Brett Stevens Has Heard of r/K

A reader emailed this article on white’s not in-grouping, which mentioned r/K:

Caucasians destroy themselves because by succeeding, they encounter problems that no one else has faced. Europe beat the challenges that the rest of the world struggles with, but in turn, encountered a new set of troubles. One of these is simply overpopulation, which because of the difference between r and K strategies of reproduction, means that lower castes reproduce much faster than their smarter, stronger and wiser brethren. At some point, the lower castes revolt and overthrow their leaders, aided by those in the middle who can make money with mercantile firms but not produce a thriving nation, and so the decay spreads, unraveling the civilization.

There are a lot of reasons for the lack of in-grouping. My own belief is he is right about whites having unprecedented exposure to success and free resources, and r-selection being part of the problem. I even think the exposure to the variability of extreme ease, punctuated by extremely lethal combat may have selected for an extreme adaptivity/variability among whites.

You will not see any populations go as r and conflict averse as whites, when resources are free. But introduce a threat and shortage, and suddenly we are happily rendering whole species extinct, resolutely flame-throwering other humans in caves, and even dropping atom bombs to wipe out entire cities.

We all see the world through our own lenses. Steven’s study of history shows in his complex analyses of psychological forces and group dynamics. My own experience with cognitive neuro-sci and biology produces basically the same explanation, just from a different perspective.

In my perspective, r-selection arises due to amygdala atrophy, and amygdala atrophy then attempts to approach everything by fostering r-selection, since reduced stress and conflict is what it is designed for. When amygdalae are strong and well developed by harshness, they drive an embrace of short term adversity, in pursuit of long term success. That means problems are met head on, and dealt with, no matter how unpleasant. Indeed, there may even be a subtle programming to like the adversity, and always take the hard road, even when an easy way presents itself. How often do you hear such people look on an easy way as cheating?

So foreigners are raiding your country and abusing the welfare system? Ship them home. It is unpleasant, and unfortunate at first, but once it is done, your nation will enjoy success for a long time.

But the amygdala-addled r will want to avoid that unpleasantness, so they will ignore the problem which presents itself, and ignore the problems which will arise later on from not doing anything. We are all doing that to some degree. We know Muslims will become a problem someday. They always do, and they always have to go back in the long run. But none of us will engage in violence now to throw them out, even though we all know our kids will likely some day face a constant stream of atrocities and a long war to expel them. That is r, to some degree, not that we have any choice. In this time of r, we wouldn’t get far if we tried to go K. Like it or not r and K are adaptive to their respective environments.

The bottom line is studies show racial in-grouping is innate, even in little children. It is, practically, an embrace of unpleasantness now, to foster greater ease later. But my own suspicion is that it is suppressed when the amygdala is atrophied because it is amygdala that drives those urges. Light up that amygdala, such as through adversity, and not only will the racial in-grouping instinct arise, I expect in-grouping based on what neighborhood you live in, what religion you practice, what specific country your ancestors came from, what you look like, and even what politician you support and who you are friends with. When the resources drop out, we will be a fractured nation, with more than enough in-grouping for everyone.

It won’t be bad. That competitiveness between everyone based on small differences they perceive is a harbinger of greater competitive drive which will make Americans want to compete aggressively everywhere else, from jobs, to national pride. Go back to our golden years, and Germans, Italians, Irish, blacks, Poles, Catholics, Protestants, and everyone else were all competitive with each other.

Until that returns, there is little fighting the tides of r and K. You cannot make a nation exhibit a psychology that is not coincident with the environment that the human population is seeing. You can try, but you will only get frustration.

But you can stall and stymie r-selection wherever you can, poke amygdalae however you are able to keep them exercised, and recognize when the time is coming to unleash a prepared strategy and exploit an environmental shift.

Obviously that time is growing close.

Tell others about r/K Theory, because the in-grouping is coming

This entry was posted in Amygdala, Cuckservatives, Economic Collapse, Immigration, In-grouping, ITZ, K-stimuli, Liberals, Migrant Crime Deniers, Nationalism, Politics, Psychological Manipulation, rabbitry, Splintering. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Brett Stevens Has Heard of r/K

  1. Pitcrew says:

    I suspect a kind of late civilization trend to be in play in Western Civ. The Romans (Classical Civ) didn’t want to serve in legions and were content to let barbarians serve and fight. It’s Oswald Spengler to some degree. Russians (Orthodox Civ) are White, but view the West as degenerate and don’t ingroup with them- unless they are trying to get something. A few Latin Americans are white, but almost always view themselves as separate, (a good example is Pinochet ridiculing non-violence) and they too are a separate civilization. This is because Orthodox and (the white part) of Latin civs have largely been without resource abundance. So they are earlier in their civilizational cycle. The West has accumulated an abundance of r-types who, while having higher IQ’s, would not lift a finger if it involved hardship. Compare that to Pinochet’s coup (in lower-IQ Chile) as well as the post-USSR Russian character. Both embraced hardship and fought off leftism. A collapse will make K’s the majority in the West again, but it will be in a new Civilization, similar to how Western civ arose after Classical civ fell apart.

    • 234534647643632 says:

      “A collapse will make K’s the majority in the West again, but it will be in a new Civilization, similar to how Western civ arose after Classical civ fell apart.”

      Yes please, I’m tired of this bullshitty civ now.

    • Andy says:

      The whole deal with Pinochets takeover was that rabbits elected him and the Ks in the Army pulled the break by force. Ks will not he the majority because the provider is not the majority. Look at any given country and you will see that the whole wealth is produced and work be done by minorities of people. And post-soviet Russia never fought off leftism. This culture is damaged beyond repair and probably was even before the reds took over. Forgett this legitimization by majority democracy bullshit, Ks are always the few and thats why they have to act and break some rules.

  2. Pingback: As Democracy-Created Problems Mount, The Thin Veneer Of The First World Cracks

  3. Andy says:

    There are still a lot of different cultural perspectives of what is r and what is K because they are in their very sense reproduction patterns fitted to a certain enviorment. What a northeuropean would identify as r-typical in different areas of the world would be identified as K-typical in those very areas. I think it will make a shift in the near future where there will be less identifyable trades between the two, but those that remain will be more distinct. We could be in the end of the day all sit at home in our virtual reality boxes and the last remaining difference is between those who consume, and those who program.

Leave a Reply