Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Serious Do you think economic collapse/Poverty/anarchy/WWIII will relieve Incels' problems?

title

  • yes

    Votes: 27 57.4%
  • no (tell the reasons)

    Votes: 20 42.6%

  • Total voters
    47
Black Soul

Black Soul

Incel suicide worldwide
★★
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Posts
4,709
I think the modern prosperity state is too bad and on the wrong track because >>60% of benefits are going to women and rises their lives value, while << 40% remained for men and they lost more than they gained although for thousands years ago women have a little value and the majority of them just existed for serve men well.

Now femoids have no time or need for us, they have "career life", "passion to achieve" and "chadsex". they have been empowered, protected and fed ego by cucks and bluepill simps.
all that leads us to a dark future where:
"the lack of poor women means their prices go up, because they can afford to price themselves higher" as blkpillpress said in a post
That's exactly why I'm wealthmaxxing

If you retire early and move to a country with a low cost of living, then you can have sex multiple times a week and it would probably cost you less than it does the average guy to be in a relationship (depends on where you live though)

Don't expect to live in new york and be able to do that

I think incels need to take advantage of the fact that poor countries exist while they still do exist lol

One day, all countries will be first world, there won't be any women that will have to fuck an incel landlord because they can't pay rent, or fuck an incel John because they have to prostitute themselves to survive

We were born in a shitty era, but there are still some loopholes and exploits, if you think we have it bad, imagine how bad it will be for the incels who have to struggle to get laid even whilst being rich, and getting laid is breaking their wallets too, because the lack of poor women means their prices go up, because they can afford to price themselves higher
Note: I doubt this statement is correct "One day, all countries will be first world", but I agree with general context.
tbh the vast majority of humans are scum and trash who consume the resources of the planet and not eligible to use the cultural and scientific heritage and contemporary technology imo. therefore, I believe in the collapse of system to reset it.
 
I NEED WW3 NOW
 
Do you mean accelerationism? It would help but it can't do everything by himself, we need an organized response
 
A new instability will provide multiple opportunities for ascension.

Nomeansyesmaxxing
Chad genocide/thinning out the competition

Also less people means a less superficial more meaningful people and better opportunities to form meaningful connections. Hypergamy was far less rampant in earlier times for a multitude of reasons.
 
Last edited:
If covid and lockdowns have been any indication then yes i think it will help as far as coping. Having all this shit that punishes extraverts have been a relief for outcasts like me
 
I would say yes. In an economic collapse/Mad Max world, female's stratospheric levels hypergamy we're seeing now would come crashing back down to Earth. If you could use a gun and/or provide resources, you would not be incel.
 
Last edited:
Note: I doubt this statement is correct "One day, all countries will be first world", but I agree with general context.

Lol why do you doubt this?

Do you think 100,000 years from now people in Africa will still be dying of starvation?

I just don't see it, all countries are getting better and better, even the extremely poor ones are getting better, just at a very slow rate, on a large enough time scale, its inevitable that all countries will reach first world status

Of course the ones that were already first world will be more advanced, but the poor ones will obviously one day be where the rich ones are right now, and that's good enough conditions to be considered "first world"

Even if the rich ones have flying cars they'd still be first world, and the problem I talked about would still be apparent, there'd be no more "poor women" to exploit, people would be poor only "relatively", when compared to those in more advanced countries, but they would not be "actually poor" to the point in which the women prostitute themselves as a norm (like in places like Brazil and Thailand)
 
Lol why do you doubt this?

Do you think 100,000 years from now people in Africa will still be dying of starvation?

I just don't see it, all countries are getting better and better, even the extremely poor ones are getting better, just at a very slow rate, on a large enough time scale, its inevitable that all countries will reach first world status

Of course the ones that were already first world will be more advanced, but the poor ones will obviously one day be where the rich ones are right now, and that's good enough conditions to be considered "first world"

Even if the rich ones have flying cars they'd still be first world, and the problem I talked about would still be apparent, there'd be no more "poor women" to exploit, people would be poor only "relatively", when compared to those in more advanced countries, but they would not be "actually poor" to the point in which the women prostitute themselves as a norm (like in places like Brazil and Thailand)
There are not enough energy and resources on planet earth to support a global American/Western standard of consumption. For that to be possible, we'd need about 3-4 more earths. We're never going to live in a Jetsons fantasy because the resources and energy are not there. Our future is one of less technology, not more. I personally believe the world will end up going "medieval."
 
man, if you read the post well you will get it :feelsseriously:
I read it, it's the same shit that gets posted thousands of times every day. The system will never reset itself, and if it does chads and foids would still keep their top spot. You're making the same mistake everyone else makes: thinking that it's males vs females when it's actually ugly males vs everyone else.

Without a true response nothing will ever change, stop coping
 
There are not enough energy and resources on planet earth to support a global American/Western standard of consumption. For that to be possible, we'd need about 3-4 more earths. We're never going to live in a Jetsons fantasy because the resources and energy are not there. Our future is one of less technology, not more. I personally believe the world will end up going "medieval."

I think you are underestimating humans and assuming they won't find a solution, this reminds me of something I learned about in Geography class.

There were these two Economists, Thomas Malthus and Ester Boserup.

Here's he gist of it

At the time (which is very important to note, AT THAT TIME IN HISTORY) Thomas noticed that humans produced food at an arithmetic rate, but reproduced at an exponential rate, from that he deduced that it was inevitable that pretty soon the country would run out of food and people would die out and reduce the population back to regular levels.

He could not conceive of the advancements in agricultural technology and techniques, which rendered his prediction moot, his prediction did not come to pass, in fact we reproduced more and more and still had food.

Ester Boserup theorized the opposite, her argument was that it was those very pressures that push humans to advance and innovate, so we develop new technologies to adapt to changing times. I think her theory is the most accurate one, especially when you look at human history.

Before the "neolithic revolution" humans didn't even farm and we were stuck doing "hunting and gathering" which was an inefficient means of acquiring food.

You think there wasn't a guy then saying - "We'll never have communities with a population larger than X amount of people because you could never house more than X people and so many die in hunting, and from disease, etc".

Today there are places where millions of people live.

I believe that just with the problem you are describing now, humans will do the same thing, we'll discover some new energy source and it will change the way we do everything and we'll adapt and move forward as a species.

There are so many instances in history where people have thought as you did, people made fun of the wright brothers who were trying to fly and now we have planes so ridiculously huge soaring through the sky and to all of us alive today ITS NORMAL.

People probably made fun of anyone thinking about going to space, and today launching a rocket into space for the purposes of exploration IS NORMAL, heck humans have been to space.

What you are saying is just another repeat of all the "nay sayers" of the past - "humans will never get past this hurdle".

I even think one day humans will defeat death itself, and people will only die if they are killed, aging will be done away with, of course in that point in history we'll be populating other planets.
 
I think you are underestimating humans and assuming they won't find a solution, this reminds me of something I learned about in Geography class.

There were these two Economists, Thomas Malthus and Ester Boserup.

Here's he gist of it

At the time (which is very important to note, AT THAT TIME IN HISTORY) Thomas noticed that humans produced food at an arithmetic rate, but reproduced at an exponential rate, from that he deduced that it was inevitable that pretty soon the country would run out of food and people would die out and reduce the population back to regular levels.

He could not conceive of the advancements in agricultural technology and techniques, which rendered his prediction moot, his prediction did not come to pass, in fact we reproduced more and more and still had food.

Ester Boserup theorized the opposite, her argument was that it was those very pressures that push humans to advance and innovate, so we develop new technologies to adapt to changing times. I think her theory is the most accurate one, especially when you look at human history.

Before the "neolithic revolution" humans didn't even farm and we were stuck doing "hunting and gathering" which was an inefficient means of acquiring food.

You think there wasn't a guy then saying - "We'll never have communities with a population larger than X amount of people because you could never house more than X people and so many die in hunting, and from disease, etc".

Today there are places where millions of people live.

I believe that just with the problem you are describing now, humans will do the same thing, we'll discover some new energy source and it will change the way we do everything and we'll adapt and move forward as a species.

There are so many instances in history where people have thought as you did, people made fun of the wright brothers who were trying to fly and now we have planes so ridiculously huge soaring through the sky and to all of us alive today ITS NORMAL.

People probably made fun of anyone thinking about going to space, and today launching a rocket into space for the purposes of exploration IS NORMAL, heck humans have been to space.

What you are saying is just another repeat of all the "nay sayers" of the past - "humans will never get past this hurdle".

I even think one day humans will defeat death itself, and people will only die if they are killed, aging will be done away with, of course in that point in history we'll be populating other planets.
This is just blind 'progress' superstition. Men like Malthus were fundamentally right. We do not have infinite tracts of fertile farmland, endless wells of cheap oil, and bottomless pits to throw our trash in. There has never been a time in natural history were a species has experienced a population boom without a corresponding population crash, and we're long overdue for that crash. The only reason there can be 8 billion people in the world is because of oil. What other energy source can replace that? Do you think benevolent aliens will come down and supply us with an unlimited, free energy source? The time for us to find this miracle energy source was several decades ago, not now.
 
What other energy source can replace that?
We don't know yet, you're the one assuming nobody will discover it, just like the people who assumed humans would never be able to traverse the skies

Do you think benevolent aliens will come down and supply us with an unlimited, free energy source? The time for us to find this miracle energy source was several decades ago, not now.
JFL, so you decide for the species when discoveries should be made, there's no such thing as a time when specific discovery "should" have been made

There was a time when humans thought that flies, frogs, etc spawned out of swamps and marshes :feelskek: (No joke, look it up)

We didn't even know about microbial life so we didn't understand what viruses or diseases were yet, so sanitation practices were poor

To the point where simply washing your fucking hands was considered a new advancement in human knowledge, a guy is literally celebrated for "pioneering" simple "hand hygiene" (Ignaz Semmelweis) and that's something that normal for either of us

In the same way that human knowledge was in its infancy then with respect to hygiene, diseases, viruses, etc. Try and conceive that our knowledge is also in its infancy for other things, and in the future there will be people thinking "well of course you get energy this way" in the same way we look back and find it funny that people didn't know to wash their hands, or that people thought insects and animals spawned from marshes and swamps, or that burying rotting corspes in a deep hole prevented stopped the spread of diseases and sickness lol.
 
Last edited:
Lol as if, get real. Human nature will remain constant.
 
We don't know yet, you're the one assuming nobody will discover it, just like the people who assumed humans would never be able to traverse the skies


JFL, so you decide for the species when discoveries should be made, there's no such thing as a time when specific discovery "should" have been made

There was a time when humans thought that flies, frogs, etc spawned out of swamps and marshes :feelskek: (No joke, look it up)

We didn't even know about microbial life so we didn't understand what viruses or diseases were yet, so sanitation practices were poor

The the point where simply washing your fucking hands was considered a new advancement in human knowledge, a guy is literally celebrated for "pioneering" simple "hand hygiene" (Ignaz Semmelweis) and that's something that normal for either of us

In the same way that human knowledge was in its infancy then with respect to hygiene, diseases, viruses, etc. Try and conceive that our knowledge is also in its infancy for other things, and in the future there will be people thinking "well of course you get energy this way" in the same way we look back and find it funny that people didn't know to wash their hands, or that people thought insects and animals spawned from marshes and swamps, or that burying rotting corspes in a deep hole prevented stopped the spread of diseases and sickness lol.
The reason I say that we should have discovered a new energy source decades ago is because it's not only about the energy source, it's about the entire infrastructure for it. It would take decades of time to convert all of our infrastructure to accommodate a new energy source. For example, let's say we find a way to use hydrogen as a cheap and efficient energy source. You cannot store hydrogen in any old container, because it leaks out extremely easily. There is no substitute for oil. No other energy source we have available to us is so dense, convenient, transportable, and versatile. And the oil is depleting, the resources are depleting. Do you know why there's been an exponential increase in global debt levels over the decades? It's to offset the realities of energy and resource depletion. This blind faith in endless technological progress will make the unavoidable collapse all the more tramautic.
 
It would take decades of time to convert all of our infrastructure to accommodate a new energy source.

So, then that's what humans will do, how many people do you think will die in a few decades if we end up in a desperate situation?

Its not like 8 billion of us will just die because of this problem, the species will survive anyways
 
The system will never reset itself, and if it does chads and foids would still keep their top spot. You're making the same mistake everyone else makes: thinking that it's males vs females when it's actually ugly males vs everyone else.

Without a true response nothing will ever change, stop coping

Lol as if, get real. Human nature will remain constant.
 
Do you think 100,000 years from now people in Africa will still be dying of starvation?

I just don't see it, all countries are getting better and better, even the extremely poor ones are getting better, just at a very slow rate, on a large enough time scale, its inevitable that all countries will reach first world status
"exponential growth fallacy" The idea that economic growth can continue forever on a finite planet is the unifying faith of industrial civilization. for example, in 1969, man landed on the moon. Extrapolating exponential growth from there one would expect huge lunar bases and manned missions to distant planets. Instead, exploration stalled or even regressed after that.
(world population and the United States's oil production both appeared to be rising exponentially, but both have leveled off in the end). nothing in nature follows a pure exponential
you just espoused the American dream creed
the poor ones will obviously one day be where the rich ones are right now
giga cope The poor have always existed in any place, time and economic system. Can you tell me why billions of people deserve be rich? these is obviously impossible.
The system will never reset itself
What a statement that goes against nature?! our system today is unnatural and will collapse this is the clear fact. If we read the human history we can confirm that, there were empires and kingdoms which appeared and disappeared, Cities full of life that were burned to ashes so current empires will have their order.
thus, a lot of global ruling powers will lose the game and leave gaps, incels (A rising global power with a strong ideology) sure can use from those chances.


@your personality
 
Last edited:
"exponential growth fallacy" The idea that economic growth can continue forever on a finite planet is the unifying faith of industrial civilization. for example, in 1969, man landed on the moon. Extrapolating exponential growth from there one would expect huge lunar bases and manned missions to distant planets. Instead, exploration stalled or even regressed after that.
(world population and the United States's oil production both appeared to be rising exponentially, but both have leveled off in the end). nothing in nature follows a pure exponential
Now with Biden as president the US is moving away from oil extraction and more toward renewable energy development compared to Trump's term. How do you think peak oil will play out this decade now?
Also wondering @PPEcel
What a statement that goes against nature?! our system today is unnatural and will collapse this is the clear fact. If we read the human history we can confirm that, there were empires and kingdoms which appeared and disappeared, Cities full of life that were burned to ashes so current empires will have their order.
thus, a lot of global ruling powers will lose the game and leave gaps, incels (A rising global power with a strong ideology) sure can use from those chances.
@your personality
Remember what @mylifeistrash said about coronavirus and how nothing was going to change for the better, only get worse. And if anything he was right then and there is no reason to expect any change is ever for the better as far as incels are concerned.
 
Last edited:
The poor have always existed in any place, time and economic system. Can you tell me why billions of people deserve be rich? these is obviously impossible.

1. They'll be "rich" relative to the past state of their country, I don't mean everybody will all be rich as in having a lot of money

2. There's no such thing as "deserve", nobody deserves anything so trying to argue what makes someone deserve something is pointless

What did you do to deserve not being born blind like some other humans?

Nothing........ exactly

Its illogical to believe that the world is unfair and chance is involved and ALSO believe in the concept of "deserving"

Nobody needs to rationalize why billions need to be rich, if they can make it happen (very unlikely), then they can do it if they want
 
How do you think peak oil will play out this decade now?
when the oil end or there is no hope
there is no reason to expect any change is ever for the better
there was a small positive change in coronavirus epidemic many incels touched it

nobody deserves anything
A strange statement that appears as subjective and uncritical
What did you do to deserve not being born blind like some other humans?

Nothing........ exactly
It's similar to
What did you do to deserve not being born anomalous like some other anomalies?

Nothing........ exactly
the standard is being born normal (can see)
being rich is anomalous
{What did you do to deserve not being rich like some other humans?

Nothing........ exactly}
Its illogical to believe that the world is unfair
JFL 99% of people(including incels) usually believe that the world is unfair and it's legit saying.
 
1612195886567

:soy: :soy:
the major users of the forum are incels without hate, inklers:soy:
@FullTimeLoser @<human @PoodankMcGee @Extra-Samsaric
 
JFL 99% of people(including incels) usually believe that the world is unfair and it's legit saying.
Are you fucking retarded, why did you cut off the quote?
Its illogical to believe that the world is unfair and chance is involved and ALSO believe in the concept of "deserving"

Its illogical to believe BOTH things, that was clearly my point, you are just being disingenuous
 
As long as the chance of ascension isn't 0% it's an improvement
 
Are you fucking retarded, why did you cut off the quote?


Its illogical to believe BOTH things, that was clearly my point, you are just being disingenuous
I genuinely didn't get what you meant tbh, what about the other points? did I misunderstand you completely?
 
yeah war is nice. you die or you rape loli. both outcomes are ideal. the longer society goes without war the more cucked it becomes
 
yeah war is nice. you die or you rape loli. both outcomes are ideal. the longer society goes without war the more cucked it becomes
I don't mean to fight by ourselves but It is more like watching our enemies fight each others, then we collect the booty when they finish.
As long as the chance of ascension isn't 0% it's an improvement
the chance of ascension never has been 0% for anyone also It depends on your definition to "ascension".
 
Now with Biden as president the US is moving away from oil extraction and more toward renewable energy development compared to Trump's term. How do you think peak oil will play out this decade now?
Also wondering @PPEcel

Remember what @mylifeistrash said about coronavirus and how nothing was going to change for the better, only get worse. And if anything he was right then and there is no reason to expect any change is ever for the better as far as incels are concerned.
Exactly, the long-term outlook will disadvantage us.

2020 was a pretty badass year for most of us but it will only go downhill
 
Exactly, the long-term outlook will disadvantage us.

2020 was a pretty badass year for most of us but it will only go downhill
True but how do you think peak oil is going to proceed now that Biden is in office? That's more about what I was tagging you about ngl.
It seemed like it could be cataclysmic on that front if Trump was going to have another 4 years because he was very much for continual extraction of fossil fuels and looked down on renewable energy. Probably had no plan on how to deal with peak oil unless when one of his family advisories discussed it with him tbh
@JegErSkribent
 
Last edited:
True but how do you think peak oil is going to proceed now that Biden is in office? That's more about what I was tagging you about ngl.
It seemed like it could be cataclysmic on that front if Trump was going to have another 4 years because he was very much for continual extraction of fossil fuels and looked down on renewable energy. Probably had no plan on how to deal with peak oil unless when of his family advisories discussed it with him tbh
@JegErSkribent
I don't know enough about it to comment, all I know it's that it's going to happen sometime in the next decade or two.
 
Yes, because the cucked government needs to collapse so we can fuck our looksmatches easier, and not get cucked by laws, faggot cops, or taxes.
 
Lol why do you doubt this?

Do you think 100,000 years from now people in Africa will still be dying of starvation?

I just don't see it, all countries are getting better and better, even the extremely poor ones are getting better, just at a very slow rate, on a large enough time scale, its inevitable that all countries will reach first world status

Of course the ones that were already first world will be more advanced, but the poor ones will obviously one day be where the rich ones are right now, and that's good enough conditions to be considered "first world"

Even if the rich ones have flying cars they'd still be first world, and the problem I talked about would still be apparent, there'd be no more "poor women" to exploit, people would be poor only "relatively", when compared to those in more advanced countries, but they would not be "actually poor" to the point in which the women prostitute themselves as a norm (like in places like Brazil and Thailand)
The only way nigger countries will ever achieve first world status is when the chinks completely take over Africa and turn the entire nigger population into blasians.
There are not enough energy and resources on planet earth to support a global American/Western standard of consumption. For that to be possible, we'd need about 3-4 more earths. We're never going to live in a Jetsons fantasy because the resources and energy are not there. Our future is one of less technology, not more. I personally believe the world will end up going "medieval."
This. The jew's end game is to turn the entire world into some modern version of feudalism.
 
Even if the rich ones have flying cars they'd still be first world, and the problem I talked about would still be apparent, there'd be no more "poor women" to exploit, people would be poor only "relatively", when compared to those in more advanced countries, but they would not be "actually poor" to the point in which the women prostitute themselves as a norm (like in places like Brazil and Thailand)
Most would still prostitute themselves, as long as a rich guy is willing to pay, and there's no cucked laws. First world places like las vegas and amsterdam have lots of whores.
 
Most would still prostitute themselves, as long as a rich guy is willing to pay, and there's no cucked laws. First world places like las vegas and amsterdam have lots of whores.

Those places ARE rich
The women there AREN'T

I don't see how you can't get the difference

The average woman prostituting herself is in debt or lacks the education to get a proper job, situations like that will become less and less as the years go by
 
The average woman prostituting herself is in debt or lacks the education to get a proper job, situations like that will become less and less as the years go by
It shouldn't be our job to give them more opportunities. There are more broke men than broke foids, but broke men don't have the option to have sex with sub6 foids for money. Non-chad men who aren't rich shouldn't feel bad for whores.
 
Non-chad men who aren't rich shouldn't feel bad for whores.

This isn't about feeling bad for them, I don't know how you don't get the point, its about them being disenfranchised so we can even have the option to pay for sex
 
i will be drafted and thrown on the front lines as cannon fodder with a 0% chance of surviving, so yes it will solve all my problems because i will be dead
 
It would be nice to not be the only one suffering
 
A while ago, I compared the male celibacy chart and a couple charts about the US economy, and I concluded that it was slightly easier for men to get laid pre-Tinder times during recessions, as there would be dips in male celibacy around the same time as said recessions.

However, those events were before Tinder. I feel like maybe if there was some negative societal impact, that there could be less celibate males, but who knows. I feel like for that pattern to inevitably happen again, technology would somehow need to be cut off.
 
It would be nice to not be the only one suffering
AgREed :feelshmm:
A while ago, I compared the male celibacy chart and a couple charts about the US economy
Interesting tbh, It's will be creative idea to make comparators between "male celibacy charts" and "charts for variable fields" then conclude the correlation
and I concluded that it was slightly easier for men to get laid pre-Tinder times during recessions, as there would be dips in male celibacy around the same time as said recessions.
I could conclude that theoretically as I explained in op. I am sure that men had more freedom and vantage during recessions.
I feel like maybe if there was some negative societal impact, that there could be less celibate males
It's certain fact and Incels who can't see it are blinds or in denial state (No voters :feelsUgh: )
I feel like for that pattern to inevitably happen again, technology would somehow need to be cut off
Idk but I don't think technology will disappear tbhngl
 
Nothing will help us, that is, our inceldom. It's fair to believe in accelerationism, but only if it's for different reasons. You just gotta give up man. If you're actually truecel there's just no escaping inceldom.

A new instability will provide multiple opportunities for ascension.

Nomeansyesmaxxing
Chad genocide/thinning out the competition

Also less people means a less superficial more meaningful people and better opportunities to form meaningful connections. Hypergamy was far less rampant in earlier times for a multitude of reasons.
I would say yes. In an economic collapse/Mad Max world, female's stratospheric levels hypergamy we're seeing now would come crashing back down to Earth. If you could use a gun and/or provide resources, you would not be incel.
our system today is unnatural and will collapse this is the clear fact. If we read the human history we can confirm that, there were empires and kingdoms which appeared and disappeared, Cities full of life that were burned to ashes so current empires will have their order.
thus, a lot of global ruling powers will lose the game and leave gaps, incels (A rising global power with a strong ideology) sure can use from those chances.
the chance of ascension never has been 0% for anyone also It depends on your definition to "ascension".
 
what is pushing us towards inceldom is the internet, which makes women think they are goddesses. if the internet is not turned off, inceldom will continue even after Armageddon
 
what is pushing us towards inceldom is the internet
:yes::yes::yes:
the internet has negative effects that couldn't be neglected and it will be more in next decades :(
 

Similar threads

Serpents reign
Replies
8
Views
270
Vitarius
Vitarius
Grim_Reaper
Replies
15
Views
213
themanwithnohat
themanwithnohat
Shaktiman
Replies
8
Views
595
Emba
Emba
ForeverGrey
Replies
47
Views
2K
stalin22
stalin22
Buried Alive 2.0
Replies
75
Views
2K
SociallyStupid
S

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top