Tag Archives: red pill

NRx = Red Pill

Awhile back it occurred to me NRx is pretty much the same as Red Pill, but with a few differences: NRx advocates a ‘monarchy/autocratic’ form of government and is more racialist, whereas Red Pill is more focused on gender issues but is less racialist. But aside from that, there is a substantial ideological overlap: both oppose the ‘cuck’ conservatives, both tend to be traditionalist, both oppose social justice, feminism, misandry, and egalitarianism, and so on. I guess this is both good news and bad news: It’s good because the views of NRx are perhaps more mainstream than otherwise thought – it’s just under a different name, Red Pill. The bad news is that because Red Pill is much bigger, it may make NRx redundant, and with the ‘techno-commercialism’ faction of NRx dead and buried, there there even fewer characteristics that separate NRx from Red Pill. If NRx and Red Pill both support Trump, who is obviously doing well in the polls, why is monarchy needed if Trump is good enough and can win. I know monarchy would be preferred, but since the odds of it happening are zero, it’s not surprising that few talk about it as much anymore with as much enthusiasm as they did before 2013. Just something to ponder.

Taking the ‘Omega’ Pill

I’ve been somewhat of a critic of Red Pill philosophy…not the part about misandry and feminism, which I agree with, but the overemphasizes on ‘game’, masculinity, traditionalism, and self-improvement. If happiness is through self-fulfillment and recognition for your achievements, contributions, and accomplishments, I don’t think adhering to the Red Pill philosophy is necessarily the best path to getting there. Red Pill philosophy as a road-map to life would have worked great as recently as the 1980′s or so, but now not so much. Especially since 2008, the pendulum has swung in favor of the ‘betas/omegas’, or the intellectual creative class, in accordance to the Ravi Batra’s Social Cycle Theory.

Although others argue that Red Pill is about self-improvement and has nothing to do with actually being masculine or projecting physical prowess and that Red Pill is a state of mind, a personal ‘awakening’ of how women try to exploit men, for this write-up I’m going by Reddit’s Red Pill introduction, which seems to put emphasis on game, seduction, and self-improvement.

Self-improvement is important to some degree, but I don’t go around all day thinking of ways to improve myself. That seems exhausting. More or less, people are hard-wired by biology to act a certain way, limiting the effectiveness of self-improvement. Even if someone makes a concerted effort to improve, since it’s not natural, eventually most will revert to old habits. Self-improvement is easier for some than others.

But most importantly, what do people want? What do we as homo sapien sapiens desire? Studies have shown that social rejection is one of the worst forms of pain, so conversely acceptance and recognition should bring the most happiness, and I think to achieve those requires a more ‘omega’ mindset, especially with the recent rise of the ‘STEM celebrity‘; thus, intellectualism is not only a path to wealth and personal fulfillment, but recognition from broader society. I’m sure you can get there with ‘alpha’ pursuits, but I think the odds are worse.

From an article posted on the crappy blog platform Medium, Are Omega males the new Alpha males?

By traditional standards, beta males are higher up on the hierarchy ladder than omega males. Omega males, unlike beta males do not care about the approval of the other males, or females for that matter. Omega males in our current society do not care about being accepted by society and may choose to live outside the lines of social norms. Most Omega males lack social skills and derive pleasure from being distinct from others. Does this ring any bells? (I’m looking at you, hipster who’s reading this with a flannel on)

That seems to my description of the Beta/Omega Male Conservative – someone who values logic, individualism, and introspection over collective, politically correct social norms. In an our increasingly competitive winner-take-all economy where IQ and authenticity is valued more than ever, it seems like the best way to rise to the top is to be yourself, provided that you have the skills (or the IQ to acquire them) that post-2008 society and capitalism values, such as coding, engineering, physics or math (STEM). Those who try to fake it will find themselves falling short intellectually and their ruse exposed.

So why do I think that Omega males are the new Alpha males? Well, it’s very simple. Think of the most youngest, most rich guy that we all know. Let me save you some time, it’s Mark Zuckerburg. Sticking true to Omega fashion, the somewhat lovable social network owner lacks (lacked) social skills, chose not to live within social norms and derives pleasure from being different. It’s these qualities that we are starting to appreciate. While the economy shifts to non-traditional jobs such as start ups, social networks, e-commerce sites, etc etc, we are starting to idolize the omega males instead of the alpha males for the first time in human history.

I couldn’t agree more…it’s like we’re reading each other’s minds. From Zuck to Musk, to Thiel and Andreessen, it seems the biggest winners of the post-2008 economy in terms of social status, influence, and wealth are people who are better at creating things and thinking of ideas than relating to other people. Marc Andreessen even admitted that while he draws people in, he ‘doesn’t want them around’. Even if you read the Red Pill philosophy threads on Reddit you get the impression that these may not be the most gregarious people in the world, and that’s not surprising since most people, to put it bluntly, are idiots and you don’t want anything to do with them. Or to quote George Carlin, — ‘Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.’

As an example of the rise of the omega, look the huge outpouring of grief over the death of Dr. Nash. Dr. Nash was more omega than alpha, but lived such a fulfilling, accomplished life that many would envy, even if you include the mental illness aspect. Being a math genius may not get your laid when you’re in the club, but it sure seems to make a lot of people like you. On the contrary, what would happen if some random pro bodybuilder died? Outside of the bodybuilding community would anyone care that much? Probably not.

But Nash’s story is inspiring not only for his contributions to math and economics, but for overcoming an awful illness, Schizophrenia, presumably through willpower. But scientists don’t know why some people recover from severe mental illness and others don’t, so we can’t attribute it purely to willpower.

Or consider how a recent Reddit thread – about an economics paper that uses complicated mathematics to show how adding a ‘tiny tax’ to plastic bags can reduce usage – got up-voted over 300 times, an example of an intellectual endeavor that brought significant recognition and positive feedback to its creator. And you see this over and over again, with scientists and other STEM people being lavished with praise and recognition for their accomplishments.

Some in the Red Pill community get defensive when you bring this up, accusing you of misinterpreting their philosophy or being uninformed. I’m more MGTOW, so I don’t see the category ‘beta’ or ‘omega’ as having to be pejorative. A beta/omega male conservative (a term I invented), for example, is someone who agrees with the Red Pill philosophy about economics, the biological differences between men and women, and feminism, but is more introverted and isn’t really into ‘game’ or traditionalism, and I think these variations can coexist without acrimony, just as the traditionalists of neo-reaction should be able to coexist with the techno-libertarian/pragmatist faction.

While there is some disagreement with certain aspects of the Red Pill philosophy, I’ll end on an optimistic note. The Red Pill and other smaller movements such as MGTOW are having an effect on mainstream public discourse, and you see evidence of this not only on sites like Reddit and 4chan but in the comments sections of mainstream sites, where ordinary people are waking up to how the SWJs and their media enablers are ruining society and the lives of innocent people. For example, the backlash against the the ‘check your privilege’ videos on Youtube, which were inundated with thousands of down-votes and negative comments imploring that the SJWs check their stupidity first before foisting a collective burden of ‘guilt’ on white males who did nothing to deserve it. And then there was the successful anti-SJW backlash against Mozilla for firing Brendan Eich, #shirtgate, and, of course, the ongoing #gamergate. Vox Day has been leading a successful crusade against feminists and SJWs in the sci-fi/fantasy publishing realm. Roosh and others in the manosphere are torchbearers of reality, exposing the bullshit that is feminism and other forms of political correctness. Even centrists like Scott have criticized the SJW culture of false victimhood. Right now, we’re in a war between those who ‘get it’ (60-70% of the general population) and the liberal media who still to some degree control the narrative – but that is slowly slipping away like sand between fingers thanks to online independent media. For example, UVA rape hoax, which dealt in irreparable credibility blow to the SJW left, exposed thanks to the independent journalism of Steve Sailor and others on the right.

But most importantly, you don’t need to belong to any specific group (Red Pill, MGTOW, etc) to be anti-SJW, pro-capitalism, pro-men’s rights, pro-Gamergate, anti-feminism, etc. The labels are convenient as a way of grouping a set of beliefs under a single taxonomy, but they need not define a person, nor should a person’s beliefs be constrained by them.

Is the ‘Red Pill’ Teaching Obsolete Skills?

It’s funny how Roosh, one of the main evangelizers of the masculinity/Red Pill movement, is being criticised for, well, not being ‘alpha’ enough. If Roosh can’t do it, what does that say about everyone else? What is means is that the Red Pill’s priorities could be misguided.

Probably my only criticism of the Red Pill movement is they put too much emphasis on being ‘alpha’. In the post-2008 economy it’s more important to be the smartest guy in the room than the most domineering or alpha guy in the room. A century ago perhaps social skills were important, but now not so much. Intellect, authenticity, and competence are valued more than ever. In our smartist economy, extroversion is seen as a crutch for the incompetent, while social awkwardness signals intelligence. The INTP/INTJ people rule, both economically and in contemporary culture, so for the red pill movement to put so much precedence on masculinity seems counterproductive. To emissaries of the Red Pill movement, if you want men to be fulfilled financially and socially (which are two things I imagine most men strive for), teach men INTP skills. Why be stuck in the 20th century. It’s like bringing a single-core processor computer to a LAN party when everyone else has quad-core. Or bringing a crappy calculator from Walgreens to a math test when everyone else has programmable graphing calculators. It puts you at a disadvantage, or at the very least is ineffective.

From my article, In Defense of MGTOW:

…in the post-2008 era, being a nerd is kinda cool, unlike as recently as ten years ago. And whether it’s through web 2.0, stocks, STEM, or expensive real estate, nerds are the ones making all the money in this hyper-competitive economy where intellect is more valued than ever. And women are increasingly preferring ‘beta‘ guys, not only because of the post-2008 rise of nerd culture, but because beta males tend earn more money.

I would rather be a beta male conservative with a lot of money and prestige than be the ‘toughest guy in the Starbucks line’ who has to go home to being just another nobody. The Red Pill and pick-up culture community is right about many things, such as being anti-feminist, but self-improvement is more than chasing an unrealistic alpha-male ideal – it’s also about being smart, or at least conveying intellect in an economy where intelligence is the ticket to social and economic upward mobility.