@CisWhiteMaelstrom > What childlessness correlates with is a custom of delaying childbirth

The discussion you dropped into is about current and future birthrate trends in first world countries relevant to TRP readership. That you had to reach as far back as 8 centuries and cherry pick outcomes in wildly different cultures and circumstances is typical T_D and GLOGANG behavior, wherein the act of edifying the readership is incidental to the goal of "shutting down the opposition at any cost." You may think you won some kind of victory but as usual fail to pick up the thread and provide a compelling much less actionable counterpoint to what I said.

My litmus test is to completely ignore and disregard any retard boomer faggot who does this because they are not worth talking to.

Set up a straw caricature and easily knock it down, saves you the effort of understanding who or what you are debating at a cost of falling ever farther out of touch with the real world and the actual people you consider "opposition." Also typical T_D and GLOGANG behavior.

Now let's flip the script, what have you done to produce knowledge other than indirectly inspire everyone on TRP.red to learn about the history of the population growth of the old world?

Unlike the people I was addressing (not to mention yourself), my track record on TRP Reddit and red is extensive and available. In contrast, this is literally your first and only post on TRP.RED. You did nothing but flip the script without even checking first, resulting in a "rebuttal" that came out low effort and rather sad.

I turned /r/the_donald from a 500 subscriber irrelevant subreddit to something

One of the biggest echo chambers ever to exist. This makes your sole claim to fame here rather problematic in my opinion. Weren't you the guy who was kicked out of there in the midst of weird oneitis behaviors toward Camille, one of the RedPillWives? Maybe @Redpillschool remembers the details better than I.

Bottom line, the politics-as-sportsball that is played in modern times has skewed your idea of what a "liberal" is to something completely unrecognizable in the real world. The big point that people like you fail to grasp (and whose cognitive dissonance is kept at bay by retreating to esoteric philosophical definitions of the term when pressed) is that relative to mainstream politics, The Red Pill is not the conservative position, therefore adopting a fiat anti-Liberal stance plays into your own enemies agenda and amounts to a "Let the Wookie win" position. You assume that YOUR vision will be the one that dominates when all ideological competition has been eliminated and banished, but where will that leave you when an even more dominant force than yourself asserts its existence?

@MentORPHEUS

"Widespread childlessness is a lagging indicator of economic surplus which moves individuals beyond the life or early death need to spawn assistance to barren subsistence farming."

This is not only painfully wrong, but it's the quintessential mating call of those who get their worldview from random tidbits and quotes that float around in the ether without any real origin.

What childlessness correlates with is a custom of delaying childbirth. Countries like the US or Japan make young people, especially teenagers, completely and totally financially insolvent. First world countries also have a standard of living that radically outstretches the earning potential of young people. The result is that having a child isn't even an option until your mid to late twenties, meaning less children.

We can see this across different time periods. In Europe, the wealthiest third of society had more babies than the bottom two thirds between 1200 and 1850.

www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol18/5/18-5.pdf

In China, serious industrialization didn't occur until the 1950s, which led to the population doubling between 1950 and 1975.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/chinese_industrialization#industrialization_of_the_people's_republic_of_china

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/demographics_of_china#census_data

India had the same thing. The population of India was fairly constant for a long period of time, exploding only when the Portuguese brought wealth to the subcontinent. Under the British Raj, the population began to explode so heavily that the Indian birthrate was close to six and they actually faced a very deadly famine because birth rates were exploding even more quickly than their rapidly exploding wealth was.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/demographics_of_india#history

eprints.lse.ac.uk/56838/1/__lse.ac.uk_storage_library_secondary_libfile_shared_repository_content_broadberry,%20s_india%20great%20divergence_broadberry_india%20great%20divergence_2014.pdf

And of course, the quintessential modern example is the African population explosion. The West funnels trillions upon trillions of dollars into Africa and since nowhere in sub-saharan Africa (except small regions in South Africa) has infrastructure to keep young people from breeding, the African population is exploding at 7 births per woman.

A litmus test chosen less for its predictive value than your certainty that it's an arena you're confident you have outstudied all possible opponents. I've long suspected it stems from inability and fear of addressing and leading large IRL groups, but more on that later.

Now, Evola and friends are a GLO interest that I can't really speak to... but I have my own litmus test. You base your ideology on random tidbits floating around without any basis in reality that are presented without source or arguments, and then you parade them around like timeless old man wisdom.

My litmus test is to completely ignore and disregard any retard boomer faggot who does this because they are not worth talking to. If your empirical and physically verifiable talking points are absolute crap paraded around by liberals, then there is a ~100% chance that your philosophical points are too. No wonder you were afraid of crowd. Crowds are probably afraid of having to watch you speak.

This is one of my chief complaints about the fruits of your methods. You've gathered a group of aggressive critics of other productive members of the Manosphere, who have little past or present original contributions of their own to show and potentially outshine that which they criticize.

I have known GLO since before glogang was a thing and I have my own side projects so I have not been directly involved, but I was talking to him a lot and working with him when I turned /r/the_donald from a 500 subscriber irrelevant subreddit to something that probably did actually impact the election and may have changed the course of history. I have nothing to do with the cringe boomer antics that go on over there now (antics that I'd place a heavy bet that you enjoy), but some good has come from GLO's aggressive tactics.

Now let's flip the script, what have you done to produce knowledge other than indirectly inspire everyone on TRP.red to learn about the history of the population growth of the old world?