiency. Pics of hanged Mussolini were published everywhere: Osama and ISIS monsters were offered Islamic ad hoc burials after US finally got them, rather than publicly humiliating this filth and demonstrating our commitment!).
Ukraine is a large country: biggest country in Europe area-wise (excluding Russia and Turkey as Eurasian countries) and with a population of about one third of Russia's. It's ridiculous to argue a relatively large country shouldn't have the right to choose its own path of development. And this development has been adopting most Western values and democracy. I'm from a very small ex-socialist country with plenty of "US involvement", which I approve of, because otherwise we'd likely be a part of Putler's shithole country by now. Bottom line is: no civilized nation really wants to be a Russian protectorate, whilst lots of such nations agree to become a US protectorate. Why is that?
Question for the new incels by AnimeRespecter in RealIncels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 2 months ago (0 children)
CareerMaxxing for oldcels might only make sense if he's white, from a wealthy country and trying to marry a woman from some 3rd world country, preferably a really poor one.
Violent 'Incel' Who Posted Attacks on Women to YouTube Is In Custody, California Authorities Say by [deleted] in RealIncels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 months ago (0 children)
Lolwut? There's nothing Chadish about him. The guy has poor facial features. Yeah, he could automatically improve his looks by getting rid of his hideous hairdo, but apart from that there's not that much to do. Of course, he probably has considerable mental issues, too, but most guys in 20s who have been let to "ldar" as they put it, develop some issues of that kind.
"This man is your friend: INCEL! He punishes sluts."
r/K selection theory is why some short unattractive guys can get girlfriends by trident765 in RealIncels
Dude, what's your mental period in history? 1950s? You really think all these desperate celibate men who are willing to pay for OnlyFans whores loads of money just to have surrogate conversation with a woman (when free porn is readily available!) lack "basic hygiene, skincare and clothes"?! Or do you think all incels are NEETs and paupers? How do you explain this concern trolling article then: https://www.wired.com/story/ellen-pao-the-perverse-incentives-that-help-incels-thrive-in-tech/ I would have guessed high tech is a very good career lol.
Women's standards have skyrocketed, they don't need a betabuxx any more. There's a certain minimum of looks below which women won't date a guy, because they can always date up (hypergamy), even though they won't make a very desirable man commit.
How SHOULD sexual selection happen in modern society? A possibly misinformed critique of incel ideology by HongKongPhooey in RealIncels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 2 months ago* (0 children)
Read what polygenic risk scores mean https://www.genome.gov/Health/Genomics-and-Medicine/Polygenic-risk-scores
I haven't read the whole document I referred to above yet, but what it treats was genetic propensities to certain traits, and which of said traits are being selected for or against. Whether environment will compensate for something is wholly another matter.
If individuals with ADHD have constantly higher reproductive success, as the source indicates, this simply means more individuals will likely develop said disorder. I don't remember whether autism was listed in the graph, but anyone knows anyway that autists have very poor reproductive chances these days. Just bringing a comparison between two mental illnesses.
Also, I wouldn't like to jump into Caamib's territory, but last decades really show intelligence is being selected against. There's a collection of materials here: https://incels.is/threads/irrefutable-proof-of-the-hypergamy-and-why-the-current-mode-of-sexual-selection-is-dysgenic.396281/
Sexual selection does not lead nowadays to better genes. Good looks are positively correlated with intelligence and health, but only weakly so. There was a study "Human Capital Mediates Natural Selection in Contemporary Humans."
I'll copy-paste someone's summary: Traits are passed on to children, so the next generation will have more of the traits to the right of the dotted line, and fewer of those to the left. At the top, the traits most rapidly spreading in the next generation are ADHD, smoking, extraversion, high BMI, and large waist circumference. These last two are measures of fatness. Heart disease, depression, Alzheimer's, and schizophrenia are also on the right. To the left are the traits that are being bred out, and at the bottom, being bred out most rapidly, are three measures of intelligence.
So if intelligence is being bred out most radically, what does it tell about miladies' preferences? :D
OK, an ugly thug can succeed if he's really sufficiently notorious serial killer. Say, Jeffrey Dahmer and other notorious serial killers who receive love letters in prison. Hybristophilia exists and can be seen as an extreme in the bad boy attraction spectrum. What you've been preaching for at least a decade, however, is a grotesque parody of female selection, claiming that only men with the absolutely worst personality can be sexually successful. This is just a delusion and pathetic cope for you. Also you're quite openly a disgusting evil shitbag yourself, so why don't these women want you, contrary to your own theory?
Why do Incel forums always end up getting moderated by people like this: by EternalSunset in RealIncels
And none of these success stories contradict the Blackpill, which tells us that White men are pretty universally considered as more attractive than men of other races. JBW. Also, if you have below average looks, you would still need to compensate a lot for your Mexican bride by a good career etc. Otherwise she'd be tempted to dump you for better looking white men soon after she has received the Green Card. Feminism is rather irrelevant here.
The story of your incel – an inconvenient truth by Caamib_ in RealIncels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
Caamib thinks parties (by that he means the female party) needn't give consent. As a man cannot (normally) be raped by a woman, it's moot for him, whether a landwhale might want to have sex with him without his consent.
But ask him whether men should be allowed to have sex with other men without consent? After all, we see all kinds of degeneracies like Delaware's age of consent (7 years) and brothels full of 12 y.o. girls listed as something normal here. But what about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi then? Hey Caammy, you had quite effeminate looks when you were young. Would you have enjoyed some Ali or Ahmed penetrating your butthole at age 12? So?
[–]JosephDeMaistre 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
Funny how Caamib keeps labelling himself "reactionary". I'd say lots of items in his advocacy for sexual depravity such as incest and pedophilia would fit with modern progressives very well. I wouldn't be surprised if Caamib supports zoophilia as well.
But then again, in Biblical times it was probably quite common to wed 13 year old girls so maybe that's his special brand of "reactionary" :D
[–]JosephDeMaistre 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
So why haven't you married a woman from a "non-feminist country" yourself? You've been like bitching over "feminist women" for decades. Still haven't found a wife despite all your smartness and whatnot lol?
Redpill/PUA scammers by JosephDeMaistre in RealIncels
[–]JosephDeMaistre[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
Yes, the idea that you'd fuck your own 12 year old daughter because she's "modern" or "feminist" or whichever way you put it just shows what a vile shit you are and also demonstrates your stupidity. Because how can you ascertain a 12 year old kid is "feminist"??? You're evil, moronic and immoral and according to your own theory you should be very attractive to modern women. Well, maybe that explains why you, after all, have had some short relationships and don't have to beg your mommy for sex all the time lol ;)
Secondly, there was no "technicality". Your idea that women are agnostic towards looks (THIS is what I was referring to) is BS directly contradicted by science. If you choose to reject science - as you just admitted - and prefer to live in your own mental "Co-Alpha" ghosttown, go on. "Agnostic towards male behaviour" (you inserted this) is likewise wrong: the female preference for dominant, aggressive men dates to stoneage and has obvious evolutionary reasons. It was like that 200 years ago, but the Dark Triad preference was often "outsmarted" by tough life.
However, this doesn't mean a Dark Triad-related Fisherian Runaway isn't taking place nowadays: this simply hasn't been studied in depth.
[–]JosephDeMaistre[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
Why don't you want to look at the evidence? I for one would gladly look into evidence that supports your main thesis that only evil morons can get laid in modern West. You already know your only "counterevidence" to Blackpill is essentially cherrypicking things that Blackpill itself admits (such as female attraction to Dark Triad, but this - contrary to your nonsensical claims - has always been true, its not a novelty of modern West, it was simply formerly repressed), and you're vastly exaggerating these, whilst completely ignoring what I just stated is the most important predictor of sexual success. Also, if your "evil immoral moron" theory were true, then you personally would be swimming in pussy, because you support incest and pedophilia and are rather stupid as well.
[–]JosephDeMaistre[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
I admit I cannot verify this and merely hope the OP was better informed. Red Pill and PUA are scams meant for morons like you who cannot admit attractive looks are by far the most important factor of a man's attractiveness to women. Your theory "just be an evil moron and you'll get all the pussy" is just a cope for you to feel better. You claimed in your now deleted blog that "women are agnostic as to looks" which is directly contradicted by all evidence, anecdotal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duIRMiNhBnk) and scientific (https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill) alike. So now who is being delusional?
3 months ago * by JosephDeMaistre to /s/RealIncels from self.RealIncels
Lately even my male friends are gaslighting me by Mazurro in RealIncels
"Friends" like this you can do without.
It's ok fellas! junst checked out r/twoxchromosomes! The only thing that turns women off is apparently misogyny! by BanditMcFuklebuck in RealIncels
Yes. Scientifically proven fact: https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Misogynistic_men_are_more_sexually_active_than_most_men CuckTear psychos and bluepiller human manure will keep repeating though that "incels are incels because they hate women" lol.
Incel trait: you only had retarded friends because you are one step up from being totally retarded by johndoyle in RealIncels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
The correlation is weak. Like, all subfields of intelligence are positively correlated with each other, too: math skills are positively correlated with musical skills. But ofc this is a much weaker correlation than the one between maths skills and technical skills!
Foids by greybeard in Incels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
I've always thought the reason the Holy Bible repeats so often the ban on bestiality must have been that foids of all millennia have been prone to it.
Why Blacks Average IQ is 15 Points Below Whites by MagicMike in SaidIt
This is complete BS. IQ is the measure that correlates the most with success in life. Now, which ethnic groups in America have the highest tested IQ? Ashkenazi Jews, then East Asians, then Whites. Afroamericans get the lowest scores. As to life outcomes, I guess we all also know what the picture is.
How Executing Felons Made UK Great by MagicMike in SaidIt
Yes, its particularly relevant in modern West. In one study, 10% of the most sociopathic men in the cohort fathered whopping 30% of all kids. This was not the case 150 years ago, when most women knew that mating with violent shitbags will end up horribly, now alas! Dutton (whom Fschmidt refers to) is right. The Western society is dysgenic.
The worst thing about trannies by [deleted] in Incels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 3 months ago* (0 children)
Foids that think they're dudes sometimes fill me with schadenfreude. I know one such incelophobic shitbag. He/she now has a 7 cm dick, counterfeit balls and is looking forward to "developing a healthy male libido" so as to find a GF :D With his "awesome" personality there can be no sortage of stacies queing for him/her.
Roasties getting toasty at how they now have to close their legs instead of get abortions. by StShitpostCel in Incels
Femoids even forget the "no-one owes you sex you inkwell!" platitude, when they themselves due to some anomaly cannot have any dick at all for just a few weeks. During the first Covid wave we could read "heartbreaking" reports in the media of women having to be without intimacy "which, after all, we all deserve". You see: THEY deserve! For THEM it's a sacred human right. The only reason they aren't talking much about this special human right of theirs is becuz indeed, under normal circumstances any foid can always get casual sex.
I want to fuck and/or date an incel by Neutralized in Incels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 months ago* (0 children)
I've known some batshit crazy women (schizotypal PD + bipolar), had been hospitalized, almost asexual, yet had had several boyfriends. But I do know one gigaautist linguistics nerd girl who really was virginal at 20. And ofc that's only because she wanted a very special man (truth be told, it's the first ever case I've encountered a woman who clearly didn't want just a chad, she was obsessed with veganism, sobriety and ofc his linguistics hobby).
I've been watching Camile Paglia on youtube lately by johndoyle in Incels
High IQ foids aren't necessarily bad, but I'll tell you the horrible truth: nerdy foids are bad. Because they are particularly picky, bitchy and degrading towards male nerds/incels. Naive airbrain Stacies were never as bitchy towards me as these pseudointellectual foids.
Prostitution is victimless, sluttiness is not by fschmidt in nonmorons
"Only the lowest of losers in society pay for sex." demonstrably nonsensical argument. In modern west, sexual success is correlated with low-class attributes like disinhibition, proneness to substance-abuse, aggressiveness etc. There was even a Youtube clip about an unemployed drug-taker who would just seduce women in the streets to have a shower and lunch once a week or so. And he offered "quality" sex for said women in return.
Very good post and I unashamedly subscribe to the thesis of para 2. Let's get over with this "no-one owes you sex, u inkwell" straw man. In a civilized society anyone has duties and expectations. I am not an anarchist nor a libertarian. I don't believe it would be fair if top 0.01% of capitalists would somehow manage to grab 99.99% of a state's income. Likewise, I don't think it's good for a society to tolerate that a relatively small number of men can hoard women, leaving some 5-10% of men hopelessly sex-starved. This demotivates said incels and ultimately destabilizes the society. The solution here is monogamy, that guarantees that almost any man can find a wife and can concentrate on more important things than chasing women.
Foid self-awareness by greybeard in Incels
Islam is right about [white] women.
Good Afternoon by andrewtate in RealIncels
I agree. I hate all immoral people. But given that the vast majority of young modern women are immoral, hence it follows that I hate most women.
Agecucks on this forum GTFO by johndoyle in RealIncels
[–]JosephDeMaistre 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 3 months ago (0 children)
Who is an agecuck? The Redpill fool who claims women hit the "Wall" in their 30s and miraculously start looking for Incel tier guys?
I mostly had high IQ friends. My own IQ is more than a SD over the average, too. Incels don't have to be stupid.
The only personality that studies have shown to be attractive to women (independent of the man's looks), is low-inhib, sensation-seeking (e.g. prone to substance abuse), narcissist, sociopathic, macchiavellian personality.