~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
redpillcad
[removed]
[–]Westwood_159 points60 points61 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Whether or not conduct is a "winning strategy" is not relevant to the question of whether the conduct is moral. In fact, the lives of the world's greatest moral teachers seem to suggest that morality leads to temporal poverty and persecution. Christ and Socrates – arguably the most influential philosophers and moralists in western society – were both killed for their teachings. One of the foundational premises of western philosophy is that pursuit of morality and "the good" isn't meant to be materially advantageous.
There's no question that what you did was morally wrong. The actions of others contributed – you were chased, he apparently let himself slip – but you also violated social and moral codes. There's no way of getting around that.
Which brings me to my point – this post reads like an attempt at rationalization. Your decency and morality were recently called into question, so you came here and wasted our time with an elementary attack on morality ("It isn't materially profitable, so it's fairy tale nonsense") and explained how everyone else in your situation is responsible for your actions.
TRP claims to be amoral. Let's keep it that way. At the very least, if you're going to attack the notion of morality, read up on your philosophy first.
[–]useyourmouth7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
redpillcad is my favorite contributor. No one here is better at illustrating AWALT and hammering home how the hindbrain in all women is a brutal cuck-killer that doesn't give two shits about your morality.
The faggots downvoting his posts are mostly hampstering weaklings, telling themselves they're honorable and heroic for not fucking the married m'ladies, as if they could in the first place. Not going through life raping and pillaging like a fucking barbarian, and not fucking the shit out of another man's woman while you make him sit in the corner crying doesn't mean shit if you aren't actually capable of doing such great violence and of arousing such great lust in the first place. A gentleman who is not first an actual man is just a larpy weakling.
That said, your post is spot on. In our soft, bluepill society today, we have forgotten that Christ's teachings were so radical precisely because they went totally against what everyone knew was the way to be a winner as a human. Weakness is strength, losing is winning, etc.
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
redpillcad is my favorite contributor.
???
redpillcad is some new account, as it is already EC I guess it belongs to some already-endorsed guy, cool. But this is the first post from this account. I guess you meant someone else?
[–]useyourmouth0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
...assuming he's the same cad that's posted for a couple years.
[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
This degenerate slave morality doesn't belong here. Sexual selection keeps the human race healthy. Sex isn't about some beta faggots needs. Sex is about selecting strong powerful men and making more of them.
Cucking beta males improves the human race.
[–]soulcatcher3573 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Cucking beta males does nothing to improve the human race, unless you are a non-red-pilled idiot who didn't use a condom on that trashy woman. Kind lowers your SMV really if it gets out. Lots of trash will be chasing you. Enjoy!
GLO- upvoted cause I do agree with you.
[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The Dominican republic has a much higher standard of living because eurobros didn't use their leather condoms Haiti on the other hand is Africa.
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
trashy
Your notion of separating the "trashy" vs "non-trashy" females shall bring you many surprises in the future.
[–]redpillcad 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
He proved my point. Lotsa guys prefer an artificial barrier to keep them safe from their own failures
[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Look at all of these delicious downvotes you know what that means: Purge
[–]Volt521212 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
this post reads like an attempt at rationalization.
Am I reading this post wrong? It reads exactly like the TRP claim of being amoral.
[–]iknowthewhey0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There's no question that what you did was morally wrong
The influx of cucks is astounding. He is simply stating that while you believe in a certain morality, there is no reason to believe or expect others to abide by it. "Western Philosophy" you speak of is as broad as philosophy itself and has no context here.
If you want to truly understand morality check out Friedrich Nietzsche for a true understanding. Amorality is the policy here for a reason.
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
but you also violated social and moral codes
No one here but you cares about that.
This is the point.
[+]oneredguy-15 points-14 points-13 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is that what you tell yourself when you're raising my kid with my woman, cause maybe she'll blow you? Good boy
"My sick philosophy says that you should love me, girl. Didn't the stoics say that you shouldn't be attracted to better more attractive guys with game? Or wait? 🤔 Yeah what he really says it's that they shouldn't sodomize my future wife while choking her out and making, (cause lel let's be honest here), her scream, "I love cock up my ass!", cause in the future I'm gonna marry that one of the skank army. He should know for me.
God dankula dude you're pathetic. But please, do, let me know how that works out for you. Oh and marry ugly, since we might be friends one day lolz u certainly don't want a wife I might be tempted by fag
[–]1Ramesses_19 points20 points21 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Ah but imaginary rulebooks is how we navigate the world. The whole anger phase is borne out of a realisation that the other side was never ever playing by the rules. "I've been wasting my time being noble and they couldn't even do me the honour of reciprocity," you think. Expecting reciprocity is a fool's errand but it is a male concept and it's not going away. Unemployed puffy thinks, "I wouldn't do that to you!" It's a masculine appeal to fairness though it rarely if ever works. Many who succeed ruthlessly exploit this weakness.
But there's nothing wrong with discussing morality even if it's rarely definitive.
[–]3LiveAFTSOV4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The real red pill is there are no rules : just the way shit works, and why it happens.
What are you gonna do about it?
[–]1Ramesses_5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's what makes this place so good. It's literally just a discussion of below the surface not so obvious facts about women and strategies for maximising your own personal sexual strategy. There's no prescription for what you should do with the knowledge; that's entirely up to you.
The only thing you CAN do, Raise an Army and conquer.
Of course, puffy isn't going to go all Ghengis Khan.
I mean he wrote a...LETTER for Chrissake.
[–]oneredguy-3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Rules? Lol omfg no. Individualisation requires courts. Rules means hierarchy, and liberty, fraternity, and demons means courts.
You don't like me banging you wife? Take me to court bitch she surely needs even more money to buy me shit.
[–]puredemo14 points15 points16 points 8 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
Condemning you verbally like that would historically be a precursor to violence.
Strong condemnation --> get others on his side who agree with his moral code --> lynch your dumb ass --> go have some beers and celebrate!
We just happen in a time period where the violence part never actually happens... since it's never actually worth it due to jail time... so yeah, it's pointless.
Moral codes are not enforceable without some violence to back them up.
You're supposed to feel shame as an emotional defense mechanism against being attacked and beaten by his posse.
But since you're shameless, and he isn't really going to do anything, yep, it's all bullshit.
Try that shit in Venezuela though.
[–]rahl_r1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Well said - like some kind of a wise guy.
If you want to have any sorts of rules or obligations implanted in a society, using (the threat of) brute force and (the potential for) violence is level 0 - this is where you get started. Any sorts of discussions and appeals can happen only after that.
What is the nature of this society (from early modern times till now)? The monopolization of violence by the state. Therefore, those condemnations can, and will, fall flat - especially when the state is toothless and/or just doesn't care.
You're supposed to feel shame as an emotional defense mechanism
Children feel shame. (A heathy amount of) shame is implanted into them as a part of the upbringing process - to make them function in society without them being absolute, punchable, smelly narcissist savages. An extra dose of shame, that is something that female relatives use to control children, and then, some men. This is kinda sorta violence - the indirect, feminine kind.
Also, the fact the cuck in question falls back to shaming language while the OP shrugs this off tells you where each of them is, mentally.
[–]puredemo1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sure, I think we agree.
Overall, I just find it somewhat ironic that some people here delight so much in behavior that really should result in them having violence done to them. Or at least, historically always would.
The guy who plays by the rules, of course, gets massively fucked over.
It is what it is, I don't care so much one way or another, but I do have to wonder where it all leads 20-50 years down the line.
There are probably a LOT of "cucks" out there with pent up violent urges just waiting to unleash them, given a halfway decent opportunity.
[–]rahl_r1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You know, there is a reason why the state took away violence from us - an arguably halfway decent reason at that.
The human ape has some specialized cognitive abilities to recognize cheaters, screwjobs, and those who just don't play "fair". You could say that evolutionarily, this was/is significant, and it carries its own weight. Then, you have a bunch of your average cucks with pent up aggression - if given the opportunity, they will exact their revenge on those who wronged them; this revenge, it will be fucken' messy. It is a part of this mental state when punishing those who don't play fair - the punisher feels this sort of adrenaline rush of blind righteousness mixed with feel-good emotions, which may as well result in them beating the punishee to a pulp. Revenge is a male erotic fantasy.
Here and there, you also have the case of the occasional hero who shows up out of nowhere and shoots the guy who had fucked his wife, dead cold.
I do have to wonder where it all leads 20-50 years down the line.
Agreed. It would be interesting to observe how this one plays out. That state I keep on ranting about tends to wrap its own laws around the bestial nature of mankind (in an ideal case). If the state is out of touch with actual hoomans, the hoomans may as well gang up to throw it over... or at least create subcultures.
[–]endertheend0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why would he be in Venezuela in the first place? Aren't most people eating out of trashcans and children starving in the streets there? That has nothing to do with OP/Morality at all, if anything it proves his point right.
If you were right, then some GOD force would come out of the sky, wipe out the corrupt politicians who put the country into the miserable state its in and give people food to eat.
But. . .well, Where is this God of morality to come save the day?
Right.
Think about it.
[–]PabloAsscrowbar12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Not just hypergamy. It is applicable to everything. Morality does not save people from harming you, backstabbing you, betraying you, etc.
Thinking that morality will save you is the same as animal-lovers hoping that starving lions will not eat them just because they love animals.
[–]Smoovemammajamma3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
I feel that there is some good people and things, but all i can do in relation is contribute where i can and try not to be the bad guy. Its more about feeling good about who I am, but i guess some people dont think or care who they are on a regular basis so they can sleep at night. Must be nice to have no guilt, i can't stand it
[–]PabloAsscrowbar2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Indeed. I don't harm or backstab anybody, but i learnt that others will still harm you regardless of how well you treated them
To me, unless a man is my personal friend, all women are game, I frankly don't give a shit one way or the other. Of course Im gonna try to keep it on the low to keep the bangs coming, but I certainly don't give a shit about "stabbing someone in the back" who I don't know.
Of course if it was business, its better to not stab someone in the bag, lest you get a bad reputation and become unable to find clients/employees/backers.
We're not talking about business, We're talking about women.
There are no rules when it comes to that.
[–]Comp1ex 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Morality is just an own person’s values in realizing their vision. Personally, I wont go for a girl who has a boyfriend or significant other since there are plenty of other girls to game and I wouldnt want both the potential conflict with the boyfriend or even the girl
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
Personally, I wont go for a girl who has a boyfriend or significant other since there are plenty of other girls to game
This single sentence only clearly shows you have no idea about the reality surrounding you and all you do is LARPing.
EDIT: I've checked your posts. You asked if you can be friends with a woman (month ago), how to talk to girls (2 weeks ago), and then there are posts about computer games.
The reality is, every hot, kind-of-hot, average and ugly girl out there is getting plowed by at least one man. But you have no fucking idea about that. What you managed to do in your mind, as an ego protection mechanism, is this exact buffer. "I'd never hit a taken girl". Let me fix that for you.
"My name is Comp1ex and I am afraid to talk to a woman. Wanna buy this CS:GO knife from my virtual paladin 80th level?"
This is who you are today.
[–]Comp1ex 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Everything you said is true but there definitely is AT LEAST a social backlash (not saying there should be one but there is) for doing so for MOST people (if you are high enough SMV im sure the story can be spun to make it so the girl left for you rather than you chased her). As other people have mentioned in this thread morality is more of a self protection mechanism than anything. Regardless of my success with women, which fair play isn’t great I dont mind admitting it, my aforementioned moral specifically is more in place for me to stop myself before hitting on or game a 5 well known and public LTR specifically when there are single 7’s I have a chance with. OFC you can never know if someone is truly single or not but significant emotional detachment from their past and even current SO’sis a good sign both in terms of my chances and avoiding future conflict. Im sure what you are saying has truth behind it, as in people with high SMV can avoid social turmoil even with no regard to morality. But for the less advanced like me, id say its a good crutch to keep myself in socially acceptable bounds (even if the idea can seem inherently beta) while I steadily improve myself. Morales can change as a persons vision and goals change, especially once initial goals are met. For others, not hitting on taken women can be an integral part of ones ultimate goal in life (i.e., reamining virtuous)
[–]nebder 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thats a lot of bullshit words. I gave up trying to sort them out
Make your own code of conduct. Live your life. Do wtfever, nobody really cares. Don’t go around looking for approval for it. Don’t say I don’t fuck attached girls ... when you couldn’t to begin with.
Conflict avoidance is a symptom of lack of personal strength. Once you get stronger, you will realize that you’re at the point where you have to fight to keep moving things forward.
[–]rationalityiskey0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I feel like I should have you as a friend just to keep my ego in check. Need more brutal honesty in my life.
[–]tteabag25915 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I agree that the old moral values in western culture are now being used as a way to keep the men playing by said rules while the women throw them out when it's convenient and too late. My stance is, I will reciprocate up to the point they're not reciprocated back. Copycat morality if you will. It allows you to keep the pragmatism in the morals without falling prey to one sided application. It's the best way to handle it by my estimation. This is largely based on game theory.
[–]puredemo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I was just going to say this is provably correct in game theory, but your last line beat me to it. ;)
[–]tteabag25911 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Right. Did you see the game they made out of it? I think the website is ncase.me. Wonderful display of it.
[–]haku1250 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I just played through the trust game on there, wow that was enlightening, thanks for including the site name wouldn't have checked it out without it
[–]tteabag25910 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The way I see it, what the hardcore redpill crowd is getting at is to stop always cooperating even with traditional values because it's actively breeding more cheaters and making you a sitting duck. Cheaters take quick advantage of morality. Since collective trust is so low due to there being so many games going on all the time(the most simultaneously in history actually), the best strategy is to be a strict copy cat. What marriage effectively does is remove a male's ability to actually pull off this kind of reciprocal trade. If you get cheated on, tough shit basically. At least that's the attitude the courts take. You no longer have the ability to pull back your tokens. The government takes over and hands them over on your behalf.
[–]2CasaDeFranco4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Leave this type of content for your diary.
[–]EscapeTheGoat1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Morality is all about should. This is how people should act. This is how people should be. Fuck that.
Real men deal with is and how.
[–]miller2111 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If your SO is cheating.. I have never understood how you can blame the person she cheated with??? Wtf
[–]oneredguy3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Don't worry bro you'll get endless weak fags in here to tell you that you are the bad man for going with a woman who, let's be honest, wanted you.
And endless pathetic fags hamstering why you should be on their side. No mention of how they will be on your side. But yeah you somehow owe them cause they exist.
And almost no one will see the lesson. Dgaf, gain power, have power, and women will follow along like the sheep to the slaughter. Only now they even bring their betas money with them lolololz.
What can we even call the pathetic beta male? He's less than the sheep. He's the sick infested sheep dog, who can't protect what he refuses to own, and he owns nothing, not even himself. Who follows his sheep master around, licking her wounds, wife us wolves eat her. Just because we're hungry.
And he weeps in the dark, curled in a ball, and never ever does anything. Even when he comes find us, and we hit him over and over, screaming, "wake up". 😂😂😂
You should have used her harder so she would have started spending his money on you. But hey already risky business with the fogged asleep betafags trying to moral shame you into the very pathetic me me me morality they desperately think they can somewhere somehow impose. With their incredible disgusting weakness.
[–]nebder 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
One of my married gals regularly pays for hotels with her cash. Pulled out of her the other day right when her hubby phoned her up to see when she’d be home. Tells him she’s running behind and will be home soon with her ass hanging out of my car.
Which man would you want to be.
[–]oneredguy-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lolololz 😂 why I'm a good stoic moralfag I'll be the guy at home phoning his wife and trying not to cry 😂😂😂
[–]BewareTheOldMan0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
When I see stuff like this...a man engaging sexual activity with either a married or committed woman I always blame the woman more than the guy as it is the woman’s responsibility to prevent sexual access to other men.
It’s up to the woman to self-correct and ensure fidelity to the relationship/marriage.
Damn straight. If women want us men to be the gatekeepers of the vag then they would vote for us to have power over who they get to spread their legs for.
As it actually happens? They are fully and 100% responsible. But it gets even better. Girls despise the type of beta man who goes full hypoagency and blames the man, for her choices. Sure they'll friendzone him. But they'll only fuck him out of desperation.
[–]halfback9101 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
Morality, trust, decency, and the ability to disagree and argue without violence are the hallmarks of civilization. We need those things to enjoy what we have. We know this. That is why people who are immoral, untrustworthy, indecent, and violent are ostracized. And rightly so.
If someone stole your bike I bet you would want them ostracized. And I, as someone who has an interest in the sanctity of my property being maintained, would join you in ostracizing them even though I was not wronged.
You need to do a bit of soul searching, I think.
[–]nebder 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Your idealism is endearing, yet it will do nothing for you but break your heart for the rest of your life.
A man must decide for himself what code of ethics to follow because that’s what he has objectively chosen to follow. You should not take a set of morals and life rules that are handed to you without scrutinizing them and asking yourself why the nebulous “others” want you to follow these rules.
You bike metaphor is shit. People are not property. Your metaphor removes any agency from the woman for her choices. Bikes don’t decide who rides them. People do decide who they fuck.
[–]halfback9101 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Don't confuse philosophical realism for idealism. And yes, people are absolutely property. We own ourselves. All property rights extend from self ownership.
Laws are just a reflection of what society already wanted. Nobody wants people to be able to run around killing others.
I'm assuming you're unfamiliar with Locke?
[–]nebder 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I see you dodging my rebuttal and points by attacking my knowledge of philosophy. I would expect to have my statements attacked if this were a logical argument. I’m open to discussing my statements. I have zero further time for rebutting fallacies. Try again or nah, no worries from me either way.
[–]halfback9100 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Well, if the last sentence offended you so the philosopher might suggest ignoring it and responding to the rest as opposed to centering your entire comment on it, which is what you did. But fine, I'm game.
A man must decide for himself what code of ethics to follow
We get to do what we want. You'll have no argument from me there. I'm not saying you can't do what you want, I'm saying you'll have to deal with the consequences of those actions.
because that’s what he has objectively chosen to follow.
Not sure what this means. If someone chooses to do a thing, then yes, objectively they have done that thing. Elaborate if I'm misunderstanding.
You should not take a set of morals and life rules that are handed to you
That's not what I've done. I do not ostracize thieves because someone has told me "Ostracize thieves." I do it because it is in my own best interest to do so. I benefit from thievery being discouraged because I stand to lose more from thievery than I stand to gain. Make sense? That's WHY there are laws against thievery. Laws are just a codification of what the overwhelming majority of people already believed. We don't believe those things because they're laws; they became laws because that's what we believed.
Same thing with murder. The vast, vast majority of people stand to lose far more from murder being okay than they stand to gain from murder not being okay.
without scrutinizing them and asking yourself why the nebulous “others” want you to follow these rules.
At no point did I say "We need to behave this way because THOSE ARE THE RULES AND RULES ARE RULES!" You'll find, if you read my comment, that I described how I would behave and why society does behave similarly. You're confusing me describing what IS with what OUGHT. If you deny this, go ahead and quote where I said "We need to do this this way because those are the rules." or anything similar. If you can't find that quote, it must mean I didn't say that.
You bike metaphor is shit. People are not property.
Yes they are. If people weren't property then slavery wouldn't be wrong. Slavery is wrong because we are depriving people of self ownership. If they couldn't be owned we would be depriving them of nothing/there would be nothing to deprive them of.
Your metaphor removes any agency from the woman for her choices.
It was not meant to be a direct metaphor to this situation. It was meant to express the idea that there are behaviors that are not in the best interest of society as a whole and so society has negative opinions of and reactions to them ranging from mild ostracism (cheating on/with a spouse) to harsh action (theft, murder). There is a negative opinion of cheating because more people feel they stand to lose more than they stand to gain than the opposite. So yes, OP gets to do what he wants, and yes, he may suffer ostracism because of it. Owning the consequences is inseparable from owning the actions.
[–]nebder 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You’ve missed the forest for the trees. Everyone else playing along must realize there comes a time when breaking the rules is better than following the rules. We have to play the same game, the rules are yours to make. You only need to deal with consequences if you get caught. I appreciate the lemmings like you that get butthurt but dont actually do anything when I take advantage of them. Your ideals can only be enforced when there is the threat of state violence to make someone like me question how far I should go.
Question everything is my takeaway. Every clause of the social contract must be examined to determine whether you can agree and abide by it.
One of my guilty pleasures is baiting pseudointellectuals. Thank you for indulging me.
[–]endertheend0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Your ideals can only be enforced when there is the threat state violence to make someone like me question how far I should go.
This is key, Morality is created by the winners, the strong, the powerful.
Also, if the state would use state violence in this way...the state would crumble instantly. So really, only individuals can be the ones to enforce this, but get this. . .
These women don't cuck people who would be able to enforce this.
Thing is, the type of individual to enforce this wouldnt do so with violence.
He would do so BY WITHDRAWING THE RESOURCES HE SUPPORTS THE WOMAN WITH.
But you see, The issue of state violence is brought up when it is ACTUALLY the STATE that is perpetuating cuckoldry to begin with! You know, through welfare laws, wage gap laws and campaigns, letting women vote, etc etc. Women ARE the state, at this point.
So no, morality will not be enforceable unless the individual man is strong enough to enforce it. This man magically doesn't get cucked.
Unfortunately such a man is rare. . .hell Even Genghis Khan lost one of his women to some chad in his army.
This is why knowing when it's YOUR TURN with women is key.
Knowledge is key as well, if knowledge of women was more well known and accepted, well there'd be no need for the red pill. Women would be put in their place and Cuckholdery would be at a minimum.
Of course it would still happen. Not even Death will Stop Hypergamy.
If not even Death will stop Hypergamy what makes people think MORALITY will?
Please.
[–]halfback9100 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The social contract is utter horseshit.
[–]puredemo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Morality, trust, decency, and the ability to disagree and argue without violence are the hallmarks of civilization.
Completely agree.
Doesn't seem to be entirely tenable long-term though, idk. Western Civ is sort of in the shitter right now, arguably from being too decent to every asshole culture who wants to take advantage.
Then again, the more moral tribes do seem to accumulate more power and resources gradually, even today. (think Mormons)
[–]halfback910-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
There are a lot of problems and I think people mis-assign blame. Muslims showed every sign of integrating into Western culture until the West began this, frankly, bullshit campaign against the Middle East a couple decades ago.
For instance, leading up to the Iraq war, each new generation of Middle Eastern Europeans/Americans was less radical and less religious than the last. That's generally a strong indicator of assimilation. After the Iraq nonsense it reversed. Each generation was more radical and more religious than the last. You've got fifty year old European Muslim Accountants who, you know, do their best to make it to the mosque scratching their heads at why their sixteen year olds want to join ISIS and fight in Syria.
There are a few ways this can go now. If we back off from the ground occupations of Muslim nations (which doesn't make us more safe, in fact it serves to bolster recruitment efforts of terror organizations. A mother of four boys gets collateral damaged by a drone and you DON'T think they'll join the Taliban?) it's likely we could see the old trends come back.
If that doesn't work, we'll have to acknowledge it's now us or them, finish what we started and annihilate them. Which has a huge chance of wiping out all civilization on the planet and, even in the best case scenario, would be the worst atrocity ever to stain the conscience of humanity. Even the thought of it is morally appalling.
[–]puredemo0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Muslims showed every sign of integrating into Western culture until the West began this, frankly, bullshit campaign against the Middle East a couple decades ago.
Wow there is a lot to unpack there.
First off, it wasn't bullshit. Saddam was a theocratic dictator and fuck dictators. I personally think every democracy should make it a number one priority to overthrow every dictatorship, period. The needs and wants of the citizens need to be respected and democracy / capitalism is the only way forward that actually accomplishes this, it has been proven a million times.
So, no, the campaign in the Middle East was not bullshit, albeit poorly executed.
each new generation of Middle Eastern Europeans/Americans was less radical and less religious than the last.
You're saying that they were being more moral specifically because they were being less religious.
Which means the philosophy itself is the issue.
If we back off from the ground occupations of Muslim nations
There should not be any such thing as a Muslim nation. I'm tired of rescuing Bahais and Christians who are ruthlessly persecuted in them.
Again, the philosophy itself is too poisonous.
So yeah, it's going to be a struggle.
[–]halfback9100 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Saddam was a dictator. Fuck dictators.
Agreed, but we are under no ethical obligation to remove them. We opened a can of worms that is a threat to all of civilization for no good reason.
Sure, they were being more moral because they were being less religious. Which means the philosophy itself is at issue.
Sure, they were being more moral because they were being less religious.
Which means the philosophy itself is at issue.
People adhering to it is the issue. The philosophy by itself won't blow up any buildings.
There should not be any such thing as a Muslim nation.
Muslim-majority nations, then. Rephrase.
[–]puredemo1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I feel like we're just looking at this whole thing from two different (probably both valid) angles.
You have a more pacifist philosophy. Keep the peace and let people gradually move away from their extremist values. I'm against this, because I see it as just "kicking the can down the street" and not dealing with the real, core issues.
I have a more aggressive, tribalist philosophy. I want to just go ahead and fight it out, whenever and whereever. If there's violence, there's violence, there will be winners and losers, and in my mind that's how it should be. You see this as pointless violence for no reason, and as an even more intense, needless polarization of the situation.
I don't think Option A works, because of population demographics, among other issues.
Honestly, the real truth is that there is not going to be any easy answer to this, and I think we need tactics from both.
If someone integrates, be very accepting. If they refuse to integrate, or they persecute other religions, use violence.
Clear, stark boundaries.
[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire21 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Um, actually, your morality WOULD save you, if the cuck were the type, to say, kill the person cuckolding him in a fit of rage.
Also, you SHAT WHERE YOU EAT! Never a smart move.
See, people think that morality is all about altruism. But that's only from a shallow reading. Really, self-interest and morality are inextricably intertwined.
You think what you accomplished is so great? All you did was fuck some guy's bored sloppy seconds. All that stuff she told you could be self-serving BS designed to seduce you into doing what she wants. Also, you could have pursued and had sex with single women. Instead, you give attention to a married woman and put your life at risk. This is from a scarcity mentality. You didn't say to yourself, "Sure, she wants to fuck, but I can always find someone NOT AT WORK and NOT MARRIED." Instead, you said, "Gee, I get to get my dick wet, I better seize the opportunity or another one won't come along!" Don't be that guy. Be a better guy.
[–]comcain-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree. Too much danger of someone getting a gun and shooting you.
[–]nebder -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Betas/losers/wtfever you call them aren’t stupid. 99.however many 9’s% won’t do a god damn thing about it beyond writing a fucking letter in this case. Why kill a man and ruin the rest of your life because your wife is a slut? I go after (tends to be they hit on me) an attached gal and consider the risk of getting gutstabbed as a calculated risk. Not much different than getting in your car and saying I need to go to work yet there’s a minute possibility I could die in a flaming fireball of a car wreck. Rewards outweigh the risks.
I was really fucking hot at the dude my ex swung to yet I knew it really wasn’t on him even in my deepest emotional turmoil. I was mad at him because I didn’t want to be mad at her. Call it what you will. Some especially deranged fuckers will take that to the next level, most will do what I did which was “oooh man that really sucks. No fair. NO FAIR”
[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire20 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I used to think the same thing, but when you are sexually involved with a woman, the chemicals involved can cloud your judgment and get you to do stupid things that can ruin the rest of your life. I know because there were many instances where I did things that upon reflection, were extremely stupid and possibly threatening to my long-term goals. Also, the guy doesn't have to kill you. There are plenty of legal and minimally risky non-legal ways he can attempt to ruin your life. Also, if the guy is beta bux, he could have resources at his disposal. There are lots of poor desperate guys who would eagerly accept a few grand to beat the shit out of someone and make it look like a "random" mugging. Hell, these guys probably know crackheads who will do it for a hundred while they pocket the rest.
And then you have potentially ruining someone's professional reputation. How might a boss react? Co-workers? Business partners?
Cucking is simply not a good habit to get into.
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
That's the thing though, if not op someone else will take that role and cuck the beta despite the risks involved. Its going to happen regardless, best to still do it, and make sure you dont get shot. If you want to take that risk. This is real. If op thinks he can handle his business and is most likely strapped himself, then he'll shoot back.
Law of the Jungle.
Who cares? Let the other person be the idiot. If other people are jumping off cliffs, taking drugs, buying stocks being pumped by Cramer or Time Magazine an argument for emulating their actions? Stupd is as stupid does. The guy shat where eat ate. Dumb, dumb, and dumb. He put his livelihood at risk just to experience a half hour of pleasure when he could have just: gone to a hooker, fucked a tinder sloot, fapped, etc. etc. I don't care about what stupid people do. I do what I think is in my own selfish interests.
[–]rationalityiskey-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Agreed. I am of the opinion that it's good to have morals, simply because not having them results in more demerits than benefits in the long run. On the other hand, using it to rationalize your laziness and your being afraid to step out of your boundaries is never the thing to do.
It's a hard balance to find. I think the important question to answer is: Regardless of morality, do I really want it, and is it worth it?
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
This post is so crucial to TRP yet so simple, that there is no amount of reddit gold or upvotes to describe its value. But still, guys who don't get it, just don't get it, maybe they won't get it. Sadly, including ECs posting in this thread, like u/monsieurhire2 (nice white-knighting, bro).
There is only one, true law, it is called "the reality". Or "nature" or whatever you want to call it. Our mission in the "upside down clown world" is to un-learn what we've been taught and to learn about "the reality", find more and more of its rules and to embrace it, to bend it to our wants and needs, to play the real game, for once.
The so-called "morality" or "values" like religion or patriotism were created by groups in charge, to control the masses and to make them fight for their interests. Nothing else. This is exactly what you wrote, "trying to control others with a proven losers strategy".
That woman came to fuck you on your terms, all she wanted was to be impregnated by you. Why shouldn't you use her as you wish, why somebody should criticise you for that and why shouldn't her husband dump her afterwards, I have no idea.
The deal is very simple, both human sexes are biologically wired to do what they do to keep the homo sapiens species running, that's our firmware, that what that woman came for. Sexual toys and contraception are just some of our MALE inventions to keep the things spiced up and with no consequences.
"Hypergamy doesn't care" is one of the rules. "Cucks gonna cuck" seems to be another, because the level that some guys don't understand this is astonishing.
[–]nebder -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You expressed my sentiments well. Owe you a drink now, let’s go with a coffee someday.
I can blow off damn near all bloop shit by now. This threads comments irked me enough to call out the bs. Most days I check the feed and go ‘garbage.. more garbage.. even more garbage’ this post made me say oh yes this will be fun after I read the post.
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I felt the same way, so many bloopers coming out of the woodwork.
Morality is gone, Society is all but fallen, religion is dead and with it went morality(thanks ironically to the bloopers), all we have is money, and our science. If you aren't cucking someone, someone else will, or someone else will cuck you.
Unless, you're "marriage game" is so tight, or SMV so high, that it causes dread for a woman to even think of entertaining another man.
This is nearly impossible, hell I bet you even chicks like Beyonce rode the Cock Carousel despite her being with JayZ
Even in countries that are ridiculously restrictive on women (middle east) where women GET STONED for adultery, . . .women still HAVE TO GET STONED FOR ADULTERY, meaning THEY STILL GET STRANGE DICK OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE meaning, EVEN THE THREAT OF DEATH WONT STOP HYPERGAMY.
This is reality. If society were to collapse tomorrow. The strongest most brutal men would come out on top and stay on top for hundreds of years until they get smart(and find ways to rule without using an iron fist. . .rather an iron fist wrapped in a velvet glove).
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The strongest most brutal men would come out on top and stay on top for hundreds of years until they get smart(and find ways to rule without using an iron fist. . .rather an iron fist wrapped in a velvet glove).
This already happened long time ago and you can find numerous examples of that iron fist wrapped in a velvet glove around us.
Should be cool to filter posts by "posts by ECs below 50 upvotes". Accidentally, that would also happen to be "the most insightful posts by GLO of all time". Or "gilded posts below 50".
After reading u/redpillcad 's post I feel like I've internalised and synthesised internally every single part of the philosophy that I need to stay awake. Mind that it is different thing to read and to understand at the logical level and to internalise.
I think I'm finally ready to post something about the catholic church that I was raised in. For you or for OP that won't be nothing new. For me, this will be something... saying "goodbye" to just another layer of control, to another layer of matrix.
Morality is a way to manipulate masses. Politics (both lefties and right wing), celebrities (Peterson, Milo, Trump), priests - all of them are using it to control others. I bet most of them are not even aware of that. "Useful idiots" are the best example.
Glad you liked my comment, have a good day.
[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire2-2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Would you congratulate a guy for fucking a crack-whore? I mean, if he doesn't, someone else will!
If anyone is white-knighting, it's posters like you, that white-knight the guys that cuck other guys, egging them on, encouraging them, acting like they accomplished something. You are rushing to their defense as if they needed it.
You accomplish VERY LITTLE when you cuck. You get 30 minutes to an hour of pleasure punctuated by the 30 second orgasm in exchange for putting your life, health, prosperity, freedom, and reputation at risk.
Where is your abundance mentality? Where is your mission? Where is your "I've got better things to do than stick it into some slut for some cheap validation and a dopamine boost?"
Where is your supply of 19 year olds? Seriously? Is that the best you can do? Someone else's sloppy seconds? I'm not saying nobody should cuck, I'm just saying men of value don't bother. High value guys have harems of single women. Cucking is for lower value guys who need to boost their flagging self-esteem by grabbing some low-hanging fruit.
You may as well congratulate a guy for fucking a fat ugly pig because he got his dick wet. I knew so many guys in college who would brag about fucking disgusting pigs and sneer at my refusal to do so, acting like they were getting something out of having a higher technical lay-count. The only way I would congratulate a guy for fucking a fat ugly pig is if he himself were a fat ugly pig who was previously incel with hangups on sex, because for a guy like that, ANY sex is an accomplishment. For an average frustrated chump? It's capitulation. It's surrender. It's a sign of a lack of standards and self-respect. Would you congratulate an AFC for fucking a crack-whore just so he doesn't have to beat off?
If the woman wants to be with you, she should leave her partner, not sneak around by his back.
[–]TheLaughingRhino1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
The Red Pill is "amoral"
But every man NEEDS a CODE.
Without "values" ( ones you determine for yourself) as guideposts, a man will be adrift. And you can't be the best version of yourself if you are adrift.
One of the problems I see with guys in the subreddit is they only go as far as to point out the "amoral" part.
If you feel it's part of your "code" to bang a married woman or an engaged woman or a woman in a traditional formal commitment, then that's on you. Your choice, your life.
You've lost frame by coming here, because clearly it bothers you and you are trying to openly justify your choices. You are trying to pull yourself up and pull him down, for your own validation.
Something to consider is any guy can also throw out his "imaginary rulebook" and take a shotgun and blow your head off. And he might show up to your house, or when you are with your family. And wipe out your little cousins, your mom, your nieces, some random kids, some bystanders. It works both ways.
I used to know a guy who spend about a decade robbing people by breaking into their homes. Sometimes the residents were inside asleep. It was like a game for him. Most of the time, the places were empty. But he was totally honest with himself. He said every time he did it, he prepared himself to die. You break into a man's home, to steal his stuff, you should be prepared to die.
It cuts both ways. Every dude here who wants to bang a married chick. Fine, but be prepared to die. An engaged chick. Fine, but be prepared to die. A chick with a boyfriend. Be prepared to die.
Someone will say, what are the odds of that?
Life is cheap. Including yours. You don't know how anyone will react.
Beta Bucks who are plugged in, they deep in the Matrix. They see you taking everything they have, all their life, their validation, some of them will snap. Some of you guys don't see it, but I see it. More of these dudes are gonna snap and more of them are going to react in a way most of you believed wasn't possible or likely.
You've lost frame. Do it if it's within your code. Don't try to rationalize it to validation how you feel.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]Westwood_159 points60 points61 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]useyourmouth7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]useyourmouth0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil3 points4 points5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]soulcatcher3573 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]redpillcad 1 points1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Volt521212 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]iknowthewhey0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]oneredguy-15 points-14 points-13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1Ramesses_19 points20 points21 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]3LiveAFTSOV4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]1Ramesses_5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneredguy-3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]puredemo14 points15 points16 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]rahl_r1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]puredemo1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]rahl_r1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]endertheend0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PabloAsscrowbar12 points13 points14 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Smoovemammajamma3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PabloAsscrowbar2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Comp1ex 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro-1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Comp1ex 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]nebder 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]rationalityiskey0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tteabag25915 points6 points7 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]puredemo0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]tteabag25911 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]haku1250 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]tteabag25910 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]2CasaDeFranco4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EscapeTheGoat1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]miller2111 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneredguy3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]nebder 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oneredguy-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BewareTheOldMan0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oneredguy-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]halfback9101 point2 points3 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]nebder 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]halfback9101 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]nebder 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]halfback9100 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]nebder 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]endertheend0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]halfback9100 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]puredemo0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]halfback910-1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]puredemo0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]halfback9100 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]puredemo1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire21 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]comcain-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nebder -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire20 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire20 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]rationalityiskey-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]nebder -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]endertheend-1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro-1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire2-2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheLaughingRhino1 point [recovered] | Copy Link