enchanted_elixir
Access ALL Of My Guides ↙️ shorturl.at/SPUPX
Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2022
- Posts
- 19,998
- Reputation
- 32,008
Introduction
THREAD MUSIC
Yes, this is an AI-expedited thread (I lay down the main ideas precisely, AI writes it out). I don't want to put so much effort. This is a really half-assed thread.
Disclaimer: Any controversial claims are meant to supplement in explaining the thread's central point or vividly display a picture to understand a topic of discussion, and are not designed to be antagonistic.
Definition
Class (klɑːs), (noun)
The fundamental, heritable stratification of human populations. The primary variables determining class are expressed multigenerationally and include general intelligence (g), conscientiousness, impulse control, and time preference. These foundational traits dictate the reproductive and social strategies of a lineage and, consequently, its dominant method of acquisition—whether it produces, trades, labors, or preys upon the social order.
This inherited capacity to contribute to or drain from the various forms of capital (genetic, institutional, sociocultural, normative, and economic) is the true substance of class.
The observable hierarchy of socioeconomic status is, therefore, merely the lagging economic indicator—the direct emanation—of these underlying biological and behavioral differences.
Stratification (in Industrial Socieites)
This hierarchy is organized from the greatest net consumers of the commons at the bottom to the greatest net producers of the commons at the top.
Section 1: Class 0 – The De-Civilized (The Underclass)
General
Where you are in the class hierarchy is strongly correlated to the probability, magnitude and valence of your life outcomes in every single dimension of your life. The underclasses are much more likely to experience adverse and traumatic experiences, while the elite classes are much more likely to experience positive and uplifting experiences.
The underclasses are much more likely to have every single bad life outcome happen to them (early death, ostracization, chronic stress, depression, misery, bullying, lower social status, poor grades, lower educational attainment, lower intelligence, disease, bad sexual-romantic relationships, children out of wedlock, getting shot, being in jail, mental health issues, genuine injustices, humiliation, being treated as a disease, disrespect, lack of access to certain opportunities due to circumstance, lack of influence, lack of power, helplessness, irritability, lower self-control, shorter time preference, neuroticism, forgetfulness, addiction, exposure to crime, poor housing, financial issues, susceptibility to social and financial predators, broken families, poor hygiene, etc.),
Meanwhile the upper classes are more likely to have every single good life outcome happen to them ...while the upper classes are more likely to have every single good life outcome happen to them (a long life, social acceptance and inclusion, low stress, happiness and general well-being, fitting in, high social status, good grades, high educational attainment, higher intelligence, good health, good sexual-romantic relationships, children within marriage, personal safety, staying out of jail, good mental health, fair treatment, dignity, being treated with respect, preferential access to certain opportunities, influence, power, a sense of control, calmness, good self-control, a long time preference, emotional stability, a good memory, freedom from addiction, safe neighborhoods, nice housing, financial security, protection from scammers and predatory lenders, stable families, good hygiene, etc.).
If you're lower class... chances are, you'll stay that way. You will probably never be able to defeat your lower-class instincts and avoid the misery of being lower class ...
I hope you don't rope from that )
Historical, Familial, & Anthropological Impact
The class of your parents and lineage is a powerful predictor of success (many of the greatest humans to ever live were the children of smart, competent, or some other highly class correlated trait). Not only do you inherit a unique hybrid of their class-causal traits to build on (general intelligence, conscientiousness, impulse control, time preference), but since you're likely going to live in a neighborhood, and attend a school and live in a home environment that also have those traits at a similar level as yours, and you're likely not willing to go through the agonizing and utterly profound transformative self-reconfiguration necessary to classmax (it's profoundly easier to use what you were given than change it), you're likely going to stay within your parent's class (maybe slight ascend due to reversion to the mean).
When comparing ethnological categories such as nationalities, civilizations, ethnicities, races, and regions, you can see that the primary distinction between them is their class distribution (aka. the percentage of the total population belonging to each class). Class distributions can change over generations via effective multigenerational population training, eugenics, or positive changes in law and culture.
You can see that societies that are majority middle class or higher have higher standards of living, enjoy higher social status (nationality, ethnicity, race) compared to majority lower class and mixed societies. And class distribution is correlated to standard of living in a subdivision.
View attachment 1750721608571.png
Compare Denmark, South Korea, or Japan, majority middle class societies, to a place like Haiti or Burundi, majority lower class societies. Comparing these two societies, you'll see gaps in the usual four traits I said that strongly determine class. Changes in class distributions eventually manifest as (and are one of the main causes of) changes in standard of living in a populated locale. To have an advanced society in the modern world, you need the vast majority of people to follow functional rules of decorum, delay gratification far enough, be smart enough to perform middle class jobs, be conscientious, and control their impulses and the more people you can get to do these things + the more individuals you can get to develop and master these traits, the more advanced your society will likely be. You can't get an advanced society if most of your people are fairly impulsive, not as conscientious, or have a short time preference due to circumstance or immaturity.
Class and Culture
"Social mobility isn't just about money and economics, it's about a lifestyle change. The wealthy and the powerful aren't just wealthy and powerful; they follow a different set of norms and mores. When you go from working-class to professional-class, almost everything about your old life becomes unfashionable at best or unhealthy at worst."— Vance, J.D. (2016). Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis.
Class and Mobility
The Law of Slow Mobility. In his 2014 book, The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social Mobility, economist Gregory Clark presents a provocative and data-driven argument: that the rate of social mobility is profoundly slow and remarkably constant across different societies and historical eras. He posits that underlying social status is far more "sticky" or persistent than conventional, two-generation studies suggest. Clark calculates an intergenerational correlation of status of approximately 0.75, which signifies that the journey to the statistical mean is a multigenerational process taking centuries, not decades.
The Mechanism of Persistence. Clark argues that this persistence transcends the simple inheritance of material wealth or the advantages conferred by social policies. Instead, he hypothesizes that families transmit an underlying "social competence"—a latent, heritable quality encompassing a range of abilities, personality traits, and drives that foster success. This competence, he suggests, is the primary driver of long-run status persistence.
Methodology: The Surname Method. The book's central innovation involves using rare surnames as a proxy for lineage. By tracking the representation of historically elite or underclass surnames in institutions of power and prestige (such as Oxford and Cambridge universities, lists of doctors and lawyers, or property records) over many centuries, Clark bypasses the "noise" of single-generation fluctuations in income or occupation. This long-term view, he contends, reveals the true, slow rate of regression to the mean. The majority of high-class surnames from 1,000 years ago haven't descended to the middle class, they have been reverting to the mean, but very slowly.
Invariance and Policy. A key finding is that this slow rate of mobility appears to be a universal constant, holding true in societies as different as modern, socially democratic Sweden and feudal England. From this, Clark infers that social institutions and public policies, which vary widely across these nations, have a surprisingly minimal impact on the fundamental rate of intergenerational mobility.
depicting the correlation between surname and class across different societies.
Rant about Marxism and its offshoot philosophies
The importance of class is no joke. It's a potent horseman in predicting general life satisfaction, arguably much more important than physical attractiveness or any other thing you could possibly come up with (assuming you do not have any debilitating physical crutches like ugliness, physical disabilities, or manletism). The importance of class in human life and history is so profound that class inequalities often generate revolutions or civil wars, regardless of the time or civilization.
It gave birth to the evil, sophistic philosophy of Marxism (class struggle) in the late 1800s in the Russian Empire, which proposed that the upper classes were systematically oppressing the lower classes and proposed that the solution to oppression is a soteriological revolution where the upper classes were exterminated in some way (killed, seizure of social status and wealth, systemic legal oppression justified as "retribution", "reparations", "affirmative action" (aka, letting less competent people get access to positions they don't deserve, a civilization destroying idea) or "fairness") and the emergence of a classless society where everyone would be guaranteed an equal income.
This philosophy is extremely seductive (and deplorably fallacious, deadly, dysgenic, and civilization-destroying), and in part why it and its offspring philosophies are so popular all across the globe. Class was as controversial in Russia as the topics wokeism protests about in the West today, and it's still controversial (so many contemporary politicians and influential figures still talk about "eating the rich" and class warfare today.). Hopefully, we have enough empirical evidence to dissuade the world of this deplorably fallacious, deadly, dysgenic, and civilization-destroying philosophy.
Marx constructed a seductive, envious, appealing, loser-luring, yet misleading worldview and was blind to the simple fact that the upper classes were indeed were much more likely had more favorable traits (intelligence, grit, longer time preference, etc.), most upper-class people weren't oppressive classist psychopathic sadists seeking to destroy the working and middle classes, the "oppressors" here did increase the standard of living in the society and definitely have a documented history of doing GOOD, and the vast majority of individuals do not judge others solely on the basis of class, and misconstrued lower social status with an exaggerated label: what contemporary individual would call classism. We must acknowledge genuine grievances and issues with the "oppressors" but that still doesn't make the facts any less real, and it certainly doesn't justify the hyper-overrepresentation of the grievances to the picture. Marx also didn't understand that what made the upper classes so successful are primarily their innate abilities (which cannot be confiscated or extirpated).
Why Marxism and its offshoot philosophies usually fail is that the majority of the "oppressed" peoples they seek to save do not have the capacities required to replace the "oppressors". If you were a communist and sought to seize Elon Musk's assets and replaced him as the CEO of Tesla or SpaceX, it would be bankrupt in 3 months.
The Soviet Union, after the communist revolution (the bourgeoisie was oppressing the proletariat), went to shit and turned into a totalitarian, inefficient, miserable slave state.
Cuba and Venezuela turned into an authoritarian, inefficient, worse, and miserable place after its Socialist/Communist revolutions (under the claim that the USA was oppressing Latin America + being seduced into Marxism)
Haiti, Zimbabwe, Uganda and South Africa are now gigashithole, significantly worse, and deteriorating states respectively after mass deporting (in the case of Haiti, Uganda and Zimbabwe) or suppressing (South Africa) white farmers and citizens in the respective countries (and Indians in the case of Uganda)... productive racial/ethnic minorities.
Some locations in Southeast Asia have pockets of Anti-Chinese sentiments and some want to get rid of their ethnically Chinese fellow citizens/countrypersons im part due to envy and claims of oppression (ethnically Chinese Southeast Asians, on average, do better than them across various life dimensions)
India has a an anti-Brahminism issue (Brahmins are the HIGHEST CASTE in India) and despite the caste system being removed, it still has an impact on social relations there. Brahmins (especially Southern Indian ones) are a social group which are biologically more likely to have higher intelligence, time preference, etc. due to their meditative training for thousands of years. Indian law has affirmative action laws that allow lower castes to be eligible for positions without being put to the same rigorous standards as Brahmins. Yet, Brahmins do better than the other castes, and Brahmin Indian immigrants are among the highest net-value immigrants a country can import.
I could go on, but I'm not going to go further with my rant.
IMPACT ON SOCIAL and DATING RELATIIONS
The second most important factor in dating after your appearance is your socioeconomic status (class). We know that women value the resources a man can provide for her, and how his resources affect her life outcomes and social status. Whether you pull up to take a woman on a date in a new Tesla or a beaten up 1980 Volvo. If she perceives you as being part of a lower class than her, this can certainly turn her off.
Being of a higher class can provide a massive cushion on the various social taxes present in the given environment.
People can usually (and quickly) sense your class (and social status) based on your appearance, what you own, how others in the environment treat you, your behavior, your cognitive abilities and nature and more and will treat you accordingly (given relative class discrepancy between you and the person)
I don't want to go to into this because you already intuitively understand this, but what I want you to know is the brutality and impact of the matter. If a woman who had a crush on you figured out you lived here, any combination of the following: lower class people walking around, people smoking/injecting drugs in their porches, fights (especially between low class people_ going on, the occasional gunshots and police, I'm not sure she would feel the same for you.
...
Taking her here could give you a perception boost.
Worst of all, class is pretty immutable (since you have to literally transform yourself to ascend your class (have the capacities like self control, capacity to make lots of money (which in itself requires lots of traits most people here don't have), higher level decorum, higher class behavioral and and phenotypic traits)& you have to do it to your family members and train them to behave like a higher class person and have their own money like you, which is super hard to do, especially at scale AND hide their lower status position as they're learning (if they can even adapt to it such that they can go undercover) ... even then people may still fish you out as someone who isn't part of the class since you don't have the history (ex. "so what neighborhood did you grow up in/private school did you attend" -- unless you're going to lie, you'll get caught, and lying itself could get you caught)
And finally, your social class usually predicts the social class of your partner. lower-class people usually date people with lower-class behaviors.
And finally, most inter-ethnic/inter-racial relationships are usually NOT inter-class/inter-social-status relationships so, despite those differences, you are usually going to end up with someone with a similar social status or class.
OVER FOR BROKIES AND LOWER-CLASS-CELS!
OVER!
Summary (ai generated)
THREAD MUSIC
Yes, this is an AI-expedited thread (I lay down the main ideas precisely, AI writes it out). I don't want to put so much effort. This is a really half-assed thread.
Disclaimer: Any controversial claims are meant to supplement in explaining the thread's central point or vividly display a picture to understand a topic of discussion, and are not designed to be antagonistic.
Definition
Class (klɑːs), (noun)
The fundamental, heritable stratification of human populations. The primary variables determining class are expressed multigenerationally and include general intelligence (g), conscientiousness, impulse control, and time preference. These foundational traits dictate the reproductive and social strategies of a lineage and, consequently, its dominant method of acquisition—whether it produces, trades, labors, or preys upon the social order.
This inherited capacity to contribute to or drain from the various forms of capital (genetic, institutional, sociocultural, normative, and economic) is the true substance of class.
The observable hierarchy of socioeconomic status is, therefore, merely the lagging economic indicator—the direct emanation—of these underlying biological and behavioral differences.
Stratification (in Industrial Socieites)
This hierarchy is organized from the greatest net consumers of the commons at the bottom to the greatest net producers of the commons at the top.
Section 1: Class 0 – The De-Civilized (The Underclass)
- Core Function: Systemic Predation and Parasitism. This class operates entirely outside the system of reciprocity.
- Method of Acquisition: Usually the irreciprocal acquisition through crime (predation) and/or the systematic exploitation of state welfare and private charity (institutionalized parasitism), or they function as homeless individuals
- Relationship to Commons: Purely extractive. They are a net drain on many forms of capital, eroding of social trust, consuming economic surplus, and increasing the costs of policing for all other classes.
- Contemporary Examples: Habitual criminals, gangs, individuals with profound behavioral pathologies, and those subsisting on generational welfare without participation in or aspiration to join the labor force.
- Core Function: Subsistence Labor. This class is distinct from Class 0 because it engages in reciprocal labor. However, their labor is of such low value, or their life management skills are so limited, that they cannot achieve economic self-sufficiency.
- Method of Acquisition: Low-wage labor supplemented by significant, ongoing state assistance (e.g., housing subsidies, food stamps, medical assistance),.
- Relationship to Commons: Net consumer. While they contribute through labor, their total consumption of public resources (in the form of both direct aid and the downstream costs of instability) exceeds their tax contributions, making them dependent on the surplus generated by the classes above.
- Contemporary Examples: Full-time minimum-wage workers with families, slum dwellers, the average third world urban citizen (especially the less developed third world nations) individuals cycling between low-wage jobs and unemployment, and those whose personal deficits prevent them from commanding a wage sufficient for self-support.
- Core Function: Cyclical Production. This class forms the productive engine of the physical and service economies. They trade their time and labor for wages that provide for a stable but not accumulating lifestyle.
- Method of Acquisition: Wage labor for immediate and near-term consumption.
- Relationship to Commons: Net-neutral to slightly positive contributors. Over a lifetime, their tax contributions are roughly equivalent to the value of the public services they consume. They follow social norms but do not produce them, and they accumulate little capital.
- Contemporary Examples: Skilled and unskilled manual laborers, clerical workers, transportation workers, and service-sector employees whose incomes provide a stable but modest standard of living.
- Core Function: Capitalization and Normative Production. This is the bedrock of a successful civilization, defined by the strategy of converting labor into durable capital (familial, social, and economic). They are the primary producers of the polity's tax base and the authors and enforcers of its social norms.
- Sub-Section 3a: The Lower Middle Class:Their focus is on achieving stability and passing on a trade or small business. Their capital is local and tangible.
- Method of Acquisition: Skilled labor, small business ownership, management of small-scale enterprises.
- Examples: Master tradesmen (plumbers, electricians), owners of small family businesses, experienced administrative staff.
- Sub-Section 3b: The Upper Middle Class:Their focus is on converting advanced education into high-value human capital. Their strategy involves long-term planning and high investment in their children's cognitive development.
- Method of Acquisition: Sale of professional expertise and specialized knowledge.
- Examples: Most engineers, non-partner lawyers, nurses, school teachers, mid-level corporate managers.
- Sub-Section 3a: The Lower Middle Class:Their focus is on achieving stability and passing on a trade or small business. Their capital is local and tangible.
- Core Function: Administration and Optimization of Complex Systems. This class does not necessarily create the foundational systems but possesses the high-order human capital required to manage, maintain, and improve them.
- Method of Acquisition: Returns on elite human capital and the successful management of large-scale economic and social enterprises.
- Relationship to Commons: Significant net producer. They design and operate the systems of production, law, and health that generate massive surplus value for the civilization.
- Contemporary Examples: Physicians, surgeons, partners in law firms, senior corporate executives (C-suite), research scientists, tenured professors at elite universities, successful entrepreneurs.
- Core Function: Production and Stewardship of the Commons Itself. This is the smallest class, comprising the lineages that create, fund, or provide ultimate oversight for the polity's highest-order institutions (the law, defense, high culture, and core financial infrastructure).
- Method of Acquisition: Returns on capital at the largest scale, typically from the ownership of major assets or the creation of foundational economic, legal, or technological frameworks.
- Relationship to Commons: The prime mover. They are the investors of last resort in the polity's survival and continuity. Their strategy operates on multigenerational time horizons, and their status is derived from their demonstrated role as guarantors of the order that allows all other classes to prosper.
- Contemporary Examples: Founders of revolutionary industries, high-level entrepreneurs and investors, families with "old money" who manage vast assets and engage in high-level philanthropy that shapes institutions, and individuals who wield dispositive influence over national law and policy,
General
Where you are in the class hierarchy is strongly correlated to the probability, magnitude and valence of your life outcomes in every single dimension of your life. The underclasses are much more likely to experience adverse and traumatic experiences, while the elite classes are much more likely to experience positive and uplifting experiences.
The underclasses are much more likely to have every single bad life outcome happen to them (early death, ostracization, chronic stress, depression, misery, bullying, lower social status, poor grades, lower educational attainment, lower intelligence, disease, bad sexual-romantic relationships, children out of wedlock, getting shot, being in jail, mental health issues, genuine injustices, humiliation, being treated as a disease, disrespect, lack of access to certain opportunities due to circumstance, lack of influence, lack of power, helplessness, irritability, lower self-control, shorter time preference, neuroticism, forgetfulness, addiction, exposure to crime, poor housing, financial issues, susceptibility to social and financial predators, broken families, poor hygiene, etc.),
Meanwhile the upper classes are more likely to have every single good life outcome happen to them ...while the upper classes are more likely to have every single good life outcome happen to them (a long life, social acceptance and inclusion, low stress, happiness and general well-being, fitting in, high social status, good grades, high educational attainment, higher intelligence, good health, good sexual-romantic relationships, children within marriage, personal safety, staying out of jail, good mental health, fair treatment, dignity, being treated with respect, preferential access to certain opportunities, influence, power, a sense of control, calmness, good self-control, a long time preference, emotional stability, a good memory, freedom from addiction, safe neighborhoods, nice housing, financial security, protection from scammers and predatory lenders, stable families, good hygiene, etc.).
If you're lower class... chances are, you'll stay that way. You will probably never be able to defeat your lower-class instincts and avoid the misery of being lower class ...
I hope you don't rope from that )Historical, Familial, & Anthropological Impact
The class of your parents and lineage is a powerful predictor of success (many of the greatest humans to ever live were the children of smart, competent, or some other highly class correlated trait). Not only do you inherit a unique hybrid of their class-causal traits to build on (general intelligence, conscientiousness, impulse control, time preference), but since you're likely going to live in a neighborhood, and attend a school and live in a home environment that also have those traits at a similar level as yours, and you're likely not willing to go through the agonizing and utterly profound transformative self-reconfiguration necessary to classmax (it's profoundly easier to use what you were given than change it), you're likely going to stay within your parent's class (maybe slight ascend due to reversion to the mean).
When comparing ethnological categories such as nationalities, civilizations, ethnicities, races, and regions, you can see that the primary distinction between them is their class distribution (aka. the percentage of the total population belonging to each class). Class distributions can change over generations via effective multigenerational population training, eugenics, or positive changes in law and culture.
You can see that societies that are majority middle class or higher have higher standards of living, enjoy higher social status (nationality, ethnicity, race) compared to majority lower class and mixed societies. And class distribution is correlated to standard of living in a subdivision.
View attachment 1750721608571.png
Compare Denmark, South Korea, or Japan, majority middle class societies, to a place like Haiti or Burundi, majority lower class societies. Comparing these two societies, you'll see gaps in the usual four traits I said that strongly determine class. Changes in class distributions eventually manifest as (and are one of the main causes of) changes in standard of living in a populated locale. To have an advanced society in the modern world, you need the vast majority of people to follow functional rules of decorum, delay gratification far enough, be smart enough to perform middle class jobs, be conscientious, and control their impulses and the more people you can get to do these things + the more individuals you can get to develop and master these traits, the more advanced your society will likely be. You can't get an advanced society if most of your people are fairly impulsive, not as conscientious, or have a short time preference due to circumstance or immaturity.
Class and Culture
"Social mobility isn't just about money and economics, it's about a lifestyle change. The wealthy and the powerful aren't just wealthy and powerful; they follow a different set of norms and mores. When you go from working-class to professional-class, almost everything about your old life becomes unfashionable at best or unhealthy at worst."— Vance, J.D. (2016). Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis.
Class and Mobility
The Law of Slow Mobility. In his 2014 book, The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social Mobility, economist Gregory Clark presents a provocative and data-driven argument: that the rate of social mobility is profoundly slow and remarkably constant across different societies and historical eras. He posits that underlying social status is far more "sticky" or persistent than conventional, two-generation studies suggest. Clark calculates an intergenerational correlation of status of approximately 0.75, which signifies that the journey to the statistical mean is a multigenerational process taking centuries, not decades.
The Mechanism of Persistence. Clark argues that this persistence transcends the simple inheritance of material wealth or the advantages conferred by social policies. Instead, he hypothesizes that families transmit an underlying "social competence"—a latent, heritable quality encompassing a range of abilities, personality traits, and drives that foster success. This competence, he suggests, is the primary driver of long-run status persistence.
Methodology: The Surname Method. The book's central innovation involves using rare surnames as a proxy for lineage. By tracking the representation of historically elite or underclass surnames in institutions of power and prestige (such as Oxford and Cambridge universities, lists of doctors and lawyers, or property records) over many centuries, Clark bypasses the "noise" of single-generation fluctuations in income or occupation. This long-term view, he contends, reveals the true, slow rate of regression to the mean. The majority of high-class surnames from 1,000 years ago haven't descended to the middle class, they have been reverting to the mean, but very slowly.
Invariance and Policy. A key finding is that this slow rate of mobility appears to be a universal constant, holding true in societies as different as modern, socially democratic Sweden and feudal England. From this, Clark infers that social institutions and public policies, which vary widely across these nations, have a surprisingly minimal impact on the fundamental rate of intergenerational mobility.
depicting the correlation between surname and class across different societies.
Rant about Marxism and its offshoot philosophies
The importance of class is no joke. It's a potent horseman in predicting general life satisfaction, arguably much more important than physical attractiveness or any other thing you could possibly come up with (assuming you do not have any debilitating physical crutches like ugliness, physical disabilities, or manletism). The importance of class in human life and history is so profound that class inequalities often generate revolutions or civil wars, regardless of the time or civilization.
It gave birth to the evil, sophistic philosophy of Marxism (class struggle) in the late 1800s in the Russian Empire, which proposed that the upper classes were systematically oppressing the lower classes and proposed that the solution to oppression is a soteriological revolution where the upper classes were exterminated in some way (killed, seizure of social status and wealth, systemic legal oppression justified as "retribution", "reparations", "affirmative action" (aka, letting less competent people get access to positions they don't deserve, a civilization destroying idea) or "fairness") and the emergence of a classless society where everyone would be guaranteed an equal income.
This philosophy is extremely seductive (and deplorably fallacious, deadly, dysgenic, and civilization-destroying), and in part why it and its offspring philosophies are so popular all across the globe. Class was as controversial in Russia as the topics wokeism protests about in the West today, and it's still controversial (so many contemporary politicians and influential figures still talk about "eating the rich" and class warfare today.). Hopefully, we have enough empirical evidence to dissuade the world of this deplorably fallacious, deadly, dysgenic, and civilization-destroying philosophy.
Marx constructed a seductive, envious, appealing, loser-luring, yet misleading worldview and was blind to the simple fact that the upper classes were indeed were much more likely had more favorable traits (intelligence, grit, longer time preference, etc.), most upper-class people weren't oppressive classist psychopathic sadists seeking to destroy the working and middle classes, the "oppressors" here did increase the standard of living in the society and definitely have a documented history of doing GOOD, and the vast majority of individuals do not judge others solely on the basis of class, and misconstrued lower social status with an exaggerated label: what contemporary individual would call classism. We must acknowledge genuine grievances and issues with the "oppressors" but that still doesn't make the facts any less real, and it certainly doesn't justify the hyper-overrepresentation of the grievances to the picture. Marx also didn't understand that what made the upper classes so successful are primarily their innate abilities (which cannot be confiscated or extirpated).
Why Marxism and its offshoot philosophies usually fail is that the majority of the "oppressed" peoples they seek to save do not have the capacities required to replace the "oppressors". If you were a communist and sought to seize Elon Musk's assets and replaced him as the CEO of Tesla or SpaceX, it would be bankrupt in 3 months.
The Soviet Union, after the communist revolution (the bourgeoisie was oppressing the proletariat), went to shit and turned into a totalitarian, inefficient, miserable slave state.
Cuba and Venezuela turned into an authoritarian, inefficient, worse, and miserable place after its Socialist/Communist revolutions (under the claim that the USA was oppressing Latin America + being seduced into Marxism)
Haiti, Zimbabwe, Uganda and South Africa are now gigashithole, significantly worse, and deteriorating states respectively after mass deporting (in the case of Haiti, Uganda and Zimbabwe) or suppressing (South Africa) white farmers and citizens in the respective countries (and Indians in the case of Uganda)... productive racial/ethnic minorities.
Some locations in Southeast Asia have pockets of Anti-Chinese sentiments and some want to get rid of their ethnically Chinese fellow citizens/countrypersons im part due to envy and claims of oppression (ethnically Chinese Southeast Asians, on average, do better than them across various life dimensions)
India has a an anti-Brahminism issue (Brahmins are the HIGHEST CASTE in India) and despite the caste system being removed, it still has an impact on social relations there. Brahmins (especially Southern Indian ones) are a social group which are biologically more likely to have higher intelligence, time preference, etc. due to their meditative training for thousands of years. Indian law has affirmative action laws that allow lower castes to be eligible for positions without being put to the same rigorous standards as Brahmins. Yet, Brahmins do better than the other castes, and Brahmin Indian immigrants are among the highest net-value immigrants a country can import.
I could go on, but I'm not going to go further with my rant.
IMPACT ON SOCIAL and DATING RELATIIONS
The second most important factor in dating after your appearance is your socioeconomic status (class). We know that women value the resources a man can provide for her, and how his resources affect her life outcomes and social status. Whether you pull up to take a woman on a date in a new Tesla or a beaten up 1980 Volvo. If she perceives you as being part of a lower class than her, this can certainly turn her off.
Being of a higher class can provide a massive cushion on the various social taxes present in the given environment.
People can usually (and quickly) sense your class (and social status) based on your appearance, what you own, how others in the environment treat you, your behavior, your cognitive abilities and nature and more and will treat you accordingly (given relative class discrepancy between you and the person)
I don't want to go to into this because you already intuitively understand this, but what I want you to know is the brutality and impact of the matter. If a woman who had a crush on you figured out you lived here, any combination of the following: lower class people walking around, people smoking/injecting drugs in their porches, fights (especially between low class people_ going on, the occasional gunshots and police, I'm not sure she would feel the same for you.
...
Taking her here could give you a perception boost.
Worst of all, class is pretty immutable (since you have to literally transform yourself to ascend your class (have the capacities like self control, capacity to make lots of money (which in itself requires lots of traits most people here don't have), higher level decorum, higher class behavioral and and phenotypic traits)& you have to do it to your family members and train them to behave like a higher class person and have their own money like you, which is super hard to do, especially at scale AND hide their lower status position as they're learning (if they can even adapt to it such that they can go undercover) ... even then people may still fish you out as someone who isn't part of the class since you don't have the history (ex. "so what neighborhood did you grow up in/private school did you attend" -- unless you're going to lie, you'll get caught, and lying itself could get you caught)
And finally, your social class usually predicts the social class of your partner. lower-class people usually date people with lower-class behaviors.
And finally, most inter-ethnic/inter-racial relationships are usually NOT inter-class/inter-social-status relationships so, despite those differences, you are usually going to end up with someone with a similar social status or class.
OVER FOR BROKIES AND LOWER-CLASS-CELS!
OVER!
Summary (ai generated)
Of course. Here is a refined version of the essay that enhances its structure, formalizes its language, and significantly expands upon the social and dating consequences as requested. Following the essay is a comprehensive summary of the author's core message.
Section 1: Definition
The essay argues that society naturally organizes itself into a hierarchy based on this "social competence." The upper classes are defined by their net production of capital and stewardship of complex systems, while the lower classes are defined by their net consumption of common resources and their inability to engage in long-term, productive life strategies. This framework renders social mobility exceptionally slow and difficult, a phenomenon confirmed by Gregory Clark's long-term studies, suggesting that policy interventions are largely futile against the powerful current of heritability.
The most severe consequences of this reality manifest in the social and dating marketplace. Class acts as an inescapable filter in mate selection. Because a partner's class is the most reliable proxy for their underlying genetic and behavioral quality, mate choice is ruthlessly pragmatic. Women, driven by a biological imperative to secure the best future for their offspring, are inherently hypergamous and are repelled by signs of lower-class status. Mating is therefore overwhelmingly class-assortative, reinforcing the rigid structure of the hierarchy across generations. For the individual, this means that class of origin is a near-permanent brand that dictates life outcomes, social acceptance, and, most critically, romantic and reproductive success. The author concludes that any philosophy, such as Marxism, which ignores this biological foundation in favor of an "oppression" narrative is doomed to fail disastrously when put into practice, as it fundamentally misunderstands the source of societal wealth and order.
Refined Essay
Article 1: A Heritable Theory of ClassSection 1: Definition
- Clause A: The Essence of Class
Class denotes the fundamental, heritable stratification of human populations. The primary variables determining class express themselves multigenerationally and include general intelligence (g), conscientiousness, impulse control, and time preference. These foundational traits dictate a lineage's dominant reproductive and social strategies and, consequently, its primary method of resource acquisition—whether it produces, trades, labors for, or preys upon the social order. This inherited capacity to contribute to or drain from the various forms of capital (genetic, institutional, sociocultural, normative, and economic) constitutes the true substance of class. The observable hierarchy of socioeconomic status functions, therefore, as the lagging economic indicator—the direct emanation—of these underlying biological and behavioral differences. - Clause B: The Axis of Stratification
In industrial societies, this hierarchy organizes itself along an axis from the greatest net consumers of the commons at the bottom to the greatest net producers of the commons at the top.
- Section 1: Class 0 – The Asocial Underclass
- Core Function: Systemic Predation and Parasitism. This class operates entirely outside the system of social reciprocity.
- Method of Acquisition: Irreciprocal acquisition through crime (predation) and/or the systematic exploitation of state welfare and private charity (institutionalized parasitism).
- Relationship to Commons: Purely extractive. This stratum represents a net drain on most forms of capital, eroding social trust, consuming economic surplus, and elevating policing and security costs for all other classes.
- Contemporary Archetypes: Habitual criminals, organized gangs, individuals with profound behavioral pathologies, and those subsisting on generational welfare without participation in or aspiration toward the labor force.
- Section 2: Class 1 – The Dependent Working Poor
- Core Function: Subsistence Labor. This class engages in reciprocal labor, but its labor possesses such low market value, or its life-management skills prove so limited, that it fails to achieve economic self-sufficiency.
- Method of Acquisition: Low-wage labor supplemented by significant, ongoing state assistance (e.g., housing subsidies, food stamps, medical assistance).
- Relationship to Commons: Net consumer. While contributing through labor, the total consumption of public resources exceeds tax contributions, rendering this class dependent on the surplus generated by the classes above.
- Contemporary Archetypes: Full-time minimum-wage workers with families, slum dwellers, and individuals cycling between low-wage jobs and unemployment.
- Section 3: Class 2 – The Laboring Class
- Core Function: Cyclical Production. This class forms the productive engine of the physical and service economies, trading time and physical labor for wages that provide for a stable but non-accumulating lifestyle.
- Method of Acquisition: Wage labor directed toward immediate and near-term consumption.
- Relationship to Commons: Net-neutral to slightly positive contributors. Over a lifetime, their tax contributions roughly equate to the value of the public services they consume. They follow social norms but do not produce them.
- Contemporary Archetypes: Skilled and unskilled manual laborers, clerical workers, transportation workers, and service-sector employees.
- Section 4: Class 3 – The Citizenry (Middle Classes)
- Core Function: Capitalization and Normative Production. This class constitutes the bedrock of a successful civilization, defined by the strategy of converting labor into durable capital (familial, social, and economic). They function as the primary producers of the polity's tax base and as the authors and enforcers of its social norms.
- Method of Acquisition:
- Lower-Middle: Skilled labor, small business ownership, and management of small-scale enterprises, focusing on tangible, local capital.
- Upper-Middle: The sale of professional expertise and specialized knowledge derived from advanced education, focusing on long-term planning and high investment in human capital.
- Contemporary Archetypes: Master tradesmen, small business owners (Lower); engineers, non-partner lawyers, nurses, corporate managers (Upper).
- Section 5: Class 4 – The Steward Class (Professional/Managerial)
- Core Function: Administration and Optimization of Complex Systems. This class possesses the high-order human capital required to manage, maintain, and improve the large-scale systems of production, law, and health.
- Method of Acquisition: Returns on elite human capital and the successful management of major economic and social enterprises.
- Relationship to Commons: Significant net producer. They design and operate the systems that generate massive surplus value for the civilization.
- Contemporary Archetypes: Physicians, surgeons, partners in law firms, senior corporate executives, research scientists, and successful entrepreneurs.
- Section 6: Class 5 – The Judiciary Class (The Elite)
- Core Function: Production and Stewardship of the Commons Itself. This is the smallest class, comprising lineages that create, fund, or provide ultimate oversight for the polity's highest-order institutions (law, defense, high culture, core financial infrastructure).
- Method of Acquisition: Returns on capital at the largest scale, typically from the ownership of foundational assets or the creation of revolutionary economic, legal, or technological frameworks.
- Relationship to Commons: Prime mover. They function as the investors of last resort in the polity's survival and continuity, operating on multigenerational time horizons.
- Contemporary Archetypes: Founders of revolutionary industries, high-level investors, and families with "old money" who wield dispositive influence over national institutions and policy.
- Section 1: Life Outcomes and Heritability
An individual's position in the class hierarchy strongly predicts the probability, magnitude, and valence of life outcomes across every conceivable dimension. Lower-class origins correlate with a high incidence of adverse experiences (e.g., premature mortality, chronic stress, familial instability, incarceration), while upper-class origins correlate with positive experiences (e.g., longevity, psychological well-being, stable relationships, personal security). This pattern stems from the heritability of class-causal traits (intelligence, conscientiousness, etc.) and the reinforcing nature of class-segregated environments (neighborhoods, schools), which makes genuine class ascent a profoundly difficult act of transformative self-reconfiguration. - Section 2: The Inexorable Pace of Mobility
As demonstrated by the work of Gregory Clark in The Son Also Rises, social mobility operates on a much slower timescale than commonly assumed. Using surname-tracking over centuries, Clark reveals a high intergenerational status correlation (approx. 0.75), suggesting that regression to the mean is a multigenerational process. This persistence appears independent of political systems, from feudal England to social-democratic Sweden, implying that an underlying, heritable "social competence" is the primary driver of long-run status, a factor largely impervious to policy intervention. - Section 3: Class as the Basis of Culture and Civilization
The primary distinction between ethnological categories (nations, civilizations, races) derives from their respective class distributions. Societies with a majority middle-class or higher population exhibit higher standards of living and greater global prestige. An advanced technological society requires a populace with the cognitive and behavioral traits necessary for complex, high-trust, and future-oriented cooperation—traits that define the upper classes in this model.
- Section 1: The Mating Marketplace
In the human mating marketplace, class functions as a primary currency, second only to physical attractiveness in its immediate impact. It serves as a powerful proxy for a potential partner's genetic quality, behavioral stability, and capacity to provide a secure environment for offspring. - Section 2: Mechanisms of Class-Based Mate Selection
- Clause A: Hypergamy and Resource Valuation
The female imperative to secure the best possible outcomes for her offspring drives a strategy of hypergamy—the tendency to select a partner of equal or higher class. This calculation transcends simple materialism; a partner's class signals his underlying traits (intelligence, foresight, stability) and his ability to confer these advantages, both genetic and environmental, onto his children. The choice between a man arriving in a beaten-up 1980 Volvo versus a new Tesla is not merely about the car; it is an instantaneous, visceral assessment of his competence, time preference, and position within the social hierarchy. - Clause B: Class Signaling and Detection
Humans possess an intuitive, rapid ability to detect class. This perception operates on multiple channels:- Phenotypic and Behavioral Signals: Posture, diction, accent, physical fitness, and even dental health.
- Cultural Signals (Habitus): Tastes in clothing, food, and art; conversational topics; and an effortless familiarity with the norms of high-status environments.
- Social Signals: How others in the environment defer to or dismiss the individual.A perception of lower-class origin can immediately disqualify a suitor in the eyes of a higher-class woman, as it signals a mismatch in foundational values and life strategy.
- Clause C: Class Homophily and Assortative Mating
The vast majority of mating is class-endogamous. Individuals overwhelmingly partner with those from a similar class background. This occurs not only by conscious choice but as a natural consequence of class-segregated social structures. People from the same class attend the same universities, enter the same professions, reside in the same neighborhoods, and join the same social clubs. Their social worlds are pre-filtered, making inter-class relationships a statistical and social anomaly. Consequently, even most inter-racial and inter-ethnic relationships are not inter-class relationships; the partners typically share a similar level of educational and professional attainment.
- Clause A: Hypergamy and Resource Valuation
- Section 3: The Brutality of Class Barriers
- Clause A: The Immutability of Origin
Class is brutally difficult to escape because it is not merely a question of wealth. Ascending the class hierarchy requires a complete internal transformation—the adoption of new modes of speech, behavior, and thought. This process is agonizing and often incomplete. An upwardly mobile individual lives in fear of being exposed as a fraud by "shibboleth" questions designed to probe one's origin ("So, what neighborhood did you grow up in? What school did you attend?"). The anxiety of being "fished out" as an imposter is constant. - Clause B: The Social Tax on Mismatched Pairs
In the rare event of an inter-class relationship, the lower-status partner pays a heavy social tax. They face the constant risk of humiliation and the subtle (or overt) disapproval of their partner's family and social circle. A woman who is attracted to a man may have that attraction extinguished upon discovering he lives in a neighborhood characterized by visible poverty, drug use, and violence—not because of snobbery, but because it provides incontrovertible evidence of his life-management failures and low position in the hierarchy she seeks to ascend or maintain. His environment becomes an unignorable testament to his class, negating any positive attributes he may possess.
- Clause A: The Immutability of Origin
- Section 1: The Marxist Fallacy
The philosophy of Marxism and its derivatives misattribute class stratification to a narrative of systemic oppression by one group over another. This worldview is seductive to those in the lower strata as it externalizes failure and provides a soteriological promise of revolutionary justice. However, it is built on a fundamental error: it mistakes the effects of class (wealth and power) for its causes (heritable traits). - Section 2: The Inevitable Failure of Leveling
Marxist-inspired revolutions—from the Soviet Union to Cuba, Zimbabwe, and South Africa—invariably fail to produce prosperous, equitable societies. The expropriation or elimination of the "oppressor" class does not transfer their productive capacity; it simply destroys it. The "oppressed" groups, as defined by this model, generally lack the requisite social competence to manage and maintain the complex systems that the higher classes created. Seizing Elon Musk's assets does not grant one the ability to run SpaceX. The result is consistently a decline into totalitarianism, economic inefficiency, and widespread misery, as the essential human capital that underpinned the old order has been liquidated. This pattern demonstrates that innate ability cannot be confiscated, redistributed, or replaced by ideological fervor.
Comprehensive Summary of the Author's Message
The author posits a starkly deterministic and heritable theory of class. The central message is that socioeconomic stratification is not a product of luck, environment, or systemic oppression, but a direct and largely immutable consequence of biologically-based, multigenerationally transmitted traits. These core traits—primarily general intelligence (g), conscientiousness, impulse control, and time preference—determine an individual's and a lineage's capacity to produce value and navigate the social world.The essay argues that society naturally organizes itself into a hierarchy based on this "social competence." The upper classes are defined by their net production of capital and stewardship of complex systems, while the lower classes are defined by their net consumption of common resources and their inability to engage in long-term, productive life strategies. This framework renders social mobility exceptionally slow and difficult, a phenomenon confirmed by Gregory Clark's long-term studies, suggesting that policy interventions are largely futile against the powerful current of heritability.
The most severe consequences of this reality manifest in the social and dating marketplace. Class acts as an inescapable filter in mate selection. Because a partner's class is the most reliable proxy for their underlying genetic and behavioral quality, mate choice is ruthlessly pragmatic. Women, driven by a biological imperative to secure the best future for their offspring, are inherently hypergamous and are repelled by signs of lower-class status. Mating is therefore overwhelmingly class-assortative, reinforcing the rigid structure of the hierarchy across generations. For the individual, this means that class of origin is a near-permanent brand that dictates life outcomes, social acceptance, and, most critically, romantic and reproductive success. The author concludes that any philosophy, such as Marxism, which ignores this biological foundation in favor of an "oppression" narrative is doomed to fail disastrously when put into practice, as it fundamentally misunderstands the source of societal wealth and order.
Vocabulary Enrichment
- Habitus (HA-bi-toos): noun. A term popularized by sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, referring to the system of ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions that we possess due to our life experiences and social class. It is the "feel for the game" that dictates our tastes, behaviors, and perception of the world.
- Shibboleth (SHIB-uh-leth): noun. A custom, principle, or belief distinguishing a particular class or group of people, especially a word or phrase whose pronunciation identifies a person as a member or non-member of a group.
- Endogamous (en-DOG-uh-muhs): adjective. Relating to the practice of marrying or breeding only within one's own specific group, tribe, or social class.
Last edited:
