Search the Community

As I was listening to the gene wars podcasts one thing kept going trough my head. "The alpha male athlete" who is 1) Competitive & takes responsibility (K selection) but 2) has a super high sex drive and is polygamic. Where does he fall in the r/K theory?

Stefan Molyneux has mentioned that Western Europe is so r selected because so many of the K selected men were killed in world wars. I'm sorry I can't remember the specific podcasts where he says this, but he has mentioned it several times. The argument that Europe is r selected is largely available elsewhere on FDR podcast, but consider the Gene Wars series for the definition of r selected[1]. Consider immigration, single motherhood, and public debt (public debt is low-investment parenting because it involves stealing from your children) in European nations. I think it's easy to dig up lots of evidence for the r selected behaviors of European nations and peoples, so I won't spend much time on it. It's covered by FDR podcasts. What I'm less certain about is the cause of the r selected character of Europe, and Stefan's assertion that world war deaths is the cause, so this is the idea that I'd like to explore in this post. Let's try to figure out if war deaths could explain why Western European nations are so r selected. K selected men are more likely to volunteer to join the military. r selected men are more likely to dodge the draft, fake an injury, and avoid military service of any kind. Conflict avoidance and deception are the foundations of r selected survival. Militaries IQ test their soldiers. High IQ, K selected men will be the officers. Officers were expected to "lead from the front", and suffered disproportionately high casualty rates[2]. High IQ, r selected men will be especially skilled at avoiding this dangerous job. This could explain why the present day elites in the Western countries are heavily r selected. K selected men are more likely to die in combat than either women or r selected men. Civilian deaths in modern wars are likely to kill men, women, children, r, and K selected equally. If a bomb drops on your house, there is little chance for bravery; no chance for putting the women and children first. If we want to identify factors that would kill K selected men disproportionately, we should focus on soldiers killed in combat. Nation, WWII military deaths, Total population[3], Percent UK 383700 47760000 0.8% France 210000 41680000 0.5% Germany 5318000 69300000 7.7% But we're not done yet. If we want to consider the effects of WWII deaths on the hereditary population of Europe, we need to figure how many men that would have had children were killed before they were able. We don't care so much about the percent of the total population killed. We care about the percentage of potentially fertile men killed. I was able to find demographic data for 1939 Germany[4]. I'll use males aged 15-44 as my "fertile men" metric. Much younger, and fertility is impossible. Much older, and fertility is still possible, but I will argue that in a traditional, Christian, monogamous society, it is less likely for a 45 year old (or 14 year old) to start a family. However, the high number of male deaths in German society at this time could affect this. Life expectancy was around 60. I'll show data if we broaden the range to males 15-65. German males 15-44 in 1939: 17,718,714 German males 15-65 in 1939: 24,620,748 I don't have the age ranges for military deaths, but most will be in the age ranges expressed above. Germany military deaths as percent of 15-44 men: 30.0% Germany military deaths as percent of 15-65 men: 21.6% If we assume that half of the 1939 German male population was K selected (see Gene Wars series[1], but European populations tend to have a balance of r/K), and all of the military deaths were K selected men (argued above): Percent K selected males 15-44 killed: 60.0% Percent K selected males 15-65 killed: 43.2% Could this shift German society from K selected to r selected? I say yes. What about Sweden? Almost no WWII[3] deaths, and yet heavily cucked[5] with their feminism and migrant crime. WWII deaths cannot be the explanation for Sweden being r selected, so we know that other possible causes of the r selectedness of Europe must exist. This does not rule out WWII deaths as being a possible cause for German r selectedness, but it does mean there are other factors. [1] Gene Wars: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMNj_r5bccUw40CpD-JYXJyVsDYsj7ITD [2] Couldn't find great data for officer casualties, but see http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000069.html [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties [4] https://www.feldgrau.com/WW2-Germany-Statistics-and-Numbers [5] Sweden: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25VVmCviVao

I was re-listening to the genewars videos and I was wondering if someone can be a r and turn into a K later on in life if the environment forced that person to change. The reason this question is so interesting to me right now is because of the west waking up to the Islamic threat. More and more we see people that were completely in denial of this threat actually waking up and realising that we are in big trouble. The interesting thing is, while I was watching the video, I realised that when I was younger I was a r organism. I was a guitarist in a rock band, didn't worry too much about my future, I was a fucking lefty and I fucked every girl under the sun. Oddly enough, now I am a complete K. I focus on my future, plan ahead, I differ gratification, I not interested in adventures so much anymore, I look for commitment and I mostly look for a woman based on her personality as a mother. I'm a conservative libertarian. I believe in small government and the free market. Maybe during puberty, the sexual hormones that go through the roof might have an influence on the r/K behaviour. When you grow older, you become more rational because your testosterone dropped to a reasonable level. An other fun fact that I've noticed as a conservative is that everyone, and I do mean everybody I know, is a fucking socialist leftist. Pretty much everyone I have know in my province is a socialist leftist. This is why Canada is so fucked. When I met members of the conservative party in Canada, I thought that they were pretty dull, not to creative, clean cut, hard working responsible people. Basically what you would expect from K organisms. But, the fact that I found these people dull and non creative, doesn't that make me a r????

Hi Stefan, Let me start by saying that I love your podcasts and that I find them absolutely necessary to cure this world from madness and to bring back reason and evidence. These past few years I have tried to turn back the tide that is threatening the west by debating and having discussions with people online and in my everyday life. I have observed that when I argue with them, even the strongest leftist or the most stuck up conservative can accept their share of truth until you reach a wall of what they are no longer able to accept. I am still convinced that we can heal this world in a none violent way with the weight of good ideas. Like they say, the truth will set us free. At the same time, I have unsubscribed to some channels that fear monger everyday about urgent news that we are under attack from the deep state that we need to pray and be ready to fight for our freedom. It might be true, but it is not in my power to go stand next to Trump with a shotgun to protect him and he is able to hire more qualified people to protect him. This fear baiting that Alex Jones does paints a very negative view of the world and I believe that it is only draining the energy of the conservatives. We also have to understand that if we live in a constant state of fear, like we have known during the cold war, that this creates more r selection type individuals. No, I believe that change is done in the way we live our lives every day. It could be argued that by being an example that seeking truth, to coexist peacefully with your neighbours, to be fair and just, and basically to be a pillar of your society, by doing that you become the evidence that libertarianism and conservatism is a successful way of life and you have a greater impact on the future of your civilisation that some nut that runs to the enemy with his rifle in hands screaming ‘’GOD WILLS IT’’. Through my debates and discussions I came to the conclusion that, even if you debunk the idiotic ideas of the left, you are only holding back the tide and not pushing it back. I came to the conclusion that we are either missing something in our argumentation or we are doing something wrong. So this summer I have focused on the topic of freedom. I have read the ‘’treaty of the second government’’ by John Locke, ‘’The Law’’ by Frederic Bastiat, I’m currently going through ‘’the liberal mind’’ by David Boaz, and through ‘’the universal preferable behaviour’’. I have notice a reoccurring libertarian concept that is not regularly touched on that might be more essential then we think. This concept is that in a free market economy, the market auto regulates itself. This concept is often called spontaneous order. This idea that the consumer and the producer have a constant exchange in which one adjust its prices to what the other consider a reasonable price for the item and the service and adjust their prices to the cost of production and to generate a profit. This spontaneous order can also be applied to ethics. If a company produces cheap good, but have a terrible work ethic, abuses children, or destroys the environment, then the consumer might decide to pay more for the same good provided by a company with more ethics. I believe that the concept of spontaneous order is essential to debunking the left, because the argument they regularly hide behind is that ‘’the right doesn’t care for the poor; the right doesn’t care about the environment; if there was a free market, you wouldn’t have welfare for the poor’’. All these assumptions are false. In a free market economy, the market more quickly to the needs of the consumers and, with fewer regulations, it generates more wealth, thus less poor people. As a scientist (I’m a student in biochemistry) I understand that, for the left, spontaneous order seems as magical as the concept of spontaneous generation. I believe that historical facts about the free market need to be brought back to the light of day as evidence of the existence of the spontaneous order. I have watched your presentations called ‘’the genes war’’ and ‘’the fall of Rome’’. They were both brilliantly presented. And the message is clear. The welfare state produces a false sense of abundance that triggers an epigenetic mechanism that favours the r selection type organism. These organisms are unable to identify threats and have no in-group preferences necessary to combat these threats. So before we become the next Rome, we must increase the number of K selection types in our population. With enough K types in our population we will be able to vote sensible laws that will fix our borders and return to a free market economy. Then the hostile migrants will have no choice but to return to the 3rd world being unable to earn a living in a competitive economy. I believe that libertarian ideas are the only way we can affect the r/K balance in our society.

Question: How high is your IQ Mr. Wolf? Answer: High enough to survive the Winter you Silly Wabbit / Ravishing Rabbit / Great Grasshopper Can someone please walk me through the origin or share data points on how and why Classical (Greek/Roman) civilization was able to come up with and value ideas and principles like Self Defense, Property Rights, and Freedom of Speech? How about voluntary exchange aka Capitalism, when exactly did that originate, rather than just warfare or self-sufficiency. Or do these ideas come from a mix of ancient tribes and groups, and which groups specifically how and why?

So, I was listening to a cover of Coolio's song Gangsta's Paradise from the 1995 film Dangerous Minds when I really stopped to listen to the lyrics. At this point, I am convinced that this song is entirely about the self justification of an r-selected gangster (which I guess is redundant). What is even more intriguing is that lines like, now incorporate a self reflective or at least telling inside into the mindset of an r-selected world view. Do you think I'm off base, missing something, or just overthinking the r/K stuff. Please let me know. Below is the video for reference: