RadixJournal - The Dictatorship of the Normietariat

00:00:00.000 Um, anyway, it's, uh, nasty stuff. That being said, I think that Seth's manifesto is very well

00:00:15.940 written. He does not have a disorganized mind. You know, we've looked at manifestos of other

00:00:22.920 school shooters or the one who killed kids in a church or whatever. And there's no rhyme or

00:00:29.540 reason it just it resembles schizophrenia whether they're suffering from that or not is

00:00:34.700 i don't know but it's just this totally disorganized mind utterly contradictory

00:00:41.000 sort of meaningless shards from the internet thrown up there i think the buffalo shooter

00:00:47.560 also had a copy paste manifesto of just nonsense from 4chan thrown up into a pdf spit it out there

00:00:57.380 it is this is why i did it obviously the there's some sort of psych psychopathic rage that inspired

00:01:04.160 him uh the manifesto is just an excuse now i think that's probably going on with seth as well

00:01:11.840 he seems to be a uh deeply frustrated person he's not getting any sex uh he has many of the

00:01:23.100 complaints that incels have that being said to be fair I think he probably has an IQ

00:01:33.460 somewhere around 125 and I think he could do graduate level work and his manifesto was

00:01:41.740 well organized and was a genuine attempt at a contribution to knowledge

00:01:48.140 um i think it will go down as something similar to the unabombers manifesto actually

00:01:57.120 and he makes some interesting points i would describe him as a kind of

00:02:02.140 marxist conservative in a way he's a marxist in his analysis of history and class

00:02:09.200 but he's a conservative in the sense that he wants a gentler society and he wants a society

00:02:15.040 based on monogamy now a couple of people joked i saw chrome barracuda made this joke that he's the

00:02:21.260 the the andrew wilson inspired shooter i think this person could inspire andrew wilson andrew

00:02:29.280 wilson is unbearable and annoying uh seth hatfield is much more intelligent than andrew wilson and

00:02:38.880 was genuinely trying to concoct an ideology based on conservatism, not religious conservatism.

00:02:48.860 I think it's pretty clear he's an atheist, but conservatism, Marxian historical and economic

00:02:59.100 analysis, uh, revolutionary terror, uh, and, uh, some other things as well. It's actually

00:03:08.640 an interesting work. I mean, you know, I mean, I don't know what to say. You can't engage

00:03:16.860 in the genetic fallacy. Uh, Richard Wagner didn't kill anyone, but he was a complete

00:03:22.440 asshole, but he wrote some of the world's greatest music. Uh, you can enjoy his music 0.99

00:03:27.420 and appreciate his drama even if you absolutely hate him and i think the same thing could be said

00:03:35.220 about seth hatfield's ideological treatise uh regular guy does the combination strike you as

00:03:42.540 russian i'm sorry uh in terms of russian intelligence no no no just the the combination

00:03:49.880 of marxist you know uh analysis marxist conservative conservative you know my mind

00:03:56.720 but kind of you know what i'm talking about like just he mentions early on in his piece i hope this

00:04:03.500 is translated into other languages and he includes chinese the first language he hopes

00:04:07.700 it is translated into was russian actually so the language thing yeah he mentions like

00:04:15.160 major ones i i so like kind of blocks of languages he doesn't just like say danish

00:04:22.160 finnish um croatian hamagyar he like as if they're blocks to represent like large areas

00:04:30.100 of the world english north america europe russian ukraine russia belarus i think chinese the sino

00:04:37.820 world but also it's eerie because i kind of predicted well not the event but the worldview

00:04:47.880 because i've criticized marx not understanding gender and him wanting to abolish the family

00:04:54.900 comparing marriage to prostitution and a lot of communist countries actually abolished

00:05:01.800 prostitution while or on paper abolished it while fascist countries didn't and him not understanding

00:05:09.100 that you could if we reached a post-scarcity world and everyone's material needs were filled

00:05:16.640 you wouldn't get the hypergamy question answered like because sex is a resource and a good slash

00:05:26.640 service that people want and if you basically make you end monogamy by fulfilling everyone's

00:05:37.000 material conditions i mean we don't have a uh post-scarcity world and but we have a more abundant

00:05:44.820 world compared to the 19th century and we see the falling marriage rates in part due to women being

00:05:52.380 in the workforce and not needing to marry a guy to survive yeah and i think i've mentioned that

00:06:00.560 eventually marx this was a blind spot for marx and eventually people that are critical of

00:06:08.820 the feminist world would eventually maybe look to marx to analyze things it's interesting i mean

00:06:18.180 i think you could say if even if we reach communist utopia there would still be the 1.00

00:06:23.620 quest for status and there'd still be the quest for pussy and you sort of have to address that

00:06:29.920 none of that stuff is going to fall away uh even if we achieve post-scarcity communism or post-scarcity 0.65

00:06:39.100 capitalism but let's let's actually listen to this podcast version um of it i i think this will

00:06:49.360 it's just i think it's like 12 minutes and it i i've listened to this already it really summed

00:06:57.400 it up quite well i think it's right here yes so again um speechify will just create an ai podcast

00:07:05.400 Kind of amazing.

00:07:08.400 So it's just under 15 minutes.

00:07:12.220 Let's go here.

00:07:15.680 Oh, OK.

00:07:16.780 The feeling of profound loneliness and isolation among men in Western society has become a stark and undeniable reality.

00:07:24.560 Yet its true nature and solutions remain almost entirely hidden.

00:07:28.180 Today we're diving into Seth Hatfield's Manifesto of June 22nd, a provocative

00:07:34.180 document that unpacks this mysterious dread, arguing it's a direct consequence

00:07:38.800 of a societal shift he calls the hypergame state. Mia Hatfield starts by

00:07:44.260 grounding his argument in biology, specifically the concept of dimorphism.

00:07:48.340 Can you explain what he means by that and how it sets the stage for his main

00:07:52.420 thesis? Certainly, Finn. Hatfield posits that in nature and especially among

00:07:57.460 vertebrates like humans, dimorphism means males and females exhibit distinct physical

00:08:02.600 and behavioral characteristics. He stresses that the brain is a physical organ, so these

00:08:07.580 differences extend to mental processes and behavior. For humans, he sees these differences

00:08:12.960 as quite apparent, and he says they lead to what he calls the contradiction of the imperatives.

00:08:18.680 The contradiction of the imperatives? That sounds foundational. What exactly is this

00:08:23.700 contradiction and how does it manifest in human reproduction?

00:08:27.660 He argues it stems from biological realities of reproduction.

00:08:32.240 Males continuously produce sperm and can impregnate many females with little biological risk beyond

00:08:38.600 dispensing sperm. 0.80

00:08:40.760 Females however, ovulate monthly and endure a strenuous nine month pregnancy, birthing 0.89

00:08:46.140 only one healthy offspring at a time. 0.99

00:08:49.240 This makes the reproductive process vastly more taxing for women. 1.00

00:08:53.480 Therefore, the female biological imperative is to be highly selective, seeking the best possible genetic quality in a mate to ensure healthy offspring. 1.00

00:09:04.040 This is sort of the manosphere 101.

00:09:08.780 And I associate it with Roger Devlin's article on what is it?

00:09:15.180 The sexual revolution in power, I believe, is the title of it.

00:09:17.900 Sexual utopian power.

00:09:19.620 Sexual utopia power.

00:09:21.140 Yes.

00:09:21.460 and um he actually wrote that as an article originally for the Occidental Quarterly which

00:09:27.580 it's very interesting anyway which is a white nationalist uh journal might still be around

00:09:33.200 um but yes and and I'm sure other people have looked at it before Devlin did but yeah the

00:09:39.860 the concept is that meant sperm is cheap eggs are dear so men produce millions of sperm on a daily

00:09:47.660 basis. Women have a limited number, hundreds of eggs that they're going to produce over the course

00:09:53.520 of a lifetime. There's pregnancy, which is extremely taxing, whereas men could just run away 0.99

00:09:59.080 and leave responsibilities behind. So the male fantasy is Don Juan or James Bond. You just

00:10:06.860 roam the countryside or the world impregnating as many people as possible. The female fantasy 1.00

00:10:12.620 is being chosen by the prince so you have a limited amount of chances men are sort of

00:10:20.480 are selected inherently in a way by the amount of sperm that we produce we can just

00:10:27.260 toss the sperm around and see what happens women are inherently case elected and they thus want to 1.00

00:10:34.300 choose the best man that they can in in order to move up in the world you could say there's a status 1.00

00:10:41.020 component to it as well whereas men the status component is i have hundreds of women whereas the

00:10:48.400 female status component is the prince chose me he kissed me in a way and awoke me from my slumber

00:10:54.420 and uh so the fact that he understands this is very interesting again he's not just whining

00:11:03.640 about women. He actually has a theory to all this. Males, on the other hand, have a biological

00:11:11.800 imperative to reproduce with as many females as possible, with less regard for attractiveness,

00:11:17.900 because their risk is lower. This creates a glaring contradiction. Males seek to reproduce

00:11:24.160 with many, while females seek to reproduce with only a select, highly attractive few.

00:11:29.920 So if these biological imperatives are inherently contradictory, how did human

00:11:35.560 societies historically manage this tension? Was it always a struggle for common men to find intimacy?

00:11:41.440 Hadfield argues that early civilizations introduced regulations to ameliorate these

00:11:48.040 antagonistic dynamics, with monogamy being the foremost. Monogamy, defined as a social pair

00:11:54.400 care, caring for, and raising offspring, significantly improved the lives of the common males, those

00:12:00.320 of average physical ability and attractiveness.

00:12:03.580 Before monogamy in primitive hunter-gatherer societies, most males never reproduced.

00:12:09.460 Monogamy provided secure access to intimacy and romantic love for the majority, stabilizing

00:12:14.500 society and allowing for its advancement.

00:12:17.360 He references a 2015 genome research paper by Carmen et al, showing that 8,000 years

00:12:23.080 ago, the female to male ratio of genetic diversity was highly skewed, suggesting widespread male

00:12:29.780 reproductive failure, which shifted once monogamy became established.

00:12:34.240 It's a powerful claim that monogamy.

00:12:36.500 This just reminds me of things I was talking about, whether it was last week, the week

00:12:41.080 before with the Andrew Wilson situation, is that, I mean, even even with the institution

00:12:48.520 of monogamy, it's still widely skewed.

00:12:51.380 And these interesting books like The Sun Also Rises or Farewell to Alms and things like this are talking about the fact that there was downward mobility throughout the Middle Ages into the modern period.

00:13:10.700 and downward mobility sounds bad but what that is is that upper people who are aristocratic

00:13:18.140 wealthier just simply more successful are outbreeding peasants and they're they're the

00:13:26.180 third or fourth son is having to go down in the social ladder so the second son might become a

00:13:32.400 priest the third son might become a shopkeeper the first son with primogeniture inherits the

00:13:37.060 state so there's like a genocide of sorts using that term a little bit ironically or advisedly but

00:13:45.440 where the top layers of society were out breeding the bottom layers so we haven't

00:13:52.020 really gotten away fundamentally from a situation of you know elk ramming with antlers ramming

00:14:02.600 each other to prove who is most fit and powerful and manly in the elk world and aggressive and

00:14:10.260 bold. We're still in that world where the high status outbreed the low status throughout time.

00:14:16.500 Now, that changed fundamentally. But if you think about prehistory, there was just a radical

00:14:25.260 asymmetry in terms of breeding so we have 50 50 more or less one man for every woman one woman

00:14:35.300 for every man but that doesn't mean that every man and every woman is going to reproduce

00:14:40.960 you you actually had one man reproducing with multiple women and to monogamy moderated that

00:14:49.440 And then I think it got really seriously moderated in the 20th century, the mid 20th century.

00:14:56.880 Monogamy was essential for civilization itself and primarily benefited common men.

00:15:02.360 But Hatfield asserts that this changed dramatically.

00:15:05.720 What does he identify as the driving force behind the decline of monogamy in Western society?

00:15:11.280 He attributes it directly to the rise of high capitalism, which he defines as capitalism enhanced by technological industry,

00:15:18.800 serving the bourgeois class. Hatfield claims capitalism was never designed for the common man,

00:15:24.880 but for the profit of a privileged male clique. After the world wars, with communism as a threat

00:15:30.620 and the western bourgeois class triumphing, they restructured society to increase profit and power. 0.70

00:15:36.900 This meant women, who were largely cut off from bourgeois exploitation while at home,

00:15:41.820 were encouraged into the workforce. Feminism, he suggests, was allowed to flourish and promoted,

00:15:47.500 created, enabling women to earn salaries and consume, which greatly benefited bourgeois 0.71

00:15:52.560 industries. This economic autonomy for women, combined with what he calls the liberal philosophy

00:15:58.700 of the bourgeois class, led to the decline of monogamy. 0.90

00:16:02.120 So, if I'm understanding this correctly, Hatfield sees feminism and women entering 0.99

00:16:07.640 the workforce not as a step toward equality, but as a calculated move by the bourgeois 0.95

00:16:12.920 class to expand their markets and exploit a new labor pool, inadvertently leading to

00:16:18.240 this hypergamy state. That's a very cynical interpretation. He must believe liberalism's

00:16:24.100 core tenets are fundamentally flawed.

00:16:26.600 Precisely. He states that liberalism and capitalism operate on three blatantly and demonstrably

00:16:33.280 false assumptions. First, that all humans are created equal. He argues this makes people

00:16:39.280 blame individual failings instead of systemic issues, protecting the bourgeois. Second,

00:16:45.060 that all humans are basically good and desire competition. He counters that humans are complex

00:16:50.500 animals capable of both good and bad, and cooperation is as natural as competition.

00:16:56.520 He believes this assumption justifies unchecked bourgeois freedom and marginalizes those unwilling

00:17:01.840 to compete. Third, that all humans are rational-minded and fully autonomous. This, he says, is false.

00:17:09.160 pain, starvation, or social isolation are not chosen. These assumptions give the illusion

00:17:14.540 that the bourgeois achieved their status through merit, not luck, and dismiss societal problems

00:17:19.800 as trivial personal failures.

00:17:21.800 If these assumptions are so flawed and society was restructured for bourgeois profit, what

00:17:27.120 does this hypergamy state look like in practice for different groups? Hatfield divides society

00:17:32.080 into three sociobiological classes, favored males, females, and common males.

00:17:38.240 He paints a vivid and often bleak picture.

00:17:41.400 For favored males, those sexually desired by females due to physical attractiveness 0.87

00:17:46.140 like height, handsome features, and often Caucasian appearance, life is one of abundant

00:17:51.860 intimacy from birth.

00:17:53.580 They experience blissful childhoods and exciting adolescent existences with little effort.

00:17:59.840 Hatfield says this excessive triumph can lead to vanity, narcissism, and even psychopathy,

00:18:06.200 as intimacy becomes meaningless. He says these men are often wealthy and can maintain

00:18:11.520 a revolving plethora of women, cheating without consequence due to their attractiveness.

00:18:16.720 So, privileged and prone to degeneracy. What about females in this hypergamy state? 1.00

00:18:22.480 You mentioned earlier that he views their position as better than common males, but

00:18:26.280 not necessarily...

00:18:27.280 He hates Chad, but he has a sort of materialist understanding of Chad's psychology.

00:18:33.240 males but not necessarily ideal indeed female children are cherished lauded

00:18:39.420 encouraged leading to more sociable contented motivated and confident

00:18:44.400 adolescences than common male children most females achieve intimacy in 0.94

00:18:49.120 abundance not just the most attractive this is because dating apps give them 0.97

00:18:53.620 constant access to favored males globally and without legal or financial

00:18:58.440 constraints of monogamy they simply copulate as they please with these

00:19:02.560 attractive men. However, Hatfield argues this isn't all blissful. Many women face

00:19:08.440 terrible ordeals and mental health problems due to the general social chaos.

00:19:13.180 They endure odious harassment from unwanted common males, but also brutal,

00:19:18.940 perverted, and excessively lustful treatment from some favored male

00:19:23.200 partners. He cites instances of trafficking and a sinister and brutish

00:19:28.280 sexual culture in high schools, where girls are often coerced into sexual acts by older,

00:19:34.520 dominant males. Despite these traumas, he claims women far rather endure the present

00:19:40.100 conditions than past monogamous systems because it grants them access to highly attractive

00:19:45.320 males, fulfilling their biological imperative, even if it means abuse. He asserts women will 0.99

00:19:51.500 tolerate heinous abuse from a tall and good-looking slob over a traditional monogamous life with

00:19:57.820 a common male you can see some of the resentment brewing in there it's like he's so bad for you 0.79

00:20:04.660 stacy why don't you find a good solid guy like me someone who will really appreciate you and

00:20:12.220 wants to be monogamous it's very strong he does this thing where it's like oh he's handsome and 0.98

00:20:20.240 a slob it's like those things actually don't go together in fact yes but no i think i think 0.96

00:20:27.400 it's it should be telling that like uh you know like a woman like many women women would rather 0.84

00:20:35.240 be with uh this like handsome guy who you who you think shouldn't be attractive because of

00:20:41.020 these uh these characteristics he has that they would actually choose him over you should be

00:20:46.520 telling yeah to me it's that he at the same time kind of makes hypergamy a feature of tribal

00:20:56.820 society but also of modern european society and yes it's it's like and also the description the

00:21:06.360 entire description of enduring harassment so that you could have access to better value males in my

00:21:13.980 opinion it might as well apply to any like saudi arabian harem which is definitely not capitalist

00:21:20.260 not western and you know like these sort of capitalist and even western in the worst way

00:21:27.560 yeah i mean it's like marx had a a kind of conservative servitism to him in the sense that

00:21:35.780 there was a primitive communism that he imagined you know far back in prehistory and we will

00:21:41.580 we can't go back but we can sort of recapture the spirit of that in techno technological communism

00:21:49.280 and this guy looks back to agriculture as the great step forward so we used to have evil

00:21:59.520 hunter-gatherers where chad just ruled the roost and then we had agriculture and settlement where

00:22:06.280 we demanded monogamy we're all long housed i guess he's a long house enjoyer is he not to

00:22:13.760 some degree and possibly drunk if we're to believe my theory yes that's true we're dionysian as well

00:22:19.880 but um but so he wants to go back to settlement and then he thinks socialism is like settlement

00:22:28.520 agriculture so communism has brought us back to hunter-gatherer systems where chad gets all the

00:22:36.000 stacy's and he wants us to go back to that wonderful sort of dawn of civilization or dawn

00:22:44.000 of history which is settlement and agriculture and the fertile crescent it's very interesting

00:22:48.700 um i again i i you know i granted this guy is a vile murderer but i have so much more respect for

00:22:59.620 him than i do with for andrew wilson andrew wilson wishes he could write something like this

00:23:07.020 or have these ideas as a background in his debates instead he's just this annoying person

00:23:14.140 but seth despite being a terrorist actually is contributing to knowledge in his way

00:23:22.700 and i it's kind of tragic that he didn't publish this without murdering innocent people

00:23:31.880 but there you go more and frankly what he's certainly more thoughtful and like a better

00:23:39.880 better thinker and essayist than andrew wilson could ever be yes same time this whole like 0.83

00:23:46.400 we should democratize pussy for like the bottom 20 is still just like 0.62

00:23:51.760 oh yeah it's terrible but at least it's very well expressed yeah i i i am better than andrew does 0.99

00:23:59.140 100 i am a nietzschean i think you have to struggle for the pussy um andrew wilson would 0.99

00:24:07.280 never describe himself as this but he is a pussy socialist so everyone should get pussy this uh 1.00

00:24:16.380 Seth probably would 1.00

00:24:19.400 describe himself as a pussy 1.00

00:24:21.100 communist 1.00

00:24:22.040 I mean and it gets

00:24:25.080 you'll see

00:24:25.920 once he comes to his conclusion

00:24:28.980 it is just outright

00:24:31.000 mandatory monogamy

00:24:33.580 government enforced

00:24:35.320 GFs

00:24:36.480 and he's fighting 1.00

00:24:38.640 vagina capitalism 0.71

00:24:40.420 and I think that's what is more honest 0.99

00:24:43.000 because if Andrew Wilson was framing 0.56

00:24:45.200 what he was fighting against as vagina capitalism he would have been more fair

00:24:51.660 but he doesn't define it as capital he thinks that socialist i mean don't you think seth is

00:24:59.260 more accurate though i mean in the sense of like i mean it's complicated but

00:25:05.880 like there is an aspect of the seth is getting at something true about capitalism which is that

00:25:17.340 it is a sort of dog eat dog world and life has always been hard but being a peasant in the 1.00

00:25:26.740 middle ages you're sort of given pussy or it's assumed god wants you to have pussy 0.99

00:25:32.160 uh and you just sort of have it and live out your life and you don't have to be in direct 0.99

00:25:38.760 competition with your neighbors and capitalism has brought that about and i i think seth is

00:25:45.880 getting at this now i would just add that capitalism have higher fertility rates than

00:25:54.500 socialist and post-communist countries uh so he's sort of fallen into the trap of like

00:26:01.800 glorifying russia even though russia has much higher uh you know alcohol abuse child abuse 0.69

00:26:09.660 divorce abortion whatever social indicator you want then the evil you know pussified 0.59

00:26:17.280 hypergamy state that is the west so he's sort of wrong empirically but i think he's getting at

00:26:27.120 something philosophically to be could you give him credit this can't be used to explain fertility

00:26:33.020 certainly because well as you pointed out and also just it's falling globally in different

00:26:38.640 societies so you can't tie that to being european or capitalist or anything but what he is pointing

00:26:45.360 to and i think that's why i also said that andrew wilson if he framed it as capitalist uh he would

00:26:50.740 have been more honest with himself it is ultimately a competition for the better male the better

00:26:56.040 product the better offer it is as capitalist as it gets and if you view it if this rudimentary

00:27:02.220 then of course well if you're a communist then you should fight against it and Andrew Wilson

00:27:07.320 just refuses to make that step yes because he wants I mean this is what what just drove me up

00:27:15.140 a tree listening to him talk on trigonometry where he was like they're not marrying us are they they're

00:27:22.520 not marrying us and yet i can get drafted into the army or something like he wants the condition 0.97

00:27:29.380 for him to defend the homeland or be a warrior is government mandated pussy he wants socialism 0.97

00:27:39.780 period he wants a world in which whether it's god or the government or the church or whatever 0.97

00:27:48.800 is mandating stay-at-home moms for him and otherwise he refuses to fight

00:27:57.540 he is a socialist people who i mean this guy seth is more honest in the sense that

00:28:08.000 he direct he this is almost this weird thing jf pointed this out it's like everything that i was

00:28:13.940 talking about seth like is explicit like explicitly is what i was talking about the

00:28:21.840 manosphere is a socialist movement on behalf of what he calls the common man or which or what you

00:28:29.960 could uncharitably call low status males that's what it is and seth is honest about it should be

00:28:39.340 given kudos for that.

00:28:41.860 ...claim that women would willingly choose potential abuse for access to favored males.

00:28:47.500 Where does this leave the common male, the majority you mentioned, in this hypergamy state?

00:28:52.540 Hatfield describes their situation as the icy, lowermost sphere of the hypergamous inferno,

00:28:58.700 a realm of grueling deprivation and ever-surging woe. They are utterly dispossessed of any steady

00:29:05.760 access to intimacy he presents forum posts from men describing profound loneliness depression and

00:29:12.560 feelings of worthlessness one man details his fiance's lack of intimacy with him despite his

00:29:18.800 efforts while she actively sought sex with other men in the past other men warn him not to marry

00:29:25.200 sharing their own dead bedroom experiences where they are exploited for resources while being

00:29:30.640 sexually starved. Another post highlights a man's lifelong struggle with bull. I earned a wage and

00:29:36.480 I still can't get pussy. Okay. And rejection, feeling he is nothing but an inexperienced and 1.00

00:29:42.320 blank husk that no one wants, despite improving himself by working out, pursuing education and

00:29:48.640 acquiring wealth. These are incredibly raw and painful accounts. Hatfield's interpretation is

00:29:54.880 that these men's efforts to improve themselves are futile because their attractiveness,

00:29:59.600 specifically height and facial features, are immutable.

00:30:03.420 He goes on to say that the dispossessed are...

00:30:05.660 You see the clav, clavicular that is, is coming from this world.

00:30:10.640 It's like at the end of the day, it's about facial structure, height, etc.

00:30:15.980 That's all it is. It's not even money.

00:30:19.020 And if you can now change those things through steroids, plastic surgery, 1.00

00:30:26.360 uh leg lengthening uh techniques etc bone smashing that you can just get women it's like 0.99

00:30:34.640 clav is is is the ubermensch from the incel abyss but that's often yeah go ahead it goes to show 0.97

00:30:45.660 how little they understand like female psychology it's like yes being being like handsome or 0.64

00:30:52.120 attractive or having good facial symmetry like we'll we'll like get you in the door but it's 0.96

00:30:57.860 not going to be like what like what makes a woman want to like repeatedly have sex with you

00:31:03.480 i think it is the alpha like i i this is where i agree with some of the like basic notions of

00:31:11.980 the manosphere i do think that it's an alpha that the women want and you can see this i mean this is

00:31:21.280 a sort of marginal or extreme example but it's a real thing where women are writing letters to

00:31:29.740 serial killers and they're just so sexy they're just turned on by they want to save them or

00:31:36.380 maybe they're attracted to it maybe maybe they're masochistically attracted i don't know what it is

00:31:41.820 but the serial killer is an alpha like in some horrible way but the way he wants to save stacy

00:31:50.660 like the guy that she wants like kind of just like wraps his hands around her throat and like

00:31:55.800 pushes her against the wall and takes her yes like yeah like get that part he's like i would 0.99

00:32:02.920 never do that i value you as a woman right exactly which is why you're always going to be the bottom

00:32:08.160 of the totem pole begging for scraps but even the alpha like i'm just thinking of this bar near here 0.98

00:32:16.600 like the Blue Moon, even the guy who like is the lead singer in a cover band at the Blue Moon

00:32:26.340 Saloon in Kalispell is a kind of alpha in his own way. And he no doubt gets laid after every

00:32:37.680 performance you know you can be a serial killer you can be a like has-been cover band artist

00:32:47.280 you can be a multi-millionaire billionaire entrepreneur you can be a poet who's

00:32:57.560 misunderstood by society all you have to do is stand outside of the normie and it's hard to do

00:33:05.640 that and again seth wants to like normify the world he wants to act on behalf of the common

00:33:13.960 men there will be no more alphas dictatorship of the normitariat exactly literally yes that's a

00:33:23.780 good title dictatorship of the normitariat this is what he wants and he goes to marx to find his

00:33:29.020 analysis which is fascinating blamed for their situation but he sees this as a deliberate

00:33:34.580 Thank you.

RadixJournal - June 24, 2026

The Dictatorship of the Normietariat

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript