497
498
499

Meta[Mod] The Red Pill is not democratic. It cannot be in order to be a viably beneficial system for men. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by ModMachiavellianRed

Sometimes I see posts from people that want to entertain democratic debate within the red pill community. These people are typically people who are not well versed in RP theory. They come from an angle "of explain this to me" evoking a response of "read the damn sidebar." Or a "should RP be run like this?" angle - which when reported to a mod (keep reporting things, by the way) incites a near-immediate ban.

Yes, like Hitler, we quite literally ban anyone who questions the administration.

(Perfect for quoting out of context, by the way.)

The well-intentioned questioners (rather than the shills who thrive on debate as a platform for subversion) tend to be rational men who have failed to actualize an effective sexual strategy and thus have ended up in the red pill community.


Logical Abstraction vs. Practical Reality

The funny thing is, despite many of red pill theory's seeming counter intuitiveness to the liberally raised, sexually unsuccessful, albeit intellectual man; these ideas have, through real world experimentation and cross-demographic corroboration, proven to be effective when implemented.

Nevertheless, the rational inconsistencies of "what seems fair" vs. "what is practicably effective" bother the intellectual mind like a thorn in the ass. Rather than the less intelligent among us, who, perhaps in a turn of irony, are far more easily able to learn the theory and apply it because they "go along with whatever works, regardless of why it works, because it makes life better."

The intellectual is paralyzed by AN UNRELENTING NEED to understand why certain ideas work, he HAS TO understand the underlying behaviors in play and FEELS COMPELLED to essentially question our ideas and values from a logical perspective over and over again, regardless of their efficiency.

Typically, men who do this also lack the real world experiences they would have gained from applying RP theory in their dealings socially, and with women (who, from a masculine viewpoint, are irrational themselves.)

I have noticed as we have grown, many of you are particularly younger than those who started this community, and thus have little but an intellectual frame of reference to articulate your ideas (that, or you're young AND stupid and thus have nothing really worth listening to.)

The fact of the matter is, in doing this, you are arguing from a point of unsubstantiated abstraction, like a theoretical scientist whose ideas fall flat in practice because they bring about no tangible, actionable results. You challenge what works out of pedanticism, and then produce no results of your own. This does nothing but dilute the community and we are not tolerant of it as such.

We don't care about logical perfectionism, we care about optimizing the lives of men and building a system of thought that will aid in this endeavor. To argue RP theory rationally, one must learn the theory, attempt to apply it to the real world, and then subject their rational mind to their experiences as a point of reference. It is an imperfect form of investigation, but it is, for the purpose of being useful to men, an accurate one.

Nevertheless, borderline autistic debates about the merits and demerits of red pill theory do not serve the community, they hamper it by becoming too abstract and polarized. This polarization leads to point scoring, it fractures the community, and it does not help men become more in-control and actualized versions of themselves free of feminine primary social conditioning. Which, alongside optimizing sexual strategy, is the primary intent of red pill theory.

As such, anything that undermines this is not tolerated.

In light of this, TRP proper will never facilitate debate about the values we hold, why we hold them, as well as far out philosophical notions such as "should we hold them?" - This is deemed concern trolling and will result, quite rationally unreasonably, but for the intent of our goals: most reasonably, in a ban.

Regardless, we are sympathetic to the intellectual pondering of the intellectual class as many of us among the ruling government of the subreddit are intellectual in nature ourselves. This is why, for as long /r/purplepilldebate gives red pillers a voice and does not prevent our membership from asserting it's viewpoint, we will endorse it as an appropriate place to intellectually nitpick at red pill theory. we recommend you head on over to /r/pillscollide/. So if you want to nitpick at red pill theory, go there and do that - but do not do it here if you like posting here.


How we rule:

We are not a democracy, we are a SCHOOL of thought and WE DO NOT WELCOME the opinions of those unversed in our ideas. Likewise, we do not welcome the opinions of those who understand or at least think they understand our ideas, but nevertheless want to do their very best to subvert our value system anyway.

If TRP is ruled by any form of government, it would be the philosopher king government as outlined by Plato's ideal city-state of Kallipolis. Those who are most versed in RP theory and have it's continued survival and best interest at heart are those who rule this community. We will, under no uncertain terms, ruthlessly exile any we deem a threat to the the integrity and values of the community. If you disagree with the community, simply leave it; we do not owe you recompense for your grievances in the form of explanation.


Why we hate democracy:

The masses who would swarm this place with their democratic self-importance would undermine our values with their sheer numbers alone. Their numbers having been inculcated with a set of values that runs contrary to our minority, unpopular and "controversial" view to begin with.

They would disregard that which is actionable, beneficial and pragmatically profitable in order to sustain the world views they have already been taught to hold. As such, as much as we'd like to be reasonable, we cannot be, for our detractors are not.

Any form of open debate we hold, any form of scrutiny we entertain, effectively does nothing but undermine the philosophy and it's growth. It invites those who have a preconceived agenda to destroy this philosophical system and fracture the community to achieve this goal - to do so. In essence, we must be ruthless with a well-intentioned totalitarianism if we wish our system of values to thrive, survive, and continue to help men across the globe.

So read this carefully, remember it, and internalize it: This is not a democratic sub and it never will be. If we "deprive you your freedom of speech" - tough. Our community, our rules. We rule with an iron fist, albeit, a benevolent one. As much as we can understand your logic, we cannot respect it. It is not in the best interest of the community's survival to entertain all and any hypothetical intellectual tangents that are thrown our way; or to open ourselves to meandering scrutiny. If your reasoning is not backed by an intent to further the philosophy, but merely tries to scrutinize it, then it is a detriment to the philosophy we cannot tolerate.


Why this sounds unreasonable and why we sound "unfair":

We cannot be as reasonable as we'd like to be. We cannot be as fair as we'd like to be. These things would be a weakness.

"But surely, those who debate the intricacies of our most prominently asked questions are destined to receive the most refined, and therefore, the most useful answer?"

Unfortunately, that is not so. This is the problem:

By entertaining debate, we endlessly perpetuate debate, and instead of teaching our values and helping men, all we end up doing is arguing with people who reject our values and wish to paralyze our school of thought. We end up defending ourselves instead of helping people, giving us no time to continue to formulate our ideas and refine our theories within OUR OWN FRAMEWORK instead of theirs.

Effectively, the sub must "hold frame" and tell anyone outside our frame of reasoning to get lost. We cannot and will not exhaust our mental reserves arguing with people, when our underlying directive is to improve men's lives. If people don't agree with us, we don't care, don't tell us, and consider yourself an unwelcome pest for as long as you continue to populate our ranks regardless of our wishes.

Call it an echo chamber if you will, we care not for name calling and such labels will not incite a change in moderation policy. We cannot and will not sacrifice our values simply to entertain the democratic and logical sensibilities of the intellectual class torn between what makes sense rationally, and what works in reality. To do so is to make ourselves prone to vitiating our values in the name of "fair debate." Likewise it gives disingenuous shills a foot in the door to take part in the theatrics; to present themselves as pseudo-intellectuals who represent a credible challenge, but wish for nothing other than to suffocate us with nonsense.

In essence, we cannot be fair, because we are outnumbered, and our opponents, those who disdain us, they don't play fair. They attempt to disrupt and subvert, and thus we must respond in kind by doing the same to their protests.

We must dictate how the sub is run, and we must be benevolently ruthless in this endeavor, lest those who are less versed in RP, or our enemies, dilute the philosophy on Reddit and fracture the larger manosphere community as a result.

For the sake of the continued preservation of our ideas, ideas which have immeasurably benefited the lives of thousands of men - we cannot cave to the notion that democracy is a superlatively superior form of governance. For us, as a community, it isn't, and it is unlikely it ever will be. If you don't like how we rule, then leave, because we want you not.

Edit; As eloquently stated by /u/CopperFox3c:

That said, I think it is important to emphasize that we do encourage debate and discussion here, just so long as it remains within [the] bounds [of TRP.]

The world must be viewed with different lenses for different purposes. The world is too complex to be viewed with simply one lens. In matters of family and social dynamics, we value the RP lens as most accurate.


[–]Modredpillschool[M] 132 points133 points  (17 children)

In essence, the rule I've followed since the inception of the sub has been to allow for the free flow of ideas and debate, so long as it was made in earnest and logical in nature.

This immediately excluded content such as shaming or concern.. "but isn't that misogynist?"

The fact is, there's a reputation we've got that the mods here will ban anybody who disagrees or has an original idea, but it's far more nuanced than that. I say that we moderate by smell.

If you've got a good attitude and a logical mind and are happy to discuss ideas without attempting to concern troll or shame, you'll get along here no problem. But if you're here to champion the cause of social justice, we'll smell you. There's an attitude - a stink - that you give off that immediately singles you out. We'll know who you are, and you're gone.

Too many people come here hoping to hijack the topic of the sub by "just asking questions" but never conceding logical points, to co-opt the subreddit by agreeing with portions but attempting to modify language or steer the direction towards "healthier" mindsets..

Those are the people who don't make it.

Of course, you could say I'm being hypocritical, since that's basically what I do- steer the direction of the sub myself. But I don't give a fuck, things will go the way I want them and there will never be a soul to change my mind. That's what made us who we are today, and that's the steady course we will continue.

[–]Black-Pill 60 points61 points  (0 children)

I am cool with the whole Benevolent Dictator thing. You and the other Mods do a great job. Thanks for your time and efforts

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (1 child)

The red pill can only be swallowed by people who find it to be obviously true. You can't hesitantly swallow such a bitter and radical pill, nor can you find the drive to really internalize it. What's really depressing is that they think they're the first non-TRP position we've ever heard or that they're view is unique. You're the best mod a community could ask for. Few could even conceive of TRP and fewer could maintain it. Tens of thousands of men have slept well for the first time because of your leadership.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 32 points33 points  (3 children)

Of course, you could say I'm being hypocritical, since in essence what I do is steer the direction of the sub myself.

It is the responsibility of someone in a position of leadership to steer the course. It is definitely not the responsibility of the masses. What is good for you, or the wider moderation team, is not necessarily good for random redditors. Just like what is good for man in a relationship, is not necessarily good for his woman. There are double standards between the captain and first mate and there are definitely double standards between what mods can do, and what everyone else can. It is a matter of intent, experience, expertise and necessity for function. Leadership can never hold itself to the same standards as it's following, because it has a responsibility for the functioning of the community that the following does not. (Anyone reading this can extrapolate this to their relationship with women, by the way.)

In that sense, it is not hypocritical in the truest sense of the word. Stubbornness as a means of preserving our ideas serves us well. I do not think nor feel we are stubborn to a point of detrimentality.

The fact is, there's a reputation we've got that the mods here will ban anybody who disagrees or has an original idea, but it's far more nuanced than that. I say that we moderate by smell.

If you've got a good attitude and a logical mind and are happy to discuss ideas without attempting to concern troll or shame, you'll get along here no problem. But if you're here to champion the cause of social justice, we'll smell you. There's an attitude - a stink - that you give off that immediately singles you out. We'll know who you are, and you're gone.

Agreed. I think we do a good job of striking a balance. We're always going to upset people, but that's unavoidable, a matter of due course.

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (2 children)

You made a good point in OP about the collective age of the sub dropping. I think you're absolutely correct on that; we seem to be getting a whole bunch of 16 to 20 year olds, who are either in high school or freshly out of high school. This means that their feminine imperative conditioning is still very fresh in their minds, as well as the notions of "democracy" and "fairness". So armed with this programming, they think they can waltz in here and make this place run like they're voting for class president.

Guys, everything MR said is spot on. At the risk of coming off as gloating, I will tell you that this sub has grown so fantastically and rapidly because of the way it is modded, not in spite of it.

Do you know how we always tell you to assess a woman't slutty past when deciding if she's LTR material? Well guess what? The same way a slut's past follows her, your post history follows you. It is often considered when determining 1) whether to ban you, and 2) whether it will be temporary or permanent.

We had a saying back in my military days:

One fuck up erases 10 "atta boys".

In other words, if you fuck up in here, you better have some "atta boys" saved up as a contributive member of the forum. Your history will be reviewed.

Message to the younger guys:

Life isn't fair, and outside of your government, life is not a democracy. Your workplace is not a democracy, the sexual marketplace is not a democracy, and /r/theredpill SURE AS FUCK is not a democracy. In all three of those examples, only that which warrants merit is of any value. Until you've internalized TRP, what you have to say is fucking meaningless. Not everybody gets a podium, not everybody gets to be heard. Go read some of the top posts from Endorsed Contributors. That's the bellwether. That's the Gold Standard.

Have a good weekend and happy hunting, gentlemen.

[–]antariusz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We have a saying in air traffic control.

One fuck up erases a lifetime of "atta boy"

[–]i2amahandmodel 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You mods are doing a great job. My only complaint on this sub is there are too many posts that claim some "wisdom" or "breakthrough" when the poster doesn't even have a grasp of RP theory. I have to read 5 post titles at 0 points before I get to a real post of substance.

Ignorant/dumb posters may not be troll posters but they have the same effect, therefore should get the same treatment.

[–]stevredpill 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I like using metaphors.

Like "just getting it" with women, the Mods "just get it" in identifying and smelling trolls.

This "just getting it," like with women, is something that is gained with experience - in this case, experience in moderating.

They ain't perfect, but in general, they know how to handle their bitch (TRP Subreddit). In addition, it don't matter that they ain't perfect because it's THEIR bitch.

[–]Redpillc0re 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TRP is intellectually engaging because the ideas presented are original and often contrarian. Throwing around trivialities and other popular feel-good-shit is a good way to get any thread to the homepage, but it offers nothing of value.

[–]Barely_Intrepid 41 points42 points  (16 children)

At it's core, universal democracy rewards ideas on their popularity rather than their merit. Simplicity is rewarded over complexity, ease over effort, and charming lies over difficult truths. Regression to the mean is the natural conclusion.

Thank you for taking a stand against this bullshit.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (7 children)

I follow Carlin's point of view on this: a democracy is only as good as it's citizens. If you have selfish, ignorant, lazy, passive, and small-minded people, you get exactly that for your leaders.

No government in the world, in any form, can improve a society that really doesn't know, or care to know, how to really improve itself as individuals or groups. Government, after all, is nothing but a subset of society granted monopoly of force and law. Who and what it enables or disables is only the reflection of the people that make it up.

[–][deleted] 9 points9 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]1APookIsAPook 4 points5 points  (1 child)

And suddenly granting voting rights only to the wealthy and educated doesn't seem so backwards.

[–]NidStyles 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The military should included as well.

[–]StatismIsBP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a democracy is only as good as it's citizens.

This is one of those common sense ideas I reject and find very insidious. You still have a political elite, only now they can continue to aggrandize themselves with this excuse (and others). I could go on about the evils of democracy but would simply like to point to Hans Hoppe's Democracy: the God that Failed for now.

From elsewhere in this thread:

The red pill can only be swallowed by people who find it to be obviously true. You can't hesitantly swallow such a bitter and radical pill, nor can you find the drive to really internalize it. What's really depressing is that they think they're the first non-TRP position we've ever heard or that they're view is unique. You're the best mod a community could ask for. Few could even conceive of TRP and fewer could maintain it. Tens of thousands of men have slept well for the first time because of your leadership.

Definitely agree about this sub being well-modded. My point, though, is that both the rejection of democracy as unquestionably superior and the rejection of participation in electoral politics out in the real world seems to have some amazing parallels to TRP.

The first parallel I see is that swallowing such pills are experiential, meaning learned by reflection and not that Aha-experience when the pill goes down. I'm interested now in real connections between the ideologies though just starting to learn and live TRP. Just putting in the time reading keeps revealing more mistakes I made in my 2, perhaps last, LTRs.

The other similarity to libertarian anarchy I see is the use of maxims or a priori truths. Well guided by the proper insight into male-female dynamics, there is still room for healthy debate, but it is one toward elucidating, expanding and making real change in the world.

At it's core, universal democracy rewards ideas on their popularity rather than their merit. Simplicity is rewarded over complexity, ease over effort, and charming lies over difficult truths.

Government, after all, is nothing but a subset of society granted monopoly of force and law. Who and what it enables or disables is only the reflection of the people that make it up.

I agree with the parent. Elections are just popularity contests and the best liars rise to the top. An enlightened dictatorship is fine here on reddit, but out in the real world, not so much. Even in the best of cases out there it's a gamble and history shows us it's a fool's bargain.

Hoppe's book contrasts democracy with monarchy then advocates another way. Your first statement is true but I take issue with the next as being merely "reflection". There's the legislation of the ruling elite but then you as the ruled are actually making law too by voting or even being passive nonvoters.

How can I advocate nonvoting and then paint such a helpless picture? Well there is a way out, education, business and making people more expensive to govern. Consider it a similarity between newb betas needing to read then be constrained in the a priori knowledge, plus lifting, and in the political case a particular way.

[–]NecroticFury -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Anything is only as good as its parts. Cracks will always form on a hollow dome!

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedPillDad 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Well said.

rewards ideas on their popularity rather than their merit.

That shit still happens here. It's always tempting to resort to sloganeering, Bro-pandering and vote-whoring rather than contribute to genuine debate. Especially for the young guys.

Thankfully the dedicated mods have kept the culture constructive and productive. That's the reason I keep returning... That and reading a good GLO rant.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It's always tempting to resort to sloganeering, Bro-pandering and vote-whoring rather than contribute to genuine debate. Especially for the young guys.

You just summed up a /u/GayLubeOil thread. He is the one guy we allow to do this, helps take the serious edge off the sub from time to time. Call it a tactical decision. Also let GLO feel special and bask in the special immunity he has.

[–]TRP VanguardtrpSenator 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Plato, or Aristotle -- one of those dead dudes -- argued that Democracy is probably the worst form of government. That the best form of governance is a "Kingship" as they called it. Simply because it's highly effective, logical, and efficient. However, that requires having a good king. The downside is that it has the potential of a bad king.

On the flipside, a democracy is very prone to poor leadership, it's slow to move, emotionally based, and appeals to the lowest common denominator. However, the plus is that it's far less vulnerable to corruption, and bad leadership is easily changed. While democracy may be extremely inefficient, it's also the safest in terms of long term stability.

However, it looks like we got a good king here.

[–]Redpillc0re 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Plato's republic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Republic_(Plato)

The dead dudes were right as history has shown. Democracy itself is not enough for a well functioning society. In today's context Fukuyama proposes 3 pillars of a good state: Democracy, Rule of Law and Accountability. This online forum can only offer democracy so far, and that is not enough.

[–]eatpraymantis -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is off topic, and Its been years since I read it, but I wasnt a big fan of The Republic - too many slippery slope arguments, that if you agree with this you must agree with this and agree with this so you're wrong. Not to say it isnt worth reading, I disagreed with a lot of how the discussions were "won" however. ..Saying this, in an earlier time "theredpill" would have been called "thecaveentrance".

I mentioned it on here a few weeks back and its made me really want to re-read The Iliad if I can find an English language version. From Achilles to Agamemnon, Paris, Hector, Phoenix, Ajax, Odysseus, however many I've forgot about, all being thrown around by the forces of nature//gods aka society, there's a lot to be said in the book/epic poem about different types of men, from a society which was focused on men.

[–]southernmost 64 points65 points  (10 children)

In short, TRP is engineering, not theoretical physics. We're not interested in why the arches hold up the aqueduct, only that they do, and thus water reaches the thirsty.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 29 points30 points  (0 children)

We're not interested in why the arches hold up the aqueduct, only that they do, and thus water reaches the thirsty.

I see what you did there. Nicely done.

[–]Redpillc0re 11 points12 points  (2 children)

i respectfully disagree, strongly. First, you are presenting physics, the king of empirical sciences as being abstract mind games. I need not remind you that most of engineering is based on the fact that the theoretical physics behind it is true.

Second, knowing the "why" of everything is compressed wisdom: having to learn by trial and error is the worst way to learn anything, learning the basic principles is a much easier way to be sure your choices are correct.

[–]rpkarma -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Fine. Let's go with quantum mechanics and hardcore particle physics instead of just "physics" then. While it technically does have some practical aspects once you move enough levels upwards, it's got naught to do with how an arch is held up for most people, and debating it is its own particular type of study and discourse that has little bearing on most engineering.

[–]Redpillc0re 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Physics is the most empirically validated exact science we have. There is almost nothing 'speculative' about it that can last long enough. You are literally reading these words because of quantum theory.

I understand and agree with the statement you are trying to make, though.

[–]1APookIsAPook 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not exactly. The unique value of TRP is that it delves deeply into the theory behind social dynamics and the sexual marketplace. I'd argue PUA is more similar to engineering, whereas TRP is physics. Traditional PUA teaches what (routines, techniques, lines), but not why. We explain why, but leave it to the individual to choose how to use their knowledge.

We care about the why, but only when what (the action/strategy) we are discussing has some basis in reality. Discussions revolving around why being a nice guy is logically the optimal sexual strategy is pointless, as it has no basis in reality. It's akin to a theoretical physics department entertaining theories which have no experimental basis. It's just endless and unproductive debate.

[–]rprando 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Some of the more nuanced posts delve into the "why", but do so from a strictly RP point of view. It's okay to discuss the theoretical physics behind our kick ass aqueduct (so long as you're not questioning the authority of the RP stance). In fact I'd argue that's part of what separates us from the PUA community.

I also believe that if there was solid evidence of a way to levitate an aqueduct without arches, we would endorse it. But right now the arches we got are pretty damn solid and to date I have not seen any levitating aqueducts.

[–]FrameWalker 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This was my gut reaction, but as /u/apookisapook points out pua is engineering and trp is science because trp is focused on the why. The details of what to do are for you to figure out with the help of the forum. The trp subreddit is ironically not for debating the why but merely understanding it's application

[–]NecroticFury -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Except people and interpersonal relationships are not arcs. They do not hold under pressure nor can they be measured with an equation.

Like theoretical physics, they can be judged and their future actions projected. We get a good sense of whats going on, but in reality we could be entirely wrong and we would never know.

The truth is we will only ever know what we are told; if the world gave a different response to our question, we would come to a different conclusion, wouldn't we?

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Exactly, empirical evidence is far more important and useful than unproven theory (rationalism). In fact, theory without empirical evidence to back it up is just philosophy, not even science. Science demands evidence and experimentation, just like the Red Pill does with field reports, experiments, observations, statistics, consistently reproducible results with game/sexual-strategy, etc.

What's even worse is pure theory that is unfalsifiable, since not only is it not right, it's not even wrong.

Your example is perfect, because theoretical physics is mostly useless philosophy that physicists use to get grant money while providing little tangible benefit to humanity. Example: multiverses, string theory, "dark" matter and "dark" energy...things that are all unproven via direct evidence and experimentation, but "must be right" according to their borderline religious theories (just try arguing with a physicist or mathematician). In the end these concepts are like unicorns: invisible, unproven and useless.

Meanwhile engineering actually produces real results: bridges, planes, trains, ships, computers, buildings, cars, satellites, farming machinery, radars, live-saving medicines, materials/chemicals, electricity, and just about every useful thing created by man.

[–]Endorsed ContributorGarl_Vinland 35 points36 points  (5 children)

And the community is better for it. Most online communities turn to shit when they reach critical mass, when the noise starts to outweigh the signal. This is amplified on reddit with the upvote system, where new users upvoting the ramblings of new users encourages new users to start rambling themselves. The only way I've ever seen for a place to survive is strict adherance to purpose, with penalties handed out without accordingly for not doing so.

So far, the mods here have done exactly that.

[–]rpscrote 18 points19 points  (3 children)

So far, the mods here have done exactly that.

It's a godamn miracle as far as I'm concerned. I've never seen a community this large not immediately devolve into absolute garbage

[–]ModRedSovereign 23 points24 points  (2 children)

Oh, the garbage is most certainly there. You should see the modqueue after a controversial post.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Or after a major holiday when most of the mod team is away for one reason or another. I still remember the Christmas day shit-show.

[–]rpscrote 0 points1 point  (0 children)

haaa point taken. Thank you and your team for your diligence

[–]trpfieldreport 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And my god has their been a rapid increase in the rambling of late.

Not to put the moderation dick in my mouth too far, but they really seem to be on the ball for getting rid of the shit.

[–]Buchloe 16 points17 points  (5 children)

At first, I really didn't enjoy this "tough titties, deal with it" style of moderation, but now it feels more like, hey- my house, my rules. If you want to learn from me, you're welcome to. But if you don't like how I operate my house, go elsewhere. Which is how a man should be anyways. It's a good example of how to not lower your standards to appease whiners.

[–]Endorsed ContributorFLFTW16 15 points16 points  (4 children)

I found it intimidating as well. I lurked for a long time before posting anything. The "tough titties, deal with it" style keeps everyone on their toes, thinking clearly (or trying to), and actually putting effort into their writing. Every upvote or compliment is earned and circle jerks are kept to a minimum. Some other subs on reddit I find unreadable; their comments strings are just sophomoric meta jokes with minimal effort, even their posts are reposts with minimal effort and karma whoring. I can't imagine grown men and women spending their time writing and reading some of the stuff that is on reddit. TRP is a breath of fresh air and the growth in subscribers is the proof in the pudding.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 6 points7 points  (2 children)

their comments strings are just sophomoric meta jokes with minimal effort

I deleted a 246 comment post the other day. Not just OP, but all the posts in it as well. Took me 25 minutes as Reddit does not provide a mass delete function. I did not want anyone already on the page or who could click the link from their own posting history going back to the topic and continuing their shitty discussion, so I nuked the lot. Why? Because it had all this "sophomoric meta joke" bullshit going on with lots of whining to boot. A mod also went -45 on a comment. Had to drop little boys all over that shit.

[–]1whatsazipper -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Must have been the bro-knighting one.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's the one. Biggest clusterfuck I've ever seen on this sub.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We are this way even more so now than in the past, and the reason is simple: if someone is going to address a room of 110,000 people, they better have something valuable and insightful to say.

[–]Rhunta 16 points17 points  (3 children)

The red pill is like being born again. You start as a baby. The goal is becoming an adult. If you want to grow, than you have to watch what the adults say. And put that too practice.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorCopperFox3c 23 points24 points  (1 child)

I think the mods do a great job here, and try to minimize all the noise and distraction. Obviously agree with everything the OP stated.

That said, I think it is important to emphasize that we do encourage debate and discussion here, just so long as it remains within bounds. TRP, as a philosophy, rests on a number of axioms and assumptions. Feminism does as well ... so do Stoicism, Rationalism, etc. Those base axioms and assumptions are not "provable" in any empirical sense, never will be. This is true of all logical systems. Even mathematics is based on unprovable axioms, such as was the basis of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem (check out Godel, Escher, Bach for a fascinating read on this).

The point is that any philosophy or logical system must rest on some basic assumptions and axioms. Arguing with people about those assumptions is pointless, and a waste of time. A distraction. Do you argue with people about whether "math is real" because it relies on untestable assumptions? No, that's a waste of time, because in the end math is useful. It helps us solve problems. That's what matters. Much the same for TRP.

All that said, the TRP theory that extends from those axioms is testable in an empirical sense, and much of that forms the basis of field reports and the like. Those topics are the ones that do merit discussion here. It is important to make that distinction, and keep the noise out.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

That said, I think it is important to emphasize that we do encourage debate and discussion here, just so long as it remains within bounds. TRP, as a philosophy, rests on a number of axioms and assumptions. Feminism does as well ... so do Stoicism, Rationalism, etc. Those base axioms and assumptions are not "provable" in any empirical sense, never will be. This is true of all logical systems. Even mathematics is based on unprovable axioms, such as was the basis of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem (check out Godel, Escher, Bach for a fascinating read on this).

Hear, hear. Stellar post. I'm going to award a point for it.

[–]ModRedSovereign 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The best systems of governance are broken into hierarchy, with the talent theoretically evenly distributed in a perfect top-down pattern. Democracy flattens that hierarchy such that the most talented voice is equally comparable to the least. This benefits no one.

Like it or hate it, TRP has grown and provided inestimable benefit for men under the leadership of /r/redpillschool and the mod team. There is no reason to disrupt this dynamic since it's working as fluidly as it is.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]Modredpillschool 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Always feel free to use the report button on stuff you don't think is high quality. It gets our attention.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]1TRPingBalls 3 points4 points  (0 children)

To everyone concerned about this policy, remember this: Truth is not a democracy. One man can speak the truth and it doesn't matter if a million disagree with him, call him names, try to shame him, or whatever. There's only the truth, and it certainly doesn't care how many people agree with it.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (13 children)

As I understand this post, at the heart, TRP has an immutable core of solid ideas and a TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT approach is the best one. There's always room for constant re-evaluation of ideas at the periphery - just like how we discuss which things work and which don't. But too many other places have had a soft edge when it comes to their core philosophy, and once the ball starts rolling towards more and more concessions, everything starts to become awash with pandering and normalization. The original message gets diluted to the points where it's no longer accessible; the man looking for a good strategy has one less choice on his list of competing viewpoints - he's the one who ultimately loses the most from concessions and regression towards the mean.

Perhaps the only question that remains in my head is what happens if you guys at the top screw up... It's entirely possible to deviate over time from the original intent and to fracture the community, just like a poor headmaster will end up with an ill disciplined school. Quite an unlikely scenario - we already have enough here to keep things intact - but everything is susceptible to gradual change... any thoughts?

  • removed some waffle

  • tl;dr question: what extra measures are in place to ensure trp is robust against the unwanted changes that democracy would cause? Can it be robust against changes in the mod's opinions too?

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 7 points8 points  (11 children)

Perhaps the only question that remains in my head is what happens if you guys at the top screw up...

Then a new culture replaces the failing old one. Just like social Darwinism, there is also reddit Darwinism. If the mods of TRP fuck up substantially enough, those who recognize the fuckup will create a TrueTRP or whatever and then their leadership will be put to the test.

[–]Do not send modmail to my personal inboxCrazyHorseInvincible[M] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Absolutely.

My standard answer to be called a censor or a Nazi (this happens about once a day) is to say "You are welcome to make your own subreddit. See if you get 100K subscribers".

[–]Do not send modmail to my personal inboxCrazyHorseInvincible[M] 1 point2 points  (6 children)

Precisely.

My standard response when called a censor or a Nazi (this happens about once a day) is to say:

"Feel free to make your own TRP subreddit. Run it your way. See if you get 100K subscribers."

TRP readers do get a vote, of sorts. They vote with their feet. Here's what their feet have to say:

http://redditmetrics.com/r/TheRedPill#compare=mensrights

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Sounds like the best approach

Also impressive growth, convergence is coming. I used to read mensrights and MGTOW but it all got too depressing and didn't feel pro-active in any way. I wonder if those subs are really buffering through the angry guys who'll eventually find a more pragmatic environment here.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

angry guys who'll eventually find a more pragmatic environment here.

Angry guys need to invest all that hateful energy into perfecting their squat, bench press and deadlift.

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 4 points5 points  (0 children)

For too long men have been told that anger is bad.

Anger is good, and I dare say necessary. But it must be focused and tempered into something useful, rather than becoming the master. It's a lot like fire: useful when focused, destructive when it gets it's way.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Except that up till this point your growth is likely due to the rejection of other weaker subs...NOT necessarily to your great modding skills nor the strength of your own sub.

Time will tell. I don't doubt this sub will continue to grow. But as of now it is because there is no alternative.

[–]Do not send modmail to my personal inboxCrazyHorseInvincible 4 points5 points  (0 children)

All winners win by being better than the losers. That's what winning is.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

At least you live up to the name you chose for yourself. I admire that.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

If the mods of TRP fuck up substantially enough, those who recognize the fuckup will create a TrueTRP or whatever and then their leadership will be put to the test.

Already happened with /r/alreadyred when a number of veterans circa a year ago lost confidence in /u/redpillschool's governance of the subreddit. This was around the time I was made moderator. Alreadyred failed, although it was a nice sub for a time. It doesn't mean it couldn't happen again, but it's proof that what you're saying is certainly within the realm of possibility should we falter.

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Already happened with /r/alreadyred when a number of veterans circa a year ago lost confidence in /u/redpillschool 's governance of the subreddit.

I didn't think of alreadyred as a vote of no confidence but rather a reddit for men farther along the red-pill to discuss things with a better signal to noise ratio (away from the early states of red pill awakening).

It was a good sub, it just didn't find too terribly much to discuss.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It began as a vote of no confidence. Then it became "something for men further along" and now it's pretty dead. I wish it wasn't dead and eased into it's new role, but it is what it is.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps the only question that remains in my head is what happens if you guys at the top screw up...

This is why we have a benevolent politburo of multiple moderators. We often consult each other on day to day actions.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This explicit declaration of anti democratic moderation is a very masculine alternative to the hush-hush shadow banning seen in other subs. Bravo.

[–]A_DERPING_ULTRALISK 5 points6 points  (21 children)

In theory, I think it makes sense. In practice though it falls victim to the same thing that plagues feminist ideology.

With no room for dissent, the only opinions that become valid are those that are even more extreme in nature. What you end up with is a kind of power creep, where only those opinions that are extremely pro red pill will survive.

It basically just turns in to a crucible of extreme ideas.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

In theory, I think it makes sense. In practice though it falls victim to the same thing that plagues feminist ideology.

It is not perfect, but it is superior to the democratic alternative.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Demcracy gives everyones vote equal weight which is absurd. It takes what, almost a year to internalize the pill? and in that time, thousands of newbies have subscribed. Giving votes to newbies who have no experience is a path to destruction.

[–]Modredpillschool 0 points1 point  (17 children)

You can have different opinions and experiences. You just can't decide to hijack the sub.

For instance, your comment here wouldn't exist if we didn't allow dissent.

[–]A_DERPING_ULTRALISK 2 points3 points  (16 children)

I was referring to dissent in terms of debating RP merrit. Of which I agree, have no place on this board.

However, this creates an ecosystem though which is excellent for extremism to thrive. Imho, those in the anger phase of RP are given too much leeway.

It wouldn't even surprise me to learn that shill's shitpost radical views.

[–]Modredpillschool 3 points4 points  (13 children)

Let them be angry. Let them be extreme. Ain't nowhere else to do it, and I sure as fuck don't care how it looks.

Being concerned with how we look or being too angry is a race to the bottom.

[–]A_DERPING_ULTRALISK -5 points-4 points  (12 children)

Being angry should not be the end game of RP. Anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

Who is there to be angry with anyways? Women? Society? What happened to the "master thyself" ideal that first attracted me to RP.

[–]rpscrote 10 points11 points  (3 children)

Censoring righteous male anger is the first step in tone policing and political correctness. It can fuck off and anyone pushing that garbage can fuck off too

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

[deleted]

What is this?

[–]2Overkillengine -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's natural yes, but not always constructive.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Aptly and eloquently put.

[–]Modredpillschool 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Nobody suggested it should be an endgame. But a majority of TRP's success can be attributed to being the one place that accepts anger as a natural response. It's the one place where it's okay to be angry.

Everywhere else has been busy making sure men can't have emotions.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is on point and missed by the cool kid new TRPers (omg you so angry brah).

Fundamentally it is the masculine extreme to murder, rape, destroy. We were the gender designed to utilize force and dominance to get what we wanted. It was the feminine extreme to unabashedly hypergame, lie, cheat, manipulate, sabotage, steal.

Society has done everything it can to neuter any kind of natural expression of sexual violence and aggressiveness from men, whilst encouraging or permitting the extreme natures of women.

Boys banned from full contact sports in schools, school fights broken up and 0 tolerance approach to violence; even in self defence, any male making a move or asking a girl how her day is going is now liable for "Street Harrassment" and creeperdom. It is politically incorrect to suggest that anger is a normal emotion for... well... everyone. It always has to be meditated out, smoothed away with counselling, conditioning, pills and societal programming or shame.

Well it won't go away because it is fundamental core of humanity and a necessary one of Masculinity.

Women respond to all the related themes of murder and rape (strength, sexual dominance, disregard for other people's opinions) whilst society seeks to wholly nullify it. Anger and rage is not only 100% normal, it is a healthy aspect of male nature.

That leads a lot of people to incorrectly believe I advocate a tweaking lunatic in day to day life. If men were "allowed" to get more outwardly angry when they get fucked over at work, home, the playground; without every mangina and female trying to shame him or label him a danger to children we wouldn't be in half as much mess as we are already.

Mastery of thyself is real. Harness everything suppress nothing, there is nothing wrong about being "angry" except where it holds you back which is the same of every other emotion.

[–]QQ_L2P 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Are you telling me you weren't a tiny bit pissed off when you found out that a large part of your failings were due to being taught the wrong axioms?

I'll tell you what, I was. After I finished moping like a little BP bitch, I went and hit the gym. Best months workout of my life. Now the only thing that concerns me is improvement. If it's not helping, I don't care for it.

Anger is a necessary part of TRP. It's like saying that you aren't pissed when someone rips you off. Being angry is a natural response, why censor it? The only thing that matters after anger is what you choose to do with it.

Besides that, the only time you can brush it off is when you have an abundance mentality, something almost none of us had when we were BP.

[–]A_DERPING_ULTRALISK -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

Please read above where I said:

Imho, those in the anger phase of RP are given too much leeway.

I agree it is a necessary phase, but that's all it is. A phase. Too much of it and people begin to think it is the norm to go around hating women.

Hating women is as effective as hating a bratty child. Don't hate the players, or the game: Play the Game.

[–]ModRedSovereign 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There's a fresh wave of newly unplugged males coming in every day. You will always see men fresh in their anger every day you visit this sub. The ones that aren't angry anymore stop posting angry material.

If you're expecting a collective transcendence of the userbase you're going to be sorely disappointed. This sub is designed for men going through all stages.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The anger phase has value for all of us to see. We can't experience that raw anger for years without it dulling down but we can still benefit from its energy by having the new subscribers around.

[–]QQ_L2P 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OK, I interpreted that to mean that the sub shouldn't allow people to post or speak in anger.

I completely agree with you. If people come here and think it's the norm to hate women, they are idiots and need to reassess what they are reading and why they are here. It would be one of the most ironic subs considering 50% of its raison d'etre is "to help men get better with women".

As far as I'm concerned, let those in anger speak, but if people are misinterpreting the anger phase, they are the ones who need reproach and a quick kick to the ol' sidebar.

[–]cascadecombo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why should anyone care what other people think. We all know its the newbies ranting, they need to rant and this is the only place they can do it.

Who ever said they hate women? Usually the posts are about hating what they were lied about, the situation, everything.

You have some serious concern trolling going on dude.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

which is excellent for extremism to thrive.

Is there anyone in TRP that isn't an 'extremist' - at least in comparison to the baseline culture? Dread game, ASD/LMR, alpha fucks/beta bucks - those are all extremist ideas.

[–]A_DERPING_ULTRALISK -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'd say no. We live in an extremist culture right now.

Compared to what's out there, I'd say TRP is mild compared to what's out there.

[–]let_terror_reign 5 points6 points  (2 children)

I'm an Intellectual, I admit it. Yes, I love learning why things work the way they do. It's an obsession because once I know the why I become adept at said thing. This idea of less why and more what is alien to me, but I do not have a wealth of experience. And yes, those who ask fewer questions often seem to do better than me. I think the path to mastery is a blend of both. You can take theory all you want but if you can't walk the walk, no use in talking the talk.
Great article. You raised all my questions and answered them. I haven't seen you post here in a while. Nice return

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I haven't seen you post here in a while. Nice return

I'm normally swamped by moderation duties, post reports and mod mail. I'm around, just not posting. Unfortunately a lot of questionable posts aren't reported, which means sometimes reading threads and manually deleting things (very taxing on one's time.) I think now and again meta posts from the mods like this are good for the morale of the community, promoting a higher quality of commentary when done right.

[–]let_terror_reign 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I haven't appreciated any meta posts till now, but this one hit home. Especially the part about intellectuals.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think everyone who is questioning, "how right is TRP?" should read the essay, The Relatively of Wrongness.

http://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.htm

For a project like TRP, we shouldn't be analyzing p values. Testing the tenets and seeing if they work for you is the goal here.

[–]Endorsed Contributormonsieurhire2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think banning should primarily be directed at trolls of all stripes, from the inane, to the clever who make disingenuous arguments unsupported by facts.

I think there is a lot of room for disagreement and difference of opinion, simply because in my experience, so-called rules, if rigidly adhered to, can have quite perverse outcomes. I think that TRP is, at the very least, a healthy "reality tunnel" to what most men were indoctrinated with. Is it the absolute, final truth? That would give the thought leadership too much power, IMO. A healthy skepticism is always called for. The reason I take it seriously is because IT ACCORDS WITH MY OWN EXPERIENCE. It's a Buddhist thing.

Also, to people that accuse TRP of being authoritarian, or whatever, for banning people, at the very least, in my experience, EVERY SINGLE FUCKING GROUP, from the extreme tree-hugger, to the blood-drinking satanist, and everything in between, and every interest group on every possible subject DO THE SAME FUCKING THING. I was repeatedly banned from a website critical of the establishment and modern technology for MILDLY DISAGREEING with host on some minor point. Never mind that I had contributed content for over a year. Never mind that I agreed with 99% of what he said. Oh no. I HAD to be a government spy because I disagreed on one minor point!

Lol.

And the so-called, self-proclaimed "good guys" in the touchy-feely subs are all about the ban.

So, it seems that nobody wants to hear opinions that run counter to their own. I'm perfectly willing consider the possibilty that maybe I'm wrong on something. But I'm also secure in my ideology. I guess the latter comes with time though.

[–]1CowardlyPetrov 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Good. Democracy is always demented.

People came to this house because it was in order. And now they want to take command of this house, while they have barely been guests for five minutes?

I recall a good comic that this reminds me of. A man is with his girlfriend. She says she doesn't like his clothes so he dresses more neatly. She says she doesn't like his beard so he shaves. She says she doesn't like his games so he stops playing sports. Then she breaks up with him and says he isn't the man she fell in love with.

These idiots and the girl from the story are one in the same. They destroy that which attracted them in the first place.

[–]Do not send modmail to my personal inboxCrazyHorseInvincible[M] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The democracy's great strength is also its greatest weakness: It values all opinions the same.

It values the opinion of the poor man equally to the opinion of the rich man, the opinion of the white man equally to the opinion of the black man, the opinion of the old man equally to the opinion of the young man. And that sounds great, until you realize that it also values the opinion of the novice equally to the opinion of the expert, the opinion of the contributor equally to the opinion of the slacker, the opinion of the invested equally to the opinion of the dilettante.

While some respect for the spirit of (read: motivation behind) democracy is valuable in preventing blatant favoritism and self-interest, all opinions are not, and never will be, equally valuable.

If any man may walk in the door of any society, and his opinion will be held in equal regard with its wisest, most sage, most senior, most hard-working, most accomplished member... then investment in any enterprise becomes pointless, and nothing will safeguard any group against the malicious and the well-intentioned idiot. Just as we here at TRP openly acknowledge the realities of the sexual marketplace by which ALL groups mate, we also openly acknowledge the realities of the seniority systems by which ALL groups actually function.

And since, in any group, some must be endorsed, and others exiled, we, the mods, are the ones charged with judging who is to be which. Will we always get it perfectly right? No. But that is acceptable to us, because preservation of the mission, not fairness to all is our top priority. We will be only as fair as we can afford to be without compromising our mission.

[–]neio 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The best form of government is a benevolent dictatorship. It's like being a good father, your rules supersedes your wife's rules. The captain knows best because he's trained to recognise the worst.

[–]Hokuto199x 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Democracy is a system where a person with an IQ of 85 gets the same input as a person with an IQ of 150. The problem? There are far more people closer to 85 than 150.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Having had enough context with people who are at MENSA, this isn't necessarily a bad thing in my opinion.

[–]let_terror_reign 0 points1 point  (3 children)

What is that like? I've never met someone from MENSA or someone of 170+ IQ

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Plenty of them suck.

The desire to feel special, to be some kind of intellectual vanguard is very pronounced among many of them, which leads them to reject plenty of stuff that's actually pretty common sense because this would mean they aren't really more informed than the average Joe. So you'll find troofers, ufo fans, esoteric aficionados etc. among them.

[–]let_terror_reign 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I expected this. Thanks. How does their iq reflect on their work tho?

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I didn't know these that closely, only through an online forum. Many were underachievers, though.

[–]slimcoat 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In essence, we cannot be fair, because we are outnumbered, and our opponents, those who disdain us, they don't play fair. They attempt to disrupt and subvert, and thus we must respond in kind by doing the same to their protests.

Fight fire with fire. It's impossible to win a war if you're following the agreed-upon rules while the enemy is blatantly ignoring them. What good are naive concepts like "honor", "fairness", and "chivalry" when you're dead?

The very core of Red Pill principles is to live in the world that is, not that world that should be. And the world that is has a lot of people in it who hypocritically denounce fairness with their actions while lauding it with their words.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The masses are asses. Democracy is a cluster fuck. People seem to be easily swayed.

[–]2IVIaskerade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TL;DR: Want to debate the axioms TRP is based on? Fuck off to PPD.

[–]adamlikesprettygirls 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sometimes I like this sub, but sometimes it seems like a bunch of assholes (myself included)

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't see what's so hard about this for blue pillers. There's a general worldview we like, this is the sub to develop it, PPD is the sub try and tear it down. Argue for whatever you'd like under the paradigm/worldview we like. If you don't like the paradigm, go literally anywhere else in the world.

[–]Redpillc0re 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Thanks for the removal, this kind of restores faith in the sub. It's telling that the removed thread had gotten 550+ votes. This means the demographic here has been diluted and the trp message is getting watered down severely. It's sad because, not only it's unfair to TRP to call it an echo chamber (it's far closer to skepticism than a groupthink), but also because despite the the banality of the thread ("Dont listen to the echo chamber") it was still voted to the top. This is not kindergarten, please keep showing the children out.

[–]ThePedanticF0x 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Like communism, The concept of democracy is attractive on paper but heavily flawed in reality. In any population the logical, rational and disciplined are the minority, the majority being the emotionally volatile, intellectually immature and irresponsible mob. The minority will vote for based on need, progress and practicality, the mob simply votes for wants and instant gratification, progress be damned.

The politician will pander to the useless demands of the mob and ignore the rational minority, votes are valued, not common sense and reason. This system breeds corruption, injustice and degeneration to the point where the mob will seek someone to blame for the civil degeneration they themselves voted for, and the government will happily satisfy them with a patsy. Once the mob is pacified the process goes back to square one, rinse and repeat.

The majority of the population has no idea what it needs, and most will never have the intellectual capacity and maturity to understand this. Democracy is essentially a middle school where the kids and teachers have equal authority. The mob does not have the intellect to understand that whatever strife befalls them and their country is exactly what they voted for, but to assert this truth is heresy.

"How dare you hold the victims accountable for their stupidity?"

The rational minority, which the subscribers of this sub represents, will of course be slandered and screamed at for daring to impose such oppressive virtues as personal responsibility, realism and logic on the public.

What we need here is a strong senate based in logic and realism. Free of fickle emotional rule and old testament in its justice. Intolerant of the shameless marxist victim complex and iron in its resolve.

Lucky for us it seems this is exactly the kind of senate we have.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy.

If you would like to do the same, add the browser extension GreaseMonkey to Firefox and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

[–]1Snivellious 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Red Pill Mods admit to being "basically Hitler"

But seriously, fair enough.

Most debate-friendly subs fall into some variant of the "eternal September" problem, eternally rehashing basic conversations for new users who won't read.

Red Pill is susceptible to some hellish combination of that and concern trolling, and there's room to infinitely debate ideas if you never appeal to proof or reality.

I'd be disappointed if TRP became a "closed" philosophy, but it doesn't look like that's what you're proposing. If someone wants to change or reshape redpill philosophy, that can still be done. Post field reports, describe how what your propose works better than the conventional wisdom (with evidence, not theory), and let people come around to the better way.

I'm sure TRP isn't precisely correct as it's formulated today. I'm equally sure that it will benefit more from evidence-based drift over time than from eternally rehashing questions of whether reality is 'fair'.

[–]1ErasmusOrgasmus 0 points1 point  (3 children)

/u/MachiavellianRed

First, I fully support the message behind this post. The modding here is first rate and like nowhere else. As others have said, all other online communties see growth coincide with a rapid fall in content quality.

My question is what is the mods' policy on female posters? My visits to the sub have been less frequent in recent months yet even I have noticed a huge increase in the number of clearly female users posting (in relative terms, as there seemed to be virtually 0 female posters even 5 or 6 months ago).

Obviously I and many others are suspicious of female posters here but it is not borne of bias when I say that the comments I have seen from clearly-female users have been awful, even worse than the types of comments referred to in the OP here. Primarily they don't even seek debate; mostly they seem to post mindless garbage which contributes nothing to the discussion and is either for the purposes of getting attention or for patting themselves on the back with humblebrags about how they're so much better than the women we bemoan here on TRP.

So do the mods have any policy on this issue?

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S,M] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Well, RPWs post here sometimes. We don't mind if women post as long their posts are on point.

If she starts NAWALTING and spouting blue pill nonsense, we'll ban her.

Obviously I and many others are suspicious of female posters here but it is not borne of bias when I say that the comments I have seen from clearly-female users have been awful, even worse than the types of comments referred to in the OP here. Primarily they don't even seek debate; mostly they seem to post mindless garbage which contributes nothing to the discussion and is either for the purposes of getting attention or for patting themselves on the back with humblebrags about how they're so much better than the women we bemoan here on TRP.

I have seen nothing like that. If you bring those things to our attention, we'll investigate it.

[–]1ErasmusOrgasmus 0 points1 point  (1 child)

That seems fair enough. Those posters to whom I was referring were anything but RP women (which makes sense because any RPW commenting should blend in). I reported a few I have seen and it seems at least one or two of them have been banned.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S,M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A message in mod mail (with accompanying link) is more effective than a report if it's a particularly bad offender, just a heads up.

[–]Ausfall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a democracy, every voice is supposed to have value and influence decisions. The fact that people try to infiltrate and pull dumbass influence ploys makes that system a bad idea, at least for the leadership, because it means all the losers that take the website too seriously will want to get in on the action. I don't think anybody wants Miss John Snippedcock having a say in TRP's direction.

I don't think I've ever seen a questionable case of modding here, which is remarkable given the size of this sub and its notoriety. They might say they rule with an iron fist, but frankly the only people they punch with it are the ones who deserve it.

[–]unicornh_1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

a curious brain is always in pain, confict and uneasyness.

i think most of this happens beacuse lack of understandability of TRP. see every one is curious here to comment. why? lots of our bros finally find something relevant to their life so comment comment and comment. i think these pals have ich that they cannot scratch(of course that includes qustioning TRP on TRP itself). i think we as community do one thing that we do best: DGAF

[–]Dueperdue -1 points0 points  (2 children)

I believe the above wall of text can be summed with the word faith.

At this point, you either believe what the TRP gods write or you don't. Which is fine, as long as the ones making the choice on whether believing or not are enough self-conscious to take the good and leave the bad.

Hitler, which has been mentioned, also had a believe system. He proposed it and demanded people to have faith. We all know how that went.

We now must hope that:

  1. The people here have enough mental power to question everything.
  2. That the Gods of the TRP "philosophy" are not cruel Gods, and that their judgement can be trusted.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You don't need to take our word for anything.

You can practice/observe what we think in the real world.

But we're not going to debate endless semantics with you.

[–]Dueperdue -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Which is what I meant with being self-conscious. You provide the information but it's up to who reads if they actually put it into practice or find it being actually useful.

[–]NapalmGod69 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe it should be made more explicit to people who come here to debate that there is a place to have those debates - the PurplePillDebate sub. Debating TRP and TBP stuff is the whole point of that sub. Send everybody there.

In fact, when I first joined I got a message from a bot saying that my post had been removed because I had not been a member long enough. Maybe add a line to the automated message saying "If you are just here to debate TRP ideas, the place for that is Purple Pill Debate" and add a link. Don't know if it will deter everyone, but maybe some.

[–]Nazrath2112 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I had been having issues with fully wrapping my head around the concept of "Holding Frame". This post really made me understand what that concept is. Thank you.

[–]1Claude_Reborn 0 points1 point  (2 children)

The execellent modding here is why I stay and enjoy this place as opposed to subs like "mens rights"

MR had an open door policy and a lax mod policy and they were very quickly overrun and destroyed by feminist trolls, concern trolls and general neck bearded fedora tippers.

They are the joke of reddit, while TRP is hated by those who don't come here and respected by those who do.

As Machiavelli says, Being loved or feared is immaterial, so long as you are respected.

MR is in no way respected, where TRP does have some level of respect from those that spend any length of time here, even if they disagree with some of the stuff posted.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

MR had an open door policy and a lax mod policy

That is an unquestionably failed immigration policy.

and they were very quickly overrun and destroyed by feminist trolls, concern trolls and general neck bearded fedora tippers.

That's what you get for not policing your borders adequately enough to deal with the threat on the outside.

As Machiavelli says, Being loved or feared is immaterial, so long as you are respected.

I thought he said it was better to be feared than loved, but it is MOST desirable to be both. Nevertheless, I like this.

[–]1Claude_Reborn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He said you had to remain respected over all. If it's only a choice been loved and feared, feared is better.

As long as you don't make yourself hated. Being hated you should avoid above all else because the more a populace hates you, the more drastic actions they will take against you.

Chairman Pao is about to learn this really hard lesson.

[–]RP_Vergil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

End date, TRP is not a "Man in distress support group". It's a "Man the fuck back up reconstruction group".

It's not about what's right, but what's your moves.

You can play chess in anyway as long as the pieces are eating each other.

[–]jdgalt 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I'm curious as to why you crossed out the reference to purplepilldebate and inserted pillscollide. PPD still seems "live".

[–]holytrpbatman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Democracy: two wolves and a sheep discussing what's for dinner.

[–]flexiblehold 0 points1 point  (1 child)

This TRP community should make a three-tier distinction between axioms, the logical consequences of the axioms and the practical application of those logical consequences.

Axioms CAN NOT, SHOULD NOT AND WILL NOT BE DEBATED. An axiom of TRP is a first principle, for instance AWALT. I totally agree that anyone coming to this sub and debating AWALT is doing us all a disservice, and should be swiftly silenced.

The consequences of the axioms are where debate should be more free, though even here banning and censoring makes some sense. A consequence of the axiom, female hypergamy, is that your LTR might leave you for the slick executive boss of hers. But we need far more details of your and her situation to be sure. It's ok to go back and forth over these kinds of details, imo, it's in fact intellectually healthy to do so. But there can be a point when a position can only be argued from the standpoint of denying an axiom, e.g. "my gf is hypergamous, yes, and I've been on disability, but she's just different and really loves me." Such an argument violates AWALT, Unicorn, Oneitis, and probably a few other axioms: this argument is retreating from a forensic debate of the facts to a debate of an axiom, and thus should be silenced.

When it comes to the practical application of the consequences of our Red-Pill reality, I wholeheartedly believe debate should be encouraged, that democracy should prevail. E.g., if one guy says "you should have waited two days to text," and another says "radio silence for her, you beta fag," and the other says "it's ok if you bring her flowers at work tomorrow," such debate is fine and really should not and does not threaten TRP.

Just my two cents.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Great post. Agreed.

[–]needmorefat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you use words like "values" and "integrity" and "community" on a forum which for the most part at least attempts morally neutral observation and discussion of what works to achieve one's ends? I'd be hard-pressed to point to any coherent values here. Ideas, yes, but not values.

[–]SW9876 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only issue I have with this is that the exact same argument could be applied to all of the feminist subs that constantly receive hate for their iron fists. The concept of, free flow of ideas so long as they fall within an acceptable range, is not really free at all. Nevertheless it is impossible to deny the fact that a completely free environment will inherently damage the effectiveness of the sub. There has to be a better way to go about moderation.

[–]thefisherman1961 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Democracy in general is a horrible, vile system of government. All one needs to do is look at the condition of America: poverty, tyranny, misery, and death. That is all democracy ultimately ever leads to.

[–]nodiggity9721 0 points0 points [recovered]

Damn do people here know how to write.

[–]donit -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I like to think of TRP as an oasis for ideas, which is where all the red pill truths came from, and why they exist. TRP had to step around the dead carcass of conventional mainstream psychology in order to develop its ideas, because that could never happen in a closed, dead-end system.

[–]spectrum_92 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

I agree with this but for the same reason we cannot then criticise the SJW-dominated execs at Reddit for wanting to shut this place down.

[–]Di-onysos -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Large-scale democracy has never worked and never will work because after a certain point the sheep outshout the "enlightened" and drag the level of thinking down to the lowest common denominator.

Benevolent dictatorship is essential for this sub. You don't argue with religious people who assert the universe was created 6000 years ago. It is a waste of time and effort, away from more fruitful discussions, and there is no way you can convince them by logic anyway.

[–]80smadmaxonly -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There isn't a choice. The SJW would ruin this site in a week if it were democratic.

[–]Valer_Pop -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The RedPill eventually becomes a Reactionary. He comes to realize the truth, that the whole 'enlightenment' was bullshit, and there is a reason we once had monarchies and state churches. To make sure that the purple-haired, hamplanet lesbian freaks wouldn't end up running things.

[–]capt_behindsight -1 points0 points  (0 children)

TRP embodies the nature of the wild. Herbivores may be content eating plants-- that is their nature. Carnivores prefer to eat other animals; it is their nature. For a herbivore to question a carnivore on logic or ethics makes no sense because they love separate lives.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

My old high school government teacher had a saying I'll never forget, and it's funny how, 15 years later, it is completely relevant since I've been a member of this sub:

The best thing about democracy is that everybody gets a voice. And the worst thing about democracy is that everybody gets a voice.

Gentleman, it can be best easily summed up this way, and this should be considered before hitting that "save" button, not after: if you have to ask yourself whether what you are about to submit is a worthy post, it probably isn't.

[–]recon_johnny -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Best fucking post I've read in a long time. Thank you for addressing a growing problem here (one that ebbs and flows, based on attendance).

I've seen most recently words in posts like: misogynist, racist, anti-semetic, shameful/not fair to women....as well as pervasive attitudes of SJW sprinkled throughout these posts.

I hope bans are done quickly when needed.

[–]2awalt_cupcake -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yes, like Hitler, we quite literally ban anyone who questions the administration.

Translation: I am Dad. Don't question my rules because I said so.

[–]Chaohinon -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I'll admit to being a guy who favors democracy in the political sense, but it makes no sense here. A subreddit is like a private brick and mortar company; for the most part, the leadership should do what it wants. If they're wrong, market forces will reflect that.

That said, I've had 0 trouble here simply by prefacing posts with, "I'm no TRP expert, but I believe/have experienced _____." Whereas other subreddits will pay lip service to democratic ideals, but will happily pounce on someone speculating like the bunch of sperges they are. Ironically, TRP seems to adapt to market forces much better and faster than most other subs I've browsed.

[–]BlatantTRPThrowaway -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Questioning RP from an intelligent standpoint is always healthy;not so much when you question RP from the angle of "you guys are HATE MONGER RACIST WOMEN WHITE PRIVILEGED DOUCHE ASSHOLE HATER PIG FRATBOYS WITHOUT COMFY DAD BODS TO LAY MY HEAD ON FUCK YOU!"

As long as the moderation stays targeted towards column B over column A, you have my support.

[–]1Padre55 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

There can be only One, democracies celebrate the weak the same as the strong, no difference between the two.

A TRP like that any self respecting man should leave the room.

[–]Otioseone1 -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

I agree with you views on your need to moderate as you do to lead,and I also appreciate that you have been effective. I have to admit I have experienced misapplication of aggression in implementation of moderating here though. Being told nonsense like 'you sound like',or worse, 'I do not need to read what you wrote to respond and I haven't',are me paraphrasing an almost roid raging mod I was forced to endure.

Now I do not now ask you to give a fuck but to consider that as great as you are, it might not hurt to be greater? Myselfe I have over 30 years unplugged in this matrix,was MRA before MRA was a term,have been arguing with the matrix for even longer. I came here because I enjoy the truth,and because I believe you value knowledge and I have knowledge to offer.Under 2 accounts I have offered,respectfully. Each attempt has met resistance and most of it based on sloppy logic and emotion to justify attacking through mod. As a result I have withdrawn and wait as I have these last decades for curiosity to outweigh posturing. Of the Red Pill theory I have science or' proof', that is easily verifiable as to why men are alpha and beta, and why our women see us as they do. I can explain the ' why ',of hyper gammy. Just not here, not until why becomes more important to you too.

In short I agree with and admire what you say I just hope it is soon that we and many others can do more for each other.Perhaps when there are more of you, and much less to do. Until then pat yer back you are accomplishing more for logic and truth then anyone else today.Kudos to you for it.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I just hope it is soon that we and many others can do more for each other

When we're not drowning in new guys who haven't absorbed the core content, and have retained enough guys who know their stuff and continue to stick around; this may be possible.

[–]let_terror_reign -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

Pills collide is the new redpill, where you can comment but not post.
Why have we shifted away from ppd though?
Nice to see that intellectuals are acknowledged though, that empathy is welcoming. Yeah, we have a NEED to understand exactly how and why this works and what variables we can tweak and how that'll play out.

[–]Upvote_To_The_Left -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This place should not be democratic. But good etiquette and mutual respect should be promoted.

[–]HappyNacho -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I agree wholeheartedly of this.

Since I've been lurking for over a year. I still consider myself a newbie here. TRP sidebar theory gives you the frame of mind on how to pursue your own true interests.

As stated on the post, having a very logical mind may interfere with the application of said theory, but sometimes you have to say "fuck it" and apply it without understanding it fully since life is not always logical.

No amount of theory will help you if you don't apply it and you also need to have the knowledge to be able to apply it.

Any question or confrontation against an idea should be made as an argument. Explaining why you think it's wrong, explaining how you would do it or how to fix it and how you came to that conclusion.

Contributors should begin writing about their experience and what outcomes they have achieved in their own life. After it has been apparent that that person has been fully swalllowed the pill, they should begin sharing more abstract theory information.

Everyone who comes here without intention of ideas discussion, just trolling should be banned.

We have come a long way but the journey is still ongoing.

load more comments (4 replies)