SSMV dynamics and mechanics

Eureka! This post inspired an insight into the dynamics of the social axis (A, B, D, G; excludes L, S, O).

Male social reputations are characterized by conflict. Social archetypes may be predicted according to two personality factors: social aggressiveness and objective superiority in conflict, as illustrated below.

Alpha – Confrontational, dominant.
Beta – Nonconfrontational, dominant.
Delta – Nonconfrontational, submissive.
Gamma – Confrontational, submissive.

To further illustrate this breakdown, let’s consider the difference between Alphas and Betas. A Beta may or may not be objectively superior to an Alpha in a point of contention, but for one psychological reason or another he is disinclined to conflict. He will not pick a fight, although he may be driven to conflict by a more confrontational personality (A or G). Contrarily, Alphas constantly seek out small conflicts in order to keep the pecking order stable. Maybe they enjoy conflicts, or their dad picked on them as a kid, or whatever. Doesn’t matter, except that they pick fights and win consistently. Big men may seem insufferable, but their constant shows of dominance are essential to group stability as a basic matter of human nature. If no one “lays down the law” consistently, people start acting up.

(In classical conditioning terms, we would expect people who win fights to be more likely to enjoy engaging in them. But contra this expectation it is clear that Betas and Gammas exist in large numbers, which I will address below- in part- and fully at some time in the future.)

As a practical matter, the tendencies of nonsocial, nonhierarchical male archetypes are irrelevant at the tactical and operational levels of human action. They are either too rare (sigmas represent less than 1 in 1,000 males) or the effects of their individual actions on the greater social system are negligible in the short term. Kant was an Omega with an unusually weighty impact on the West at large, but his existence did not affect Germany’s GDP within his lifetime, and possibly not at all. Only the social dynamics ought to be considered as a matter of tactics and operations, and only at the strategic level and above should we concern ourselves with such statistical outliers as Kant.

I’d like to introduce a symbolic method of illustration to the theory of male social conflict. Here is an example of an interaction:

B ~ G, a Beta and a Gamma come into peaceful contact.
B ~< G, the Gamma initiates conflict.
B >< G, the Beta stands ground and returns fire.
B >> G, the Gamma turns and flees.
B ~> G, the Beta ceases hostilities and extends an offer of peace.
B ~ G, the Gamma accepts and mutual hostility has temporarily ceased.

Another example. Try to imagine the interaction according to the symbols, and see if it matches the explanation at the end.

A ~ D
A >~ D
A >< D
A >> D
A ~> D
A ~ D

In this scenario, an Alpha initiates conflict with a Delta. The Delta tries to stand his ground, but finds himself outmatched and submits/flees. The Alpha is pleased with this outcome and ceases hostilities, extending the olive branch. The Delta accepts.

These interactions are statistical in nature. The archetypes are tendencies, unlike the laws governing chemical interactions. For instance, an Alpha can lose an argument, but they are characterized by a consistent pattern of winning. Statistically rare interactions often give rise to maladaptive behaviors. For instance, Gammas don’t usually win, so when they do win they often aren’t gracious in victory. This would be illustrated like so:

D ~ G
D ~< G
D >< G
D << G
D ~< G
D << G
D >< G
D << G

As you can see, the Gamma never ceases hostilities or extends the olive branch, because he has never been in the superior position before. He is unable to control his confrontational nature, and continually presses the attack. Every previous conflict ended when the Gamma submitted to the stronger party, but here we have an infinite loop. The Delta attempts to cease hostilities, but this fails to appease the Gamma, and when he fights back he is defeated, so he will continue to be harried to the ends of the earth. It isn't accidental that this matches the behavior of degenerate rabbits (due to mutation accumulation, ref. Charlton and Trust), feminists, cultural Marxists, et al.

Please note that there are some hidden assumptions in place. This is a social model, as in R-selection. Social conflict only has costs measured in terms of reputation, and nobody gets killed over an insult (that would be K-selection). There is also an assumption that the hierarchy exists in a vacuum, with no external inputs to the system. However…this is certainly not the case in the modern day.

Consider the exemplary case of "victim identity politics". In this bizarre new world, there is a real, substantial, externally imposed reward system for failure, and punishment for success. “Victims” who tend to be in a lot of conflicts, and also tend to failure, are elevated to some semblance of success by an authority external to the male pecking order that we’ve considered. In such a world, it is therefore no surprise to see more males expressing the Gamma strategy of picking lots of fights and losing. Even further, we see that there are no checks or balances on this Gamma male behavior: they will continue advocating for more and more Realpolitik along these lines, and vote for more external rewards for losers like themselves.

Advertisements

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to SSMV dynamics and mechanics

  1. Craig says:

    Trust a married lover to nail Sigma the best…

    http://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/2vzbeo/thoughts_on_sigma_males/

    A 1/4 of a page down.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      For the peanut gallery:

      “This post is my husband in a nutshell. With all the good of being married to a sigma, there is bad as well. As all the good traits of men are amplified, so are some of the bad. We’ve been married for over 7 years now- I think i get what he’s all about. Depression is deeper and most vast. His work is hard on both of us (he’s in the navy). He was a raging alcoholic, briefly. addiction is easy for them. He’s been way out of shape, and really in good shape.

      If it’s trauma at a young age (he said there’s plenty of that), then there would also be hardships because of it later in life.

      That being said, it’s exactly as flat-white described above.”

      -laeliaorchids

      • Craig says:

        Yeah, more the lady above her, never a raging alcoholic, or fat. In the forces a drinking culture is pretty much a given, every unit has it’s own boozer for cheap after work drinks and social club… I miss off pay day 50c beers.

        Deep depression, not as deep as the ones who end up in mental health…I think it’s more of a all in, or not at all attitude.

        Remember the man hating Lesbian I mentioned, she ended up in cookcoo land.

        What I find is a lot of ex force people who go off the deep end have a second wind later in life as well. They tend to be white haired by age 40.

  2. Craig says:

    It’s taken me awhile to get this A, B, G, D, O, S Stuff. As in how it all fits, makes identifying social situations easier. A lot of people lean on me to lead in the local community, different clubs… meh. Of course I try to avoid it.

  3. Heaviside says:

    I don’t think Vox’s really worth anything when you are talking about anything other than the relationships between relatively tightly knit groups. It definitely doesn’t apply to society as a whole, which is far too atomized to have a definite status hierarchy other than that set by the mass media, but the mass media promotes a hierarchy of fashionability, not authority, so the sports team delta/beta/alpha metaphor does not apply.

    Barack Obama definitely isn’t the “team leader” or “alpha” of the whole country, because America is not a “team”; it is an enormous pile of silty writhing molluscs having a net slowly tightened around it.

    A fascist country would be closer to one where the head of state could actually be considered a “team captain” and the entire country a “team,” but only by so much. Fascism that resembles Napoleon or Mussolini or Hitler is still rooted in the modern notion of a democratic nation-state.

    In modern societies social relationships outside of small groups are too mediated by the mass media, bureaucracies, and capitalism for alpha/beta/delta distinctions to have much value.

    https://collapseofman.wordpress.com/2013/07/07/scale/

    This guy gets it.

    The collapse into primitive tribalism and the abandonment of the West’s rational heritage is so terrifying for me to contemplate that I would prefer the existence of a dystopian Stalinist World State to that. Anything to that. Just thinking about it makes me physically ill.

    Here’s to hoping — World Revolution 2017!

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >I don’t think Vox’s really worth anything when you are talking about anything other than the relationships between relatively tightly knit groups. It definitely doesn’t apply to society as a whole, which is far too atomized to have a definite status hierarchy other than that set by the mass media, but the mass media promotes a hierarchy of fashionability, not authority, so the sports team delta/beta/alpha metaphor does not apply.

      This is a very, very good point. I’m glad you were able to define the limits of the theory so concisely, because I hadn’t even conceived of the necessity. In fact, I expect that this will spur more insights whenever the theory fails to predict an interaction correctly. Say the Alpha avoids conflict with the Delta. What happened here? What greater law was at work? Etc.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I think you’re right about Arred. This click showed me I should pay him some attention: https://collapseofman.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/post-autism/

  4. Heaviside says:

    I forgot to add:

    It’s not just “victim politics,” but a whole constellation of formalistic and impersonal institutions which render trying to use SSMV ranks as a substitute for socioeconomic classes futile. I have to say this because many of the people who read Vox Day’s blogs attempt to use them to explain social dynamics in general as if they were classes.

    This is nothing new. Since Marx, conservatives have conceived of social position in subjective terms, and leftists have conceived of it in objective terms. Conservatives associate conservatism with an internal locus of control because it is preoccupied with the subjective side of social relations. Vox’s hierarchy obviously falls into the subjective category, since it is primarily concerned with attitudes. Roissy’s alpha/beta dichotomy is much more objective since the way he defines it only the number and quality of lays count, but you can tell in general still think of it in very subjective terms because they focus so much on attitude, “state,” “outcome-independence,” “abundance mentality,” and so forth.

    I’m much more Hegelian, so I don’t think either the subjective side or the objective side is necessarily more important than the other, but Marxism makes an important point by positing that in modern society the objective matters more than our feelings, attitudes, and personal relationships.

    (Marxists used to bash Hegel for his supposed “subjectivity’ and “bourgeois idealism,” which just shows either a lack of intellectual honesty or an inability to really understand him, which might be attributed to Marx’s Jewish character. Today’s so-called “Marxists” don’t bash him anymore because not only do they not read Hegel, they don’t read Marx either! These subtle distinctions would be lost on them, anyways.)

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >It’s not just “victim politics,” but a whole constellation of formalistic and impersonal institutions which render trying to use SSMV ranks as a substitute for socioeconomic classes futile. I have to say this because many of the people who read Vox Day’s blogs attempt to use them to explain social dynamics in general as if they were classes.

      It’s not entirely misled (although certainly obfuscated) because SSMV is a phenomenon that emerges from post-scarcity economics. The female sociosexual hierarchy always conforms to male SSMV…except when the food runs out, or LA is in flames. Then women will look around for anyone with food, or a gun, and fall in love with him as easily as she once fell in love with Charles Manson.

      >This is nothing new. Since Marx, conservatives have conceived of social position in subjective terms, and leftists have conceived of it in objective terms.

      I suppose you adopted my saying “politics is the continuation of war by other means” because it’s concise. I expanded this in a Vox Popoli thread by saying that, essentially, conservatives conflate civil administration with “politics”, whereas liberals correctly see them as two different weapons for the same purpose.

      • Heaviside says:

        >I suppose you adopted my saying “politics is the continuation of war by other means” because it’s concise.

        Bro I was saying that before you.

      • Heaviside says:

        >I expanded this in a Vox Popoli thread by saying that, essentially, conservatives conflate civil administration with “politics”, whereas liberals correctly see them as two different weapons for the same purpose.

        And this too.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        Ah, sorry for the arrogance then.

  5. Pingback: Domains of superiority (SSMV dynamics addendum) | Aeoli Pera

  6. Pingback: HTML mistake | Aeoli Pera

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s