The incentive for continual powerlessness

I woke up in the middle of the night thinking about the normie questionnaire and it hit me like a ton of bricks: The internet right doesn’t want to win because if they succeeded at spreading their worldview they’d be normies and no longer special.

The modern economy is about feeling special and different at the lowest possible cost (Ref: “Q is consumerism in its purest form.”) It’s cheaper to work your way into an economic niche and just sit on a sinecure collecting collect rent. Virtue signalling correlates strongly with dark triad traits (about 0.6):

Increasing narcissistic resentment in the population causes increasing demand for being special at low cost. “The upcummies must flow.”

Therefore, for the right to repent of its powerlessness it must repent of this drug first. Outrage porn is probably more debilitating than ordinary porn. It has to go.

About Aeoli Pera

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

21 Responses to The incentive for continual powerlessness

  1. MM says:

    >Virtue signalling correlates strongly with dark triad traits (about 0.6)

    Hmm so since I don’t do that it means Im a totally principled triple-K selected overman.

    Oh wait, I just virtue signaled. Fuck!

    • MM says:

      (triple k selected,

      dont disrespect it)

    • Obadiah says:

      >Hmm so since I don’t do that it means Im a totally principled triple-K selected overman.
      >Oh wait, I just virtue signaled. Fuck!

      Edenists are one of the most hardcore “we are very special and different” groups out there, and this idea gives more weight to the basis of “Aeolian” Edenism (which is ‘aristocratic’ and exclusivist i.e. hardline “us vs them”) rather than “Koanican” Edenism (which is ‘democratic’ and universalist i.e. “everyone fits into the phrenological quaternality”)

      However unlike Judaism/Nazism Edenism comes from a place of moral correctness rather than amorality, of logical-incoherence rather than rationality, of pathologically deflated rather than pathologically overinflated self-esteem, of social alienation rather than narcissistic supply, and of societal periphery rather than societal centrality.

      I’m just kind of throwing shit out there but this concept has the stink of importance on it.

      • Obadiah says:

        >Hmm so since I don’t do that it means Im a totally principled triple-K selected overman.
        >Oh wait, I just virtue signaled. Fuck!

        “Consequently, in the above-mentioned example, the introverted intuitive, when affected by the giddiness, would not imagine that the perceived image might also in some way refer to himself. Naturally, to one who is rationally orientated, such a thing seems almost unthinkable, but it is none the less a fact, and I have often experienced it in my dealings with this type.”

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        >the stink of importance

        LOL

      • bicebicebice says:

        “I’m just kind of throwing shit out there but this concept has the stink of importance on it.” the problem with Edenism has always been thats itz true if the last pharao is a blockpusher there be no more pharaoes and if the last president is a communist moslem kenyan malasiyan gay nigger chichago rentboy….

        https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/10/at-5-neanderthal-you-are-an-outlier/263475/

      • MM says:

        >narcissistic supply
        >societal periphery rather than societal centrality.

        the starved ego is just as apt to be narcissist as the glutinous overfed one, and narcissists are found mostly on the peripheries (and if Vaknin is to be believed, much more often on the negative periphery).

        Hence, Alpha-gamma mindsets have much in common. If anything, the gamma is more obsessed with status and praise (like a classic narcissist) and an alpha cares more about
        the phenomenological experience of “winning” itself (in a disorganized way in the form of a primary psychopath, or with enormous intentionality in at least one form; that of the “results based” narcissist. I forget the term :/. There probably is a form that lacks any pathology, which Id expect to be something like the rare ultra competent that is also very well socialized)

        Ultimately, it is status itself that makes the most difference.

        IE:
        Imagine meeting a normal person that acted like Trump
        “its not creepy if she likes you”

        The contextualization given by society matters much more than any inbuilt evaluation, for most behaviors (according to the nature of most people).

        • Obadiah says:

          >Hence, Alpha-gamma mindsets have much in common. If anything, the gamma is more obsessed with status and praise (like a classic narcissist) and an alpha cares more about
          the phenomenological experience of “winning” itself

          Agree to some extent, though status is definitely a big part of what drives the Alpha’s winning-addiction (status moreso than praise, because the alpha is more self-assured than the gamma, who is trying to gain self-assurance to in turn gain status). For what does the phenomenological experience of winning provide but the *status* of being #1?

          And I think it’s pretty much canonical that both positions on the hierarchy are associated with narcissistic behavior or a pathological “hunger”.

          • WW says:

            >For what does the phenomenological experience of winning provide but the *status* of being #1?

            Simpler.
            Winning BIG is a hit of cocaine. The most pronounced effect being a deeper hunger, a need for an even bigger hit. Of course there is a status component. Im saying the more “alpha” someone is the more likely they are to value winning over status. “Winning” is ultimately an unreducable feeling of great pleasure and ‘gain’ and hunger. What the ego does with it afterwards (chiefly, justification and “Im the gratest”) is not as important for shaping behavior as the drug itself. This makes more sense when you realize it is the most powerful natural addictive thing there is (to a man) and so anyone who actually *is* that good at winning should get more addicted to really stacking the wins up than trying primarily to feed an ego. Thats the kind of shit someone on the decline starts to do. Oh yeah, thats the other thing they dont tell you: losing big feels 10x worse than winning big feels good. Not to a loser though… they get over it disgustingly quickly. Which of course is actually the big pitfall of the gamma: delusion (but not with the deep seated addiction to winning, only a deep seated addiction to constructing a second world where they shouldnt brutally kill themselves by their.own standards)

            Read “the winner effect”

  2. MM says:

    What is the research on the people who anti-virtue signal?

    Like:

    “yeah Im a fat fucking hawg gonna stuff my growing-ass gut with fiber waffles and sawsidge grayvy haw haw haw haw haw” (farts)

    [vid links deleted by mod]

    mild content advisory for second vid- its really gross. But there’s no reason to watch past first minute for our… scientific (lol) purposes… he actually eats all that shit like the self-styled untermensch “man-hog” he is.

    (not the most serious example but is a legit good question)

  3. Obadiah says:

    I’ve thought about this before too; I think its part of it but not all of it. The religion of feeling special forever necessitates some real life action eventually or you have people get disillusioned and then you become irrelevant–that’s why the Jews have to actually go out and rule the world as part of their religion. Nazis are just inverted Jews and right now they’re writing their Talmud.

    • Obadiah says:

      The Jews and the Internut Nazis are both characterized by legit intelligence, legit talent, and legit dark triad skew. Same traits, same needs.

      Idk at least Ave Imperator Augstus His Majesty Jim of Jim’s Blog will allow some sort of state-sponsored bongo Christianity if he thinks it’ll help him control the plebs.

  4. Obadiah says:

    Aeoli in your book is “feeling special” the same thing as “narcissism”? I don’t think having a strong, healthy sense of self-worth is necessarily pathological and may in fact be normal. We are after all the literal offspring-children of the literal God Almighty, and the Lord is not known to suffer from low self esteem.

    Maybe the real special folks are the ones who can get over themselves and repent of their wickedness.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Aeoli in your book is “feeling special” the same thing as “narcissism”?

      No, the more precise formulation I prefer is solipsism * entitlement. It was just shorthand for the common Luciferian untermenschen variant (I think this is what MM means when he talks about creating a second world).

      >I don’t think having a strong, healthy sense of self-worth is necessarily pathological and may in fact be normal.

      Unpacking:
      Self-worth = morally good. God clearly values you, you should too.
      Pathological = usually morally bad but not always.
      Normal = Morality varies bigly

      >We are after all the literal offspring-children of the literal God Almighty, and the Lord is not known to suffer from low self esteem.

      I made that exact argument to Vox a couple years ago. Adopted KANGZ.

      • Obadiah says:

        >No, the more precise formulation I prefer is solipsism * entitlement

        I believe that this is a good formulation of what narcissism “looks like in action”. But I do believe that narcissism itself, like the “thing-in-itself”, is definitely a bigger and deeper and more complex phenomenon and its cause is often unique to each individual person.

      • MM says:

        >I think this is what MM means when he talks about creating a second world

        heh. Man does not live by bread alone.

        Two senses:

        1. The literal dopaminergic neurological processes that form idealized futures that can be worked towards.
        These things are non-existent “dreams” that give felt meaning to what I assume is all “out-of-the-moment” human action

        (and a very good deal of in-the-moment as well; especially if you include value and metaphysics, which are the true “second worlds” that inform the idealization process the individual experiences in the description above. Note; As usual on the God question: I don’t know)

        (and once the dream is reached, it necessarily collapses and necessarily does not satisfy. The subject must find a new idealization, and cannot be satisfied with what has been achieved. Such is life)

        (for example, I had the idea for this response and was excited while writing it. Once it was finished all that happened was slight annoyance, and then a new thing popped up)

        Orgasm “satisfies” because it is a cessation of dopaminergic fuckatry, not a zenith.

        Dopamine isn’t pleasure. It is craving, lust, dream, itch, impulse.
        Motivation, both felt and unfelt.
        (And so much more)

        If you put food in the mouths of mice who have had their dopaminergic reward systems destroyed they will still eat, but will otherwise make no attempt to feed themselves or do anything else to stay alive.

        2. Cynically, as a mocking of the never ending complex of lies or convenient assumptions humans use to be able to say that they are special, that their lives have meaning forever and always, that doing X (usually what they were already doing) is of absolute importance.

        I will say more on this later.

        >Aeoli in your book is “feeling special” the same thing as “narcissism”? I don’t think having a strong, healthy sense of self-worth is necessarily pathological and may in fact be normal.

        With that much leading of the question there is only one conclusion you will come to anyway.

        :)

        >narcissism itself

        Is a spectrum that goes all the way to self deification.

        The “why” is obvious, as humans have no limit on the power they desire, and they are often lazy.

        There is either a God or you are a ‘narcissist’ of some form, as all value will stem from the self and its nature, without this being in service to anything greater (in reality, not perception).

        (it could still be true that all felt value stems from the self if there was a God as well, to the subject. But an all powerful God could in principle make all value truly objective at will, or eliminate the boundaries of perception between subjects. This is obviously not the case at the moment; each person is a subject. General misalignment with the preferences of God and actual average human nature is obviously curious.)

        This is not a value judgement from me just because of using the loaded word “narcissism”.

        All human value falls under your nature.
        And (most) humans value far more than “self”.

        To be an actual narcissist and not just a ‘philosophical narcissist’ you will have to meet the pathology; grandiosity, self importance, need for supply, overvaluation/devaluation, all that Vaknin stuff and the different subsets of narcissist, etc.

  5. kensuimo says:

    The distinction, unexpectedly, fits well with their revised types: Aeoli as bigpar, Koanic as fauxc (plus bulb’s parietal fraction).

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s