What is it that makes a person popular—likeable, on the outermost level? These questions, I find, can be extremely difficult for some people to answer, not because the answers are difficult to grasp, but because no one likes the answers that prevail in human interaction; they know that psychopathy and narcissism—exacerbated by the childlike state induced by social media and popular culture—are powerful in dictated this sort of social hierarchy in open communities. Even when one is willing to entertain thinking in terms of the superficial, neanderthal laws that win out in the social arena, it can be very damaging to one’s conception of human value.
Last week, I became aware of an (undoubtedly extreme) example of this; it came to my attention that a young man with whom I graduated high school was accused involvement in the murder of his best friend. Most around me expressed complete disbelief, and I remain doubtful of his guilt until evidence is presented; but the most disturbing part of the revelation, to me, came from the few who whispered that they were unsurprised, that such is the end of the values and actions that concern such people. Regardless of this case in particular, that made complete sense to me; there had already been at least one or two others who graduated with me who were extremely popular and undeniably likeable who had apparently done some horrible things—to this, I’m sure everyone can relate. And is it not horribly disgraceful that these people, who demonstrate utter stupidity and sociopathy, are those that win in the social arena?
As I alluded to, these laws, in their lowest form, derive from narcissism—psychopathy, even. One may think that by choosing his company he can avoid interface with this, but many aspects of one’s life may involve entering some sort of social marketplace. For example, in dating, one may find that he has to compete with psychotic alpha males and interact with insane women before finding any value in what he is doing. And I am certain that many men have witnessed the phenomenon that women are often attracted to guys that are complete dicks. These laws are unavoidable in this sense simply because they are ubiquitous. In a social arena that involves varied individuals with drastically different (if existent) standards of value and morality, the most animal instincts are the lowest common denominator. This means that if a large and varied enough group of people are forced to interact and compete, at some level we find that the psychopaths will be revered, a few men get vastly more attention than others from women (and vice-versa), and virtue and ambition are the standard of value only among a few within sub-communities.
And the most ubiquitous of these sub-communities is the individual. That’s why men choose to go their own way. Of course, they won’t get credit within the larger community for this. Men who follow MGTOW principles, or anyone who puts virtue above fruitless social interaction are labeled as “arrogant”, or “selfish”. But the difference between this selfishness and the narcissism of social neanderthals is its value. Likeability is a fiat currency to narcissists. And just as the government bureaucrat, who thinks money can be produced by superfluous spending and stolen without consequence, makes an enemy of the industrialist who earns every cent of wealth from his own tireless work, so too will amoral sycophants show contempt for one who is justified in his conceit.