Great article Roosh.
I had no idea there were some many evolutionary dogmatists in this community. Just like you detected that the red pillers and MGTOWs were becoming retarded, you've once again spotted the more irrational part of the manosphere and called them out on it. I don't know how you have such a knack for this stuff.
For example, look at Caveman above: just a rambling bunch of nonsense with zero reasons to support any of his objections. Ad hominems, and quoting some other blogger whose entire post consists of huge quotations of your text followed by one-sentence rebuttals. I really pity these guys to have invested so much of their ego in a flimsy scientific theory. These guys really think they have the truth figured out but are unable to defend their "truth" without having a meltdown.
That said, I do believe group selection, or cultural evolution, explains human behavior much better than any individual selection theory. I always have since college, but even still I do not believe it tells the complete story, not by a longshot. Regardless, let us examine the merits of cultural evolution, also known as group selection.
First example: why is multiculturalism a failure?
Because as too many differences are introduced into an original gene pool of a group, humans instinctively realize they are not supporting the original gene clusters that created them and thus withdraw from the community. The book "Bowling Alone" is a good description of this phenomena.
Answering more questions: why do people sacrifice themselves for the group or fail to reproduce?
Because they are part of a homogenous group that created them. For example, if you're living in a country where everyone is a 12th or 16th cousin, then it follows that even if you do not reproduce as long as your neighbors have kids then another version of you will be created again since the gene clusters that made you are still in circulation. But if you introduce people of different races or communities that are separated by 100,000 generations of cousins, people no longer feel any desire to support one another and instead become hostile or alienated to one another.
Hence, diversity + proximity = war.
Furthermore, group selection/cultural evolution is consistent with why some religions succeed and others fail: certain religions favor the success of the group better than others. All of the Abrahamic religions are good examples of this. The Jews strictly favor the Jews, the Christians originally were supposed to only favor other Christians ("Do not cast pearls before swine") but today Christians are dissolving because they neglected their own family/group ("Honor thy mother and father"), and Muslims favor Muslims (Jizya tax for anyone except other Muslims).
Another example: Why do women select for alpha males and then have beta males raise them (or the state)?
Because this increases the fitness of the group.
One more example: Why is it if you swap babies at a hospital most parents won't even know?
Answer: This is only true if the babies belong to the same group. For example, if you swap a black baby with an asian baby, the parents will immediately know the baby isn't theirs. But if you swap two asian babies, since they belong to the same group the parents cannot tell the difference and do not care.
Ants are a simplified version of what humans are but ants also evolve along group selection lines.
Regardless, I commend you for calling out these dogmatists who are actually willing to believe in individual gene selection because frankly, the idea is contradicted by so much evidence you'd have to be a zealot to keep believing in it.
I had no idea there were some many evolutionary dogmatists in this community. Just like you detected that the red pillers and MGTOWs were becoming retarded, you've once again spotted the more irrational part of the manosphere and called them out on it. I don't know how you have such a knack for this stuff.
For example, look at Caveman above: just a rambling bunch of nonsense with zero reasons to support any of his objections. Ad hominems, and quoting some other blogger whose entire post consists of huge quotations of your text followed by one-sentence rebuttals. I really pity these guys to have invested so much of their ego in a flimsy scientific theory. These guys really think they have the truth figured out but are unable to defend their "truth" without having a meltdown.
That said, I do believe group selection, or cultural evolution, explains human behavior much better than any individual selection theory. I always have since college, but even still I do not believe it tells the complete story, not by a longshot. Regardless, let us examine the merits of cultural evolution, also known as group selection.
First example: why is multiculturalism a failure?
Because as too many differences are introduced into an original gene pool of a group, humans instinctively realize they are not supporting the original gene clusters that created them and thus withdraw from the community. The book "Bowling Alone" is a good description of this phenomena.
Answering more questions: why do people sacrifice themselves for the group or fail to reproduce?
Because they are part of a homogenous group that created them. For example, if you're living in a country where everyone is a 12th or 16th cousin, then it follows that even if you do not reproduce as long as your neighbors have kids then another version of you will be created again since the gene clusters that made you are still in circulation. But if you introduce people of different races or communities that are separated by 100,000 generations of cousins, people no longer feel any desire to support one another and instead become hostile or alienated to one another.
Hence, diversity + proximity = war.
Furthermore, group selection/cultural evolution is consistent with why some religions succeed and others fail: certain religions favor the success of the group better than others. All of the Abrahamic religions are good examples of this. The Jews strictly favor the Jews, the Christians originally were supposed to only favor other Christians ("Do not cast pearls before swine") but today Christians are dissolving because they neglected their own family/group ("Honor thy mother and father"), and Muslims favor Muslims (Jizya tax for anyone except other Muslims).
Another example: Why do women select for alpha males and then have beta males raise them (or the state)?
Because this increases the fitness of the group.
One more example: Why is it if you swap babies at a hospital most parents won't even know?
Answer: This is only true if the babies belong to the same group. For example, if you swap a black baby with an asian baby, the parents will immediately know the baby isn't theirs. But if you swap two asian babies, since they belong to the same group the parents cannot tell the difference and do not care.
Ants are a simplified version of what humans are but ants also evolve along group selection lines.
Regardless, I commend you for calling out these dogmatists who are actually willing to believe in individual gene selection because frankly, the idea is contradicted by so much evidence you'd have to be a zealot to keep believing in it.
Contributor at Return of Kings. I got banned from twatter, which is run by little bitches and weaklings. You can follow me on Gab.
Be sure to check out the easiest mining program around, FreedomXMR.