I thought the download was going to be a nice 75-200 pages book, not a twitter post :|

home come there are a billion niggers then

US is too big to fail. Glowies got us by the balls.

>>24896562 christcuck propaganda

>The single most influential factor in a civilization's longevity and success is prenuptial chastity. >If people were expected to remain virgins until marriage, the culture was more likely to have all of the markers of human flourishing. okay, except not enough data points available for this many variable to explain.

>>24896619 i imagine the most successful are mutt empires where they just steal up foreign peoples into drones and keep a few whities to run the top, like rome, USA, macedonia, russia. coincidentally europe's zenith was during this thing called 'colonialism' where they ruled foreigners and collected taxes rather than burning down the village and raping every one

Even if that were the case the world today is different from anything in the past. There are 8 billion humans on this planet right now. With that many people it takes time for collapse to happen. The world trade and culture are somewhat globalized so the access to both physical and intellectual goods is widespread which can slow down collapse both locally and globally. Technology also reduces the need for actual human labor so it doesn't matter as much if men are not maximally productive. It's really hard to try to apply historical lessons to the current world. I don't think that the civilizational collapse will be as total as it has been with some past civilizations. Sure some high technology might disappear, but you can't just make the massive amounts of resources dug up and refined disappear. Maybe the future humans will scavenge and create something new from what is left (or maybe it will be like African infrastructure crumbling after colonization). The collapse might also not be global, maybe some pockets of advanced civilization will remain.

>>24896619 >If people were expected to remain virgins until marriage, the culture was more likely to have all of the markers of human flourishing. But seriously, outside of Asia, this was pretty much never the case. Nobody in Europe gave a fuck if you wanted to marry a widow, for example. I don't know why chuds are unable to understand this. In reality, the most prosperous societies had a large amount if incels and femcels, only the best got to marry and have children, and that was eugenic enough for Europe to become the dominant power in the known universe. For example, in 14th century England, almost half of women (40%) were unmarried (Smith et al.). Then this changed in the modern era, when we had enough resources to survive with more families, at the cost of a quickly degenerating gene pool.

>>24896664 Technology vanishes when it becomes obsolete. This doesn't necessarily mean it's replaced by an improved version, it can also mean that it simply isn't needed: >Ipads don't exist anymore because people don't listen to mp3 libraries anymore >Aqaeducts were discontinued in the middle ages because the population density was lower than in Roman times, so aquaeducts were simply not needed anymore >Armor was discontinued in the early modern era because it didn't work against modern firearms anyway >As armor vanished, so did heavy melee weapons because a saber suffices to kill a guy who only wears an uniform And so on. So it's not inconceivable that as populations and social situations change, some things will simply vanish because it would be more of a hassle to keep them. Look at desktops, most people today use notebooks or even just smartphones, almost nobody has a desktop anymore.

But all old civilizations are gone ? so they collapsed in one way of another

>>24896572 Here you guys go

>>24896601 >Rome is to bug too fail >Mongol Empire is too big to fail >Russian empire is too big too fail >America is too big to fail

>the men freed enough from sexual gaming wat the fuck does it mean? everyone on kc is free from sexual gaming but it doesnt help in any way. also for a technologically advanced society it becomes impossible to keep women repressed because families just buy their women (daughters, sisters) out of repression with wealth, regardless if its legal or illegal

Incel theories Women have always been whores, the only people who think otherwise are clueless boomer incels who get their theoretical knowledge about women from books.

Who's gonna replace Wectern empire? The Russians have too many divorces for this, and porn is available. Unless Russians manage to turn the rudder, it'll be Chinks. Fucking shit, society destroyed by a few Jewish dykes who burned their bras.

Civilization is only good if it involves childsex, otherwise I want to be a barbarian.

>>24897162 Every civ will get -90% nerf and start over, then it will be colonization & slavery against by wect

>>24897162 >chinks lol they're dying out

>>24897176 Most likely this. Also, lessons learned = 0 and in 500 years we'll have the same problems again.

One of us

>>24897159 >everyone on kc is free from sexual gaming We're not free from it, we're actively losing the game >also for a technologically advanced society it becomes impossible to keep women repressed because families just buy their women (daughters, sisters) out of repression with wealth, regardless if its legal or illegal Everything happening is destined and unstoppable, as you see in op's first image it says "unstoppably destroyed".

>>24896998 unmarried doesn't mean childless let alone unfucked. Priests had "household helpers" that handily turned into official wives once Sweden swapped to protestantism.

>>24897257 >Yeah but these bizarre isolated cases... Who asked?

Bump

>>24896998 >In reality, the most prosperous societies had a large amount if incels and femcels, only the best got to marry and have children What is prosperity then, just economy?

>>24897161 >Women have always been whores, That has nothing whatsoever to do with societal arrangement, notice in the op image it talks about sexual freedom, not sexual constitution

>>24897392 If women are genetically programmed to be whores without exception, the logical conclusion is that the ones who didn't whore were selected against. Which means that if any past society had successfully stamped out whoring, then we do not descend from that society.

>>24897405 Patriarchal monogamy does not stamp out whoring, yes. It's only necessary for men to, as the op image puts it, be "freed from sexual gaming" through having their family-making ability properly secured so that they can focus on civilization-building, and sexual freedom for women obliterates that possibility for a large swathe of men because those average men can't have their average girls anymore and thus can't have the traditional source of life motivation anymore

>>24897447 >be "freed from sexual gaming" And that never happens. Women have gotten very sneaky and stealthy, that's the only genetic thing the sexual suppression has resulted in.

Civilization is gay. I want to be a barbarian.

>>24897405 he's talking about modern civilization, not ooga booga bush civilization >>24897465 >I want to be a barbarian

>>24897405 he's talking about modern civilization, not ooga booga bush civilization, which got exploited by modern civilizations (colonialism) >>24897465 >I want to be a barbarian

>>24896998 >In reality, the most prosperous societies had a large amount if incels and femcels, only the best got to marry and have children, and that was eugenic enough for Europe to become the dominant power in the known universe. that's never really been the case outside of some truly intense population bottlenecks. most people who could have kids after a while generally did. the real killer was famine and disease.

>>24897405 This, it's what made us the dominant species so we gotta deal even though it's annoying.

>>24897497 >most people who could have kids after a while generally did. Nope.

>>24897527 Proofs to the contrary?

>>24897483 Where did you obtain this image of me?

Bump

>>24897209 >We're not free from it, we're actively losing the game who's free of it then?

>>24897209 >Everything happening is destined and unstoppable yeah i agree

>>24897447 why cant they just get ugly girls then? they obviously dont care about women, all they're interested in is civilization building after sticking their dicks in pussy like 5 times to get 5 kids, and that someone makes them a sandwich and cleans the house and deals with the kids. all of that can be done with an ugly woman or a mail order bride from some shithole where they would kill each other for the chance to become a first or second worlder's housewife

>>24897447 the truth is that man became as corrupted by progress, technology and social liberties as women. men have become like the guys from big bang theory, they wouldnt do any better even in a society where 10/10 women would cut each other's throats to become their traditional wives for life. they are not interested in civilization building, all they're interested is movies, games, tv series, tasty food and have sex from time to time and have someone to hug while they fall asleep. thats all they're interested in and it has nothing to do with sexual revolution

>>24897465 >I want to be a barbarian. whats holding you? go in the mountains. cops are too fat to go there and arrest you for some rule violations or anything like that

>>24899435 if being an autistic nerd was so fun why dont chads do it instead of fucking women

>>24896562 >tl;dr >kohlface >i can't breed >the society has fallen

>>24899520 Anti faggot-downvote

>>24899520 that kohlface boy spitting mad facts

>>24896637 >coincidentally europe's zenith was during this thing called 'colonialism' where they ruled foreigners and collected taxes rather than burning down the village and raping every one >taxes European global empires were about captive markets, not taxes. Britain didn't gain wealth from taxing Indians. They gained it by, for example, buying their wool, shipping it to the industrial heartland of England where the most efficient mills on Earth wove it into millions of miles of quality fabric, which was then shipped back to India and sold to the locals (at less than what the locals could charge producing it with traditional methods). China manages a similar feat today without having to pay for the upkeep of global empire.

>>24897459 That's completely false and sour grapes. Punishing adultery with death keeps bitches in line. The pimp hand must be strong.

>>24899338 Me. I have three blue eyed sons, and have aged out of the competition.

>>24897405 >the whore gene lol shut the fuck up retard

>>24903142 Are you trying to claim women aren't evolved to be whores? Try to make an argument to support such claim. Doing nothing but deny another's claim is true and flinging epithets only turns them back on you.

>>24904926 You are another stupid retard Do you think sexual behavior can be delimited by a single whore gene that is either selected for or against or something

>>24904926 If women were whores by nature men wouldn't be so outrageously horny by nature. The male libido ensures men are driven, to an insane degree, to mate. Were women whorish by nature men wouldn't be so horny, because the ones that weren't still managed to breed due to the female libido. Woman's nature is to mold itself into what is expected by her group.

>>24903142 >the whore gene Not how it works monkey

>>24904935 Your shit flinging duly noted. Lack of relevant comment and erection of strawmen only further exacerbates your utter incompetence, irrelevance, and obtusity.

>>24905010 >Were women whorish by nature men wouldn't be so horny, because the ones that weren't still managed to breed due to the female libido. Your attempt at logic is pathetic, contradicting itself so obviously I can only surmise it was an attempt at trolling.

>>24905012 Another denial + ad hominem. Why are the obviously sub 70 IQ so eager to reveal their intellectual incompetence? Is this behaviour somehow rewarded on the KC?

>>24905021 Pray tell me retard, how would you select against the whore gene

>>24905043 Let me extend my ridicule of your idiotic comment. Whores, first, don't express libido, but rather larceny, greed, and acquisitiveness. They are driven, not to enjoy their sexuality, but to whatever will gain them money. Sluts are libidinous. Know the difference. Secondly, your pretense at logically supporting your argument completely contradicts it. Were whores to be more freely available than non-whores to libidinous men, they both would breed more as a result, producing more offspring for men with higher libidos. In fact high libido men out breed low libido men regardless of the libido of women, as they will simply make more effort to breed such women as there are, and will gain the benefit of more effort, which is more offspring. Finally, you make some bizarre reference to low libido men being successful at breeding as some kind of disproof of women being libidinous (which is what you incorrectly think whorish means), but I just can't see any way to examine that claim and find some logical basis for it, no matter which way I examine it. Libidinous women given a choice between libidinous men and men with low libido will obviously breed more with libidinous men. Low libido women facing that choice may prefer low libido men, but libidinous men will simply seek intercourse more often, and thus out breed low libido men. Insofar as your initial characterization of men was as universally libidinous, and rabidly so, the later mention of low libido men without any rational basis for bringing them into the discussion is just weird. Perhaps you just wanted to throw yourself into the mix out of narcissism? Ignoring any of the actual reasons for low libido genes to be maintained in a gene pool means you just haven't the intellectual capacity to correlate other factors in contemplation of complex systems. Low libido men are probably better providers for families because they are less desperate for tail, which desperation presents risk to families. This matters to successful reproduction because human children require at least a decade of care before they can fend for themselves, and this disfavors high libidos in parents, who may produce more offspring, but with lower survival rates. This may outproduce the libidinous, or it may not. We just can't know, but it does present some argument for low libido parents, at least.

>>24905107 see >>24905300

While I agree, still >3 generations In history and biology it's common to count one human generation as 20-25 years. Women got full rights since the end of WWII. Or rather in 1960s. 1960+75 = 2035 I can't see civilization is falling in ten years. I think, he was exaggerating.

>>24905329 civilization has collapsed. We're just eating our way through our savings.

>>24905057 I'm in disagreeance with the brazilian and not with you, you idiot

>>24905768 More ad hominems doesn't make you more rational, fyi. Quite the opposite.

>>24897162 Statistics claim that the main cause of Russian divorces is in fact... the lack of money. We have very different societal problems, there's less tension between Russians themselves, as it is between Russians and non-whites. In fact, their evil is forcing Russians to band together and demand the changes. Western empire will get replaced by whoever is last standing when it falls. It might be one of the Euro states, or it might be itself as it's really too big to just fail.

>>24897465 VAG vikernes, promoting vaginal written books of his wife