Why American Society Has Decayed Since 1960

Famous political thinker Charles Murray is the author of Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010. Murray presents the case that in the U.S., there are two distinct cultures within white America which have formed over the last 50 years: The New Upper Class and the New Lower Class.


Murray focuses primarily on white America because he wanted to avoid the complexity that race would introduce into discussions of class. Fifty years ago, white Americans were a homogeneous bunch, with mostly the same social and cultural norms. They watched the same television shows, ate the same food, and had the same rate of marriage and happiness across social classes. This is not true today. What happened?

Four Requirements For The Functioning Of American Society


Murray argues that the feasibility of the American project has historically been based on four founding virtues. He identified these virtues based on the writings of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and other key figures of the 18th century:

1. Industriousness. This was a signature characteristic of Americans. It consists of the deep-seated American assumption that life is meant to be spent getting ahead by working hard to make a better life for oneself and one’s children. American industriousness fascinated citizens of other nations.

2. Honesty. For Thomas Jefferson, “honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.” Many Americans are familiar with the stories of “Honest Abe Lincoln” and George Washington. This unique trait most observed by European intellectuals when they noted the willingness of Americans to obey the law. Tocqueville, during his journey throughout the U.S. in the late 19th century, noted, “In America, the criminal is looked upon as an enemy of the human race.”

3. Marriage. The founders took for granted that marriage was the bedrock institution of American society. In fact, the founders often used the word “morality” as a synonym for fidelity, meaning to remain faithful to one’s spouse. The American concept of marriage was different from the European one, with its lack of arranged marriages and more religious roots.

4. Religiosity. Interestingly, Murray notes the relatively progressive views the founders held on religion. Jefferson was a Deist, Franklin did not believe in the divinity of Christ, Hamilton and Madison were suspected of being relaxed about their devotion to Anglicanism, and Washington was evasive about his views on Christianity. However, all of the founders were united in their view that religion was essential to the health of American society. The social institution of religion placed an emphasis on self-restraint and self-discipline, which the founders considered essential for civic bonds.

The founders were explicit in their belief that the American constitution would only work for moral and virtuous people who followed the above four precepts. As anyone can clearly see through mere observation, these values have eroded in American society.

The New Upper Class And Lower Class


Now let’s take a look at the data. Charles Murray defines the new social classes along educational and occupational lines. He has created a quiz here that measures how disconnected you are from mainstream American society.

To qualify for the upper class, individuals must have at least a bachelor’s degree and work as a manager, physician, attorney, engineer, architect, scientist, college professor or content producer in the media. For the most part, these are your stereotypical white collar careers. To be assigned to the lower class, individuals must have no academic credentials higher than a high-school diploma. If they work, it must be in a blue-collar job, a low-skill service job such as cashier, or a low-skill white-collar job such as mail clerk or receptionist.

For the lower classes, marriage has undergone a particularly dramatic transformation. Working class Americans 50 years ago would not even recognize their counterparts in modern America.


In 1960, high proportions of whites in both upper and lower social classes were married. For the upper class, it was 94%, and for the lower class it was 83%. In the 1970s came the great divergence. Among the upper classes, marriage has stabilized at 83% since the 1980s where it has remained. But for the working class, it has plummeted. As of 2010, only 48% of working class Americans are married. In 50 years we have gone from an 11% to 36% gap in marriage rates between the two social classes.

Children of the lower class today are being raised in very different situations than their 1960 counterparts. For white Americans as a whole in 1960, 2% of children were born out of wedlock and only 6% for women with only a high school education. By 2008, the out-of-wedlock birthrate for lower class white women has jumped to a staggering 44%.

White privilege.

White privilege.

Other factors are disrupting and dividing the social classes as well. These include drug addiction in working class white neighborhoods, lack of social capital formerly created by religion in addition to marriage, and increasing economic competition from legal and illegal immigrants.

A working class man from 1960 would not even recognize the neighborhoods, norms, and families of his social equivalents in 2016.

Two Forces With Unforeseen Collateral Effects


Murray argues that since the 1950s, there have been two powerful forces that have had collateral effects which has contributed to ever greater social class division: changes in the college admissions process and the increasing value of brains in the job market.

Murray refers to the first force as “the college sorting machine.” This is the initial mechanism that brings people with distinctive tastes and preferences together. He states in Coming Apart, “People like to be around other people who understand them and to whom they can talk. Cognitive segregation was bound to start developing as soon as unusually smart people began to have the opportunity to hang out with other unusually smart people.”

Elite colleges changed their admissions policies to place a greater emphasis on intelligence and less on wealth. In other words, top colleges used to be filled with rich students, some of whom were smart. Today, top colleges are filled with smart students, some of whom are rich. In 1952, the average SAT verbal score of incoming Harvard freshmen was 583. By 1960, it had jumped to 678.

However, most of the students who did well enough in school to get into an elite college came from upper middle class families. So the upper middle class kids attended school with the wealthy, and the few working class students who get into top colleges rarely returned to their hometowns. This perpetuates the divide.

The second factor is the increased value placed on intelligence. Today, businessmen and mathematicians get paid far more and are afforded many more opportunities to create wealth than existed in 1960.

As the nature of work changes, how can the working class adapt?

As the nature of work changes, how does the working class adapt?

In the early 1990s, Bill Gates was asked what competitor would be most likely to draw potential employees away from Microsoft. Goldman Sachs, Gates answered. He explained: “Software is an IQ business. Microsoft must win the IQ war, or we won’t have a future. Our competitors for IQ are investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.”

Over the last century, brains became much more valuable in the marketplace. For high-tech economies, companies hire people who can improve and exploit the technology. For complex business decisions, businesses rely on people who can navigate through labyrinths that require advanced cognitive ability.

Furthermore, the bigger the stakes, the greater the value of small increments in skills. The corporation ranked 500 in 2010 was about eight times larger than the 500th-ranked corporation in 1960. Today, a worker who can add a few percentage points of profitability can be rewarded with several times as much income as a result.

Now What?


The first step we can take is to acknowledge that something has happened to America. People on both sides of the political spectrum point to different causes. But one area where both can agree is that the upper class must have a sense obligation to the lower class. It is reasonable to suggest that the upper class must preach what they practice. One way we can do this is to stop the myth that “all families are equal.” The elite must stop pushing social boundaries to the detriment of the lower classes. It is not true that a single mother, gay parents, and other forms deviant families are equally healthy for a civil society.

Observing the effects of the last 50 years, it is clear that the U.S. is coming apart. If there is any hope to halting or reversing the decline, the 2016 presidential election may be the last chance we have.

Read More: Our Decaying Society Has Created The Age Of Unreason

217 thoughts on “Why American Society Has Decayed Since 1960”

  1. The biggest sign of decay is that the U.S. no longer produces goods. We provide services instead. This signals a civilization in the final stage of development.

    1. You only have to distinguish between ‘low value’ and ‘high value’. Production of goods is mostly low value, while services are mostly high value. Engineers and designers create the technology of a phone and this is high value. They are not involved in the physical production of a phone. This is done by unskilled people somewhere in a factory in Asia, which is considered low value, because the materials are cheap and the work is monotonous
      90% of the value of a phone is created by engineers and designers, while only 10% is created by the actual production in the form of materials. The 90% part is mostly done by Western countries, which is the reason they make the most money. It’s the part where you need to be smart and creative and that’s something that is considered high value.

      1. That is bullshit. Factory jobs have ALWAYS had good pay and benefits. Someone working at a car factory in the US has a STARTING PAY of 60 dollars an hour. Don’t even try to tell me a shitty service job at a gas station is better than a factory job, and Engineers and designers make up a minuscule and small amount of workers. I mean, there physically isn’t a demand for that many people too work in STEM fields.

        1. He is referring to factory work outside of the Western World, which tends to be poorly paid.
          Unfortunately what he is saying is true for the post-industrial societies of the west, but it has led to a fundamental imbalance in our economies that has really only benefited small groups of people.

        2. “He is referring to factory work outside of the Western World, which tends to be poorly paid.” That isn’t even true, factory jobs in the 3rd world, while it may be intensive, it’s still has very good pay compared to other jobs.

        3. I assure you, that if those factory jobs are brought back to America, they will not be low paying, they will have at least upper average pay.

    2. This is going to change in the near future. Automation technology combined the the mostly fracking based energy revolution is going to bring back a significant amount of manufacturing to the U.S. I started seeing this in my field (industrial automation) about 3 years ago.

      1. To be fair, I think he was talking about people rather than production figures per se, you know? I remember reading articles years ago about how employment was down and decreasing dramatically in certain manufacturing sectors in america, and everyone was making a big deal out of it as if we weren’t making or selling as many of the manufactured goods as we used to.
        In fact it was the opposite case, we were manufacturing and selling more manufactured goods… it’s just that machines and automation were making humans increasingly obsolete, and when costs needed to be slashed it was the laborers who were the first to be replaced with robots.

        1. Automation is not replacing all of the jobs. Someone has to repair and maintain the robots.
          I can tell you there is good demand for someone who can design and wire electrical control panels, someone who can troubleshoot a VFD, or a hydraulic pump. Trust me on this latter one – we’ve gone through countless service companies because no one can actually be bothered to do it right.
          The stereotypical boneheaded factory floor jobs of yesteryear are being automated out of existence (soon the same for service jobs). But people who can actually do good electrical or mechanical work will be in demand for a long time to come.

        2. I won’t disagree here.
          I may have even seen some stuff you’ve worked on as I appraise roughly $1B. of equipment for banks per year.
          I’m interested in making connections through ROK, so if you have any reason, let me know and I’ll shoot you my burner address. I’d like to do the same if it’s cool with you (what type of equipment is your specialty?).

        3. “In fact it was the opposite case, we were manufacturing and selling more manufactured goods… it’s just that machines and automation were making humans increasingly obsolete” This is bullshit, because it ignores the fact the world is still in a state of more demand than supply. If 100 people could create x goods in a factory, and now with new tech 10 people can make x goods, it is much better for the company to just produce 10x goods and take advantage of increased production.

  2. To all readers still in high school: You MUST learn to think critically to survive in today’s economy. So nurture your brain. Read every decent magazine and book you can find. Practice a musical instrument to build cognitive speed. Eat blueberries (they help, no joke). Join the debate team, even just for one season — or do like I did and argue with friends about Big Ideas.
    Those skills are the ticket to success in the New Amurrica.

      1. Lol, that guy’s never getting laid, and it’s why I didn’t join.
        BUT … debate teaches you how to hold two opposing ideas in your head at the same time. In less than a minute, I can always tell which people have debate experience, either formally or just with family around the dinner table.

        1. Debate teaches (1) how to use logic to break down an argument and arrive at truth, (2) how to hold two opposing arguments in your head at the same time, and (3) how to use persuasion and be a good public speaker. The guy above is doing worse than the average alcoholic street bum at #3.
          They don’t *teach* you how to be a good persuasive communicator in debate class, which is a real tragedy. I picked up a lot of it via trial and error, but I’m convinced I could have been state champion (I started at #3 my novice year) if I was given some training (like “toastmasters”) in voice, inflection, NLP, cross examination strategy, and general verbal jousting skills. If I had a kid, I’d make him watch some Gerry Spence, Vince Bugliosi, & F Lee Bailey clips, and he could mop up the competition, even if they were better prepared or more knowledgeable. OJ Got off with histrionics about a glove that supposedly didn’t fit (when it actually did). Evidence, testimony, and logic didn’t matter.

        2. This isn’t what most of debate is like, this is just a really shitty format of debate called “policy debate” and it is being self suffocated to death because of this stupid “spreading (talking faster than people can understand you)” bullshit. If you were to do this in say, Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum, Worlds School Style debating, or Congressional Debate, you would just make yourself look like an asshole and get placed 9 (out of 8, and I am not even joking).

        3. “They don’t *teach* you how to be a good persuasive communicator in debate class” That sucks, the coaches on my team luckily did.
          “(I started at #3 my novice year)” Holy shit, you are certainly a master debater. What format did you do? You mentioned cross examination so I assume LD? Did you ever make it to Nationals?

        4. No, I never went to the national level. Yes, it was L-D. I only did it for 2 years. I had a lot of potential my novice year. My debate coach hated me. I was shy and pretty geeky in high school–made straight As, didn’t have a girlfriend, but wasn’t quite a “nerd” in that I still had cool friends and was generally well liked and happy. My teachers *all* loved me but for some reason the female debate coach hated me–she actually made some comment in class one day about how I had everything given to me and I was lazy–the ironic thing was I was the ONLY kid in the class who had a job after school! I worked at the local grocery store every day from 4 to close. My parents were blue collar, while many of my other classmates *were* spoiled and had rich parents who bought them a nice car and gave them free money (I paid for my beater).
          My reaction to her was basically to give up and not try. I mean I wrote decent cases and tried hard in the debates, but I didn’t do more than the bare minimum or really research hard or prepare well or anything. I withdrew and never asked any questions in class. There was a novice freshman girl (I was a jr) who the teacher loved, and became her favorite “pet” who she expected to be competitive, although she never amounted to anything. I never even thought about it until this moment, but it was a clear case of sexism. There were some older female debaters that this coach LOVED and supported, and the coach was a gross fat old lesbian. I still learned some philosophy and stuff from her, because I was in the class, and it was very worthwhile, but it was also quite a wasted potential for something I could have gone a lot farther with. I can’t remember if I told my parents.. high school is a weird time to be “telling” on adults but she should have been called out. For the record, while I’d recommend L-D debate, I think policy debate is not only useless, but detrimental.

        5. Yeah, Policy is complete shit with all the spreading now. Though I actually do/did congressional and am thinking about doing worlds school debate.

        1. Well if that’s debate then the whole unit I was in while in the military must of been top tier. We would throw expletives and racial ones around more than they did.

        2. She won the *national championship*. I bet you in 20 years she’ll be running for governor, or higher. Hopefully I’ll be far away and will be able to just sit back and laugh, because this would be pure comedy if it wasn’t happening to your culture.

        3. “She won the *national championship*. I bet you in 20 years she’ll be running for governor, or higher. Hopefully I’ll be far away and will be able to just sit back and laugh, because this would be pure comedy if it wasn’t happening to your culture.”
          That’s the logical outcome of “debate” class.
          “Should Gay Marriage Be Legalized?”
          “Should Women Be Able To Vote?”
          “Should Transgenders Be Able To Use The Bathroom Of The Sex They Identify As?”
          Students should start from the premise of the absolute truth of Orthodoxy, be assigned an errant ideology or behavior, and compete to see who can offer the best refutation or way of combating it.

        4. Probably not, because they are a University team, while that guy is high school level.
          The fuck? How did they win? I know highschool freshmen who have better public speaking skills than them!

        5. Not necessarily. You are graded off your presentation ability rather than ‘who won”. That is why you are generally automatically assigned to a side (pro or con).

        6. Oops, I wrote that first part during the point when the news caster said they are University level, so I just automatically assumed they would be better, but holy crap, that is horrid speaking. Thanks for informing me of that.

        1. No, that isn’t Harvard, this is the “Harvard invitational”. Invitational’s are when Universities will host a high school level tournament on campus and teams are invited to join.
          P.S. Because of this bullshit, Policy (this type of debate format) is pretty much going to die off.

      2. Oh, Policy. Well fuck, that is policy debate, so it doesn’t count. Policy is probably going to be gone within a few years because this shit has started to happen, when it will be replaced by the much superior Worlds Style debate. (I have first hand experience with speech and debate).

    1. “Join the debate team”
      And at the same time realize that anything you say based on critical thinking could get you socially outcasted, fined, or even jailed regardless of how polite you make an argument. Understand that you are currently living in an empty shell of what was once a great nation and now has become a wasteland where the majority are politically correct, non-critical thinking shit-for-brains.

      1. Seeing commentary on Facebook or YouTube is a good litmus test as to how far society has lost its way. When the populace adopts a witch hunt mentality, it’s easy to see why secret brotherhoods evolved into being.

      2. Not nessisarly. If you are doing one of the three traditional debate formats (Policy, Lincoln-Douglas, or Public Forum), then you are assigned to what side of a pro/con argument you have to make, so you can say pretty much anything you want. On the other hand, if you do the two more avant-garde debate formats (Congress and Worlds style debate) where you have Freedom of what side you want to argue, you could potentially get in trouble (I learned this the hard way).

        1. “Not nessisarly. If you are doing one of the three traditional debate formats (Policy, Lincoln-Douglas, or Public Forum), then you are assigned to what side of a pro/con argument you have to make, so you can say pretty much anything you want”
          I hear ya. But as you mention ‘tradion’ I think to myself that all things ‘traditional’ especially in the university environment are being done away with.
          If I may ask, what trouble did you have in your debate forum?

        2. Well I was in a congress round, we were debating the most mundane things ever – taking away federal funding for charter schools. The bill author was apparently a Social Justice Warrior, because one of their points was that charter schools are bad because they are majority white even in “diverse” (unspecified amount) areas.I of course jumped right on this and pointed out in my speech that Blacks and Hispanics are outperformed by whites and Asians in education because they have less of a cultural and parental drive to get into universities. (Ironic how I got discovered this via a left wing website: http://bigthink.com/videos/why-some-races-outperform-others). Now this soon turned into a shitshow after the round because apparently some people took what I said as to mean that Blacks and Hispanics aren’t smart as Caucasians and Asians and other racist stuff I didn’t imply. I had to then defend my self in a sort of tribunal by a horde of SJW’s but took out their flimsy Strawmen and anecdotes fairly easily.
          As for the 3 traditional debate formats, LD, PF are still alive and big, though Policy is probably going to die of because it has started to be taken over by the “spreading” phenomenon (aka, people talking extremely fast) in the past decade, and this is basically keeps anyone from taking it seriously anymore. I think spreading is either going to have to die off or policy will shrink until it is taken off the National Event list.

      3. I can only imagine a debate about allowing transgendered men use the ladies room. It is a PC keep-out zone there…

    2. Problem-solving ability is the key. You (meaning high school students) probably hate algebra and think it’s a worthless subject that you’ll never use again in your life. I know I did.
      But had I applied the problem-solving skills it teaches earlier in my life, I would have been happy earlier.

    3. Mags are dying, but there are great blogs (like this one) worth reading. I’d also add voxday.blogspot.com (Vox Popoli – poitical insights and anti-SJW instruction) and captaincapitalism.blogspot.com (Cappy Cap is an economic powerhouse). If you’re interested in efficiency and entrepreneurship, Scott Adam’s blog (blog.dilbert.com) and Sublime your Time (sublimeyourtime.com) are also excellent resources.
      For food, I find that two eggs per day, scrambled with as much butter or bacon grease as they’ll take, is great for improving general health. Eggs and coffee first thing in the morning keep me focused and clear all day.
      And do some morning calisthenics when you get up. No faster way to get your body awake and ready to work.

      1. What’s your morning calisthenics routine like?
        Regrettably, this is an idea that’s almost entirely neglected in the bodybuilding and fitness world. Are we talking about some bodyweight pushups, lunges and crunches, or what?
        It’s an interesting idea to me since I’ve discovered how minor changes in my morning routine can have a big affect on the rest of my day.

        1. I used to go through a Convict Conditioning routine first thing in the morning (pushup, leg raise, pullup, squat, bridge, handstand), but I ultimately fell off that routine. It’s very effective, and if you do enough sets each day you can more or less skip the gym.
          Now I’m a simpler (and lazier) guy. 10-20 pushups, 10 jump-tucks (starting from squat position), and whatever core exercise I feel like that day (usually prone leg lifts, planks, or bird dogs). Follow it up with some basic stretches and a quick shower, and I’m ready for work.

        2. I also want to add that breathing exercises are great for your core and your mindset. The basic is a square breath (10 count in, 10 count hold, 10 count out, 10 count hold), but I also dabble with Tai Chi and Qi Gong breathing routines.
          The Shaolin monks swear it’s the basis for their strength, and who am I to argue with people who break concrete with their faces?

        3. That’s awesome man. It gives me something to do rather than sitting around and waiting for my coffee to brew. I might try it out. Thanks.

        4. That’s interesting. I recently read about ‘box breathing’ over at wellbuiltstyle.com
          Do you use this exercise in a planned and deliberate fashion? Or do you only use it in cases where someone might say, “Whoa! Slow down and count to ten,” or maybe both?
          I guess the question is whether you box-breathe deliberately every morning and experience positive benefits throughout the day, or whether you merely do it when you feel anxiety or whenever needed for meditation purposes throughout the day?
          As an aside, since you mentioned the “core,” I thought I might add that I regularly perform vacuums throughout the day while sitting at the office. It’s the only exercise (aside from finger extensions with a rubber band) that I dabble around with outside of the gym.

        5. I box breathe whenever I want to feel relaxed and focused. Because I’m a singer who used to deal with rage issues, I “take a deep breath” all the time as a sort of reflex.
          (As a side note, sighing is a very effective anti-stress activity. The contented sigh, like the smile, is both a physical response to a certain emotion and a mechanism for generating said state.)
          Meditation is a preventative exercise, not a reactive one. It’s best to take five minutes whenever you have a chance and just relax, practice some breathing exercises, and consciously reinforce your focus and control. Once you establish such habits, you will find it more difficult to experience anxiety.
          Vacuums (tensing your core muscles and taking deep breaths) are very effective exercises you can do anywhere – it’s a great thing to do at the office. I also have a 4lb squishy rubber medicine ball at the office to toss around when I’m thinking – great for forearm strength and grip.

        6. Great stuff Taignobias.
          I’ve recently experienced some of the benefits of sighing. I like how you emphasize the idea that these physical phenomena can both be a result and cause of some state you are in. You’ve given me a lot to think about here.
          I don’t mean to put you on the spot or anything, but if you haven’t done it yet, I hope you consider submitting an article here on something fitness related. ROK is kind of notorious in my mind for promoting fitness yet failing to provide the tools and ideas.

    4. As someone involved in hiring entry level employees for an office job, I disagree. The best thing for kids to do is to learn:
      1) How to bathe and groom
      2) How to dress like they understand sizes and aren’t colorblind
      3) How to make eye contact
      4) How to not leaving rotting food on their desks
      5) How to hit and then flush a toilet
      6) How to answer a phone
      7) How to ask a question
      8) How to answer a question
      9) How to tell the time and date
      And, most importantly
      10) How to shut up and LISTEN
      Kids have to learn how to sit up and focus their eyes before learning how to run.
      A degree means nothing, solving problems means nothing, if a kid is a smelly, aimless sperglord who cannot communicate.

        1. Actually, I think kids out of high school a could be OK if they got a job, but if they do college first, they’re pretty much irredeemable.

        1. Thank you so much for sharing these. I watched “Act Your Age” with my kid. My kid enjoyed it and thinks it should be shown at school.
          We’ve lost so much in this country.

    5. Is critical thinking a skill you can acquire, or is it something you are born with?

  3. Hmm. What else has happened since the 1960’s?
    The civil rights movement, which allowed the more functional blacks to leave their low-IQ black trash neighbors behind in the inner cities. We’ve seen how well that has worked out.
    And just letting any kind of human debris from random places around the world into this country, whether they bring anything of value or not. I’ve seen this happen in northwest Arkansas, the home of my mother’s family. Back in the 1970’s, poor white people like my grandmother had jobs in the chicken processing plants. I guess Arkansas ran out of hillbillies, however, so these degenerate companies have imported people from the Marshall Islands to take those jobs now.
    The Marshallese make hillbillies look like characters from Star Trek by comparison.

    1. Since the civil rights movement, blacks have become even more concentrated in the inner cities, so I’m calling bullshit on that. Besides, this article is about INCREASED class segregation, not the intermingling of blacks with society at large.

    2. “The Marshallese make hillbillies look like characters from Star Trek by comparison.” LOL

  4. Corporate America has been cuntified. Gimme that and fuck you is the logic, doing less to gain more is congratulated. And if you work and supervise like a man, another company will engage in cuntified policy to take it away from you.

  5. I’m not sure I understand the point of the article. Is it saying that greater economic and intellectual divergence is the cause for the decay? I feel like the last part is missing.
    While I’m on the subject…these “Cause of the Decline in America” articles are mostly true and interesting, but we basically are given the same article every two weeks with slightly different wording and title. Maybe tell us something we don’t already know? This one was a little different, but like I said above, i feel like it was unclear.

    1. And is it suggesting that university students should be chosen based on wealth first? Or that the upper classes from previous generations took on more responsibility towards the lower classes?
      How exactly did the division between IQ groups lead to decline? I also didn’t find it entirely clear.

      1. Exactly. I actually don’t think it’s bad for universities to sort by intelligence; I’m not sure if he was condemning it either.

        1. Universities tend to sort by intelligence. But this means top schools will be filled with the upper middle class. Most of the smarter kids come from upper middle class and above backgrounds.
          People living in an upper class bubble removed from mainstream society is one major factor of the decline. Upper class kids who attend elite schools go on to leadership positions in government and business. They live in areas with people similar to them. Yet they are driving policy and shaping society for the working class who they have no connection with.

      2. Segregating by ability inside schools is not an issues. Total isolation based on wealth, IQ and class is a big problem. There is a big difference between out performing the kid to grew up with. And having never met anyone not exactly like yourself.

  6. The sorting he is talking about is real.
    In the public schools I went to in the 1960’s and 70’s. I set next to the children of doctors, lawyers, old money and new. The children of factory workers, mechanics and the flat out poor. There was only a minor IQ divide between all the classes. We were all one tribe, with one set of morel standards and cultural expectations.
    As young man some the the most intelligent people I ever met were construction tradesman. I was a laborer when I dated a girl going to UCLA. She was proud to show me off at her sorority party’s. I had no trouble fitting in with these supposed elite intellects at one of California’s elite universities. The intellectual divide was simply not that great between blue color and white.
    Today the children of the rich never go to the same schools as the children of the working classes and poor. The different classes rarely ever see each other growing up. A UCLA sorority girl dating and showing off a laborer? That is not going to happen today. The kids at UCLA are far brighter than the kids going into the trades these days. The high IQ kids simple do not go into the trades. As children we are sorted by test scores and income and kept away from each other. We are now different classes and tribes. In the end we do not know each other. We do not like each other, we no longer share the same moral and cultural standards. And that is not even taking the 60 million immigrants from totally different cultures into account.
    God help us all.

        1. Is there anyway to put an end to this bubble bullshit? And unite the classes again? Both the Rich and the Poor are one people. We should help each other out complement our strengths and cover over each others weaknesses or even rectify them.

        2. The only thing that seems to unit us anymore is a common enemy. 9/11 united us for about 90 days. Bloody civil unrest or a war we could lose, would do it. For a while

      1. In Indiana there are walled off suburbs built only for the sickenly rich. They have small towns inside with shops and gas stations so the people don’t ever have to leave. It’s like science fiction. The homes go for millions of dollars. If the rich want to be physically separate from the rest of us, that’s OK. But when they commit economic crimes they need to go to regular prison like the rest of us.

        1. Their bubbles needs to be popped and not allowed to have their fortunes not tied to us.
          If we go down they go down. A good incentive for them to ensure our prosperity.

        2. Totally. Their fortunes came from us by the way they drain money from the economy and then hoard it. And it’s bullshit that the investing schemes they make and control shoot all opportunities for economic security for the rest of us all to hell. And when there’s a crash, they’re insulated from it, while the rest of us have to struggle to rebuild careers. I’m all for wealth, but it has to be fair. . .People get rich because other people get poor and then the rich eliminate opportunities: There needs to be some kind of compensation.

        3. ”People get rich because other people get poor and then the rich
          eliminate opportunities: There needs to be some kind of compensation.”
          Those who get money through a good service or product has every right to riches.
          Its only those who gained money through screwing over others that should lose it.

        4. I have given this question much thought as well excessive wealth gives too few too much power. Maybe a 100 million per person limit on wealth adjusted for inflation…

        5. Or find a way to make it impossible to have a monopoly. Hence making more equitable distribution without force. The way to do it is to have a sound currency and not to shield any corporation from competition.

        6. Because if one uses force to impose limits on wealth. They will buy the government to make it their friend. If it is just incentives imposed by impersonal forces. Then it cannot be corrupted.

        7. True I have given this side of the issue much thought but with many representative forms of government often limit many of these abuses if there is a willingness. Billionaires wield to much power and they themselves can be ( and often are ) agents of corruption.

        8. Agreed billionaires themselves are a form of monopoly which was the reason I poised the question If a national or even global cap on personal wealth ( Say 100 million per person AAFI ) as a possible solution…

      2. Think of society as being the Titanic the Elites have their life boats sadly we don’t…

    1. With such an intense class conflict, I suspect that people like me who stayed out of the education system for so long will likely have an advantage in negotiating between the various intellectual classes. This might be an interesting future.

    2. We have also created perverse incentives where people of high intelligence go into fields like finance and insurance. Fields, that, while arguably necessary in an economy, don’t require any great innovation and aren’t going to make your society any more wealthy. I went into finance for precisely this reason. Because at the end of the day, I’m working for a paycheck, and I wanted to be rewarded fairly well. Doctors are also paid really well, but have shitty hours, terrible work environment, and low freedom. Read up on the F-9 monkey.
      In 50 years, when America is fully overcome by societies that planned better for the future, it won’t matter that we squandered our best and brightest working on wall street churning out more money for themselves. This has absolutely zero societal return. There are many with strong minds, that could be making valuable contributions to science, research, philosophy, etc. but choose to be a lawyer or banker because our society rewards it highly. Why?

      1. The commoditization of currency was made possible by fiat printing. Prior to central banking, the path to wealth was private production of goods and infrastructure that the market rewarded.
        Now, you can make untold billions moving money from one digital account to the next and collecting the middleman fee. We need to sever the printing press and return to private production if we are to last.

      2. Well said. No doubt we have gotten to where we send our best and brightest into fields where their efforts are useless. there is no benefit to society from their work. In some cases if they ceased to exist, if they all died tomorrow,we would be better off.

    3. The biggest issue that we are currently facing is the amount of foreign people coming (specifically China & India) who are trying to get into our universities and also take our jobs (H1b visas). As long as this happens, the divide will get larger and larger.

      1. Yes that makes the problem far worse. Cultures that were never like ours are not going to make us a more homogeneous people. They only make the problem worse

  7. So again I ask: Has Israel “decayed” or “come apart” since 1960?
    Why do Israelis run their own country properly, when the ones in Israel’s branch offices push damaging policies in their host countries?
    And I mean this quite literally. An Israeli banker named Stanley Fischer runs the U.S. Federal Reserve. Why don’t people want to talk about how weird this looks?

    1. Oy vey! When you need to know something, we’ll tell you what to think on CNN or ABC. You goyim just don’t understand that your countries must be filled with mooslims and mexicans so you can have the enrichment of diversity. Of course, we (((jews))) don’t need enrichment because we’ve already been enriched.

    2. “Give me control of a nations money supply and I care not who makes its laws”
      -Mayer Amschel Rothschild

        1. “I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls the British money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.”
          – Nathan Mayer Rothschild in 1815 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Mayer_Rothschild#Legend)
          “Let us control the money of a nation, and we care not who makes its laws.”
          – A “maxim” of the House of Rothschild (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Money#Misattributed)

        2. i guess you want to demonstrate how cheap internet conspiracies are made to manipulate both naive SJWs and “anti-establishment” warriors.
          -first, you just proved that the original quote posted by Psquare is fake
          -there’s no the 1815 quote on the Wikipedia link you posted
          -the wikiquote link clearly says that the “maxim” is just another hearsay – for which there’s no proof.

    3. Tribalism at its finest.
      Kinda like if you were to combine capitalism and cannabalism where by the bones of both predator and prey are picked clean in one fell swoop.

  8. It’s all about norms and values. Most Western countries abandoned this in the 70s and created a society where everybody and everything should be accepted. We all know that this doesn’t work, because most people can’t handle freedom. Give them freedom in dress and people will wear the most ridiculous clothes and their retarted values will become the norm in society, because the dumbest people are the biggest attention whores in society, while the smart people stay on the background and suffer in silence. Afraid to open their mouth.

    1. There should be minimum aesthetics standards for clothing. Ancient Clothing and Medieval clothing can be inspirations.

  9. The divide of the upper and lower class today is not only wealth, but of education and ‘superficial’ intelligence. To gain being a manager in the 1960s, one would show hard work and intuition to get into position, according to limited historical source I have read. Today world, its the focus on college degree and certification in order to become a manager with sucking up to HR. Once workplace decide to use the college degree as filter for applicants, help increase the divide with upper and middle class. Once the college became filled with leftism professor, we start see the formation of the liberals of modern day. MIke Rowe sums up the this problem in picture.

    1. Its all about checking the right quantification box. In the day you proved yourself to your coworkers. Their was no HR department. Major companies used to test for ability. Major aerospace companies had lead engineers who were drop outs. They trained these natural talents. One of those drop outs designed the SR-71. No degree but he was the best and the brightest at what he did. Lockheed’s HR department would not even give him an assemble job these days

      1. Those companies at those time, knew what they were doing. Just like a chef in a kitchen, you have train the staff yourself in order to get the results you want. Today, HR controls that function and its a mess.

        1. The “Inhuman Resources” department in EVERY company is the weakest link by far.
          Inhuman Resources is a real world application of allowing the inmates to run the asylum.
          No surprise that they’d fuck up a glass of water.

        2. I hear what you guys are saying. It is HR and the whole corporate scene today that is the reason why I’ve gone back into engineering (industrial automation and control systems) rather than trying to pursue the MBA corporate climbing thing (which I’m no good at anyways).

        3. The HR problem is a result of the “line” people (engineering, production, sales/marketing) being replaced by “staff” people (HR, finance, legal) in corporate management. I think this due to the FED bubbles as well as the need to comply with increased government regulation, especially with regards to labor law.
          I agree that this is destroying the competency of American corporations as well as making it more difficult for the line people who do the real work to find employment in them.

        4. Its one big catch 22 in the USA. Now do we hide in the airplane and take raft out to sea to find salvation from the ridicule rule in the USA.

        5. I’m still on the fence about getting an MBA. I recently got my professional designation, so I thought an MBA with a relevant emphasis (i.e. finance) might vault me into a higher career path. Alternatively, if I start stacking designations and certificates onto those I already have, I could double-down on the professional experience that has landed me where I am today. I haven’t decided yet, but my reluctance to go to business school is a pretty good sign that I won’t be doing it (even though I just recently requested an information packet on applying).
          I’ve been to grad school before for economics; I dropped out fast. That kind of soured me to the whole idea of grad school and I’m perhaps a bit too wary to give it another go even while bringing a different skill set and pursuing a different emphasis.
          I don’t know, here in Florida I’d only need about $20,000 or so to get an MBA from UF, so it wouldn’t be too risky, at least compared to the $250,000 my brother spent getting his PhD. I can pay for my MBA with cash and I’ll always have my “senior accredited…” designation regardless.

        6. I have one, and while I don’t regret it, and got mine a few years ago for far less than $20k, it hasn’t done much for me professionally and the learning I got from it was very minimal. I would only recommend it if a) you work in an industry like teaching or a huge corporation or a union that will automatically pay you more just because “you have a degree” or b) you don’t have a background in business / finance / economics and want one (although much of what they teach is questionable anyway).
          You’ll find people care even less about what school you earned your MBA from than where your undergrad degree was. I mean sure, a Harvard MBA is more valuable than a UF, but otherwise I don’t think the brand is very important.

        7. Thanks for the advice, I really appreciate it. There are few places I can turn for issues of this nature and honest career advice is much appreciated wherever I can get it.
          I don’t even trust my own father to give me advice here (in spite of his professional success)… he still thinks an MBA is the holy grail, and I remember his shock/disbelief when the best job I could come up with in ’07 was ‘Barista’ after attaining an Economics degree from an honors college.
          It didn’t really surprise me much; the only thing that surprised me was that so many others expected otherwise. Needless to say, I rapidly learned to ignore the career advice coming from Boomers + Grandpa unless they were teaching me how to earn a comfortable income while gaming the system (thanks Ed… I got $2.00 for you the next time we cross paths).

        8. If you care to share your career plans, educational background, and line of work perhaps I can elaborate. The majority of my classwork was all “group work” which seems childish to me, and felt odd for a bunch of adults to be working on presentations together. The way it works out is everyone gets an A or B. The professors know that in every group there is going to be one loser or dumbass that doesn’t pull their own weight, so they just give every team a good grade so that your team isn’t punished for having to carry dead weight (this of course removes any meaning your grade would otherwise have).
          I already had a business background, and had taken finance and econ classes, and learned very little. As I told my uncle after graduating “It was ok, but nothing I couldn’t have learned by spending 6 weeks at the library.” The theme was focusing on groupwork and collaboration and equality (kind of like our government). I did meet one redpill guy there, but I was fresh out of college and pretty beta and didn’t keep in touch.
          The most challenging subject was finance, which is probably the most useful and the only one requiring real analytic thinking. It was done online (which was shitty): every week the class read an article. One person was tasked with summarizing the article. Another person was tasked with leading the discussion. The rest of the class was required to make at least 2 discussion posts. You would rotate these jobs throughout the class so you got at least 2 articles of your own. Your performance was graded by the other class members.
          The first time I thoroughly read the article, thought it through for a couple of hours, explained it in great detail using examples, and in plain speech where anyone could understand it, and asked some thoughtful questions to stimulate discussion. My classmates gave me a C or D.
          The second time, I emulated what others were doing: I briefly skimmed the article, not even reading the whole thing. I made a formulaic summary using a whole bunch of buzzwords, talked about downsizing and corporate responsibility and synergy, and a bunch of stuff that wasn’t even in the article. I got an A. I suppose in the end I *did* receive a valuable lesson from that class.

        9. Damn. Never experienced anything like that, but I’m not surprised.
          By the way, I love hearing these kinds of personal experiences. In some sense, they confirm for me that shit is real.
          “Career plans…educational background…line of work…” For me, well, my plans are vague but I’d like to either be a senior executive in a larger firm or owner of my own business like my dad.
          I’m lucky because I currently work for my dad. It makes things easier for me and him since he can trust me, I can trust him, and there’s no bullshit (we don’t fuck with each other, play games, etc., we’re on the same team even if we argue from time to time). I’lll stress that I’ve worked for my dad off and on for years, and only recently has he come to respect me… only recently have I commanded his respect. It’s not an easy thing.
          My career plans are vague. At this point, I’m mainly concerned about moving on from my dad’s business. Of course I could take over the business, but unless I have a good 5 or so years more experience, it would be absurd since my dad is a legend in the industry and basically makes the business work with his name…sure, I can milk the name, I can consult with pops, etc., but it’s not sustainable unless I find a way to break away and establish myself.
          My educational background is simple. BA Economics and recently credentialed.
          I’ve been working for my dad off-and-on since high school, so it wasn’t hard for me to come up with the experience, recommendations, courses, etc., for my accreditation.
          I’ve really hit my stride recently and I can tell that my dad is contemplating turning over the business to me within the next few years. I don’t think I’m ready for that, but I know I’m the best man for the job compared to the other employees, so I’m kind of torn about whether I should expand outward and capitalize on further credentials or merely sit tight and capitalize on what I’ve got going on now. No doubt, the knowledge that my dad would be a “consultant” would be the only reason I could take over if he decided to retire, otherwise I would just be another appraiser.

        10. I tried to tell my sons what I am about to tell every one here; get a certification that allows you to get a job. Then let the company pay for your further education. An example is going to a 6 week class to be certified as a nursing assistant (CNA). Then get your nursing degree while you gain experience in your field working full time as a CNA.
          I got my BS Engineering through the military. I got my MBA through the company where I worked after the military. I got my PhD the way almost everyone does; by being a TA/RA and getting the school to pay for the tuition. I paid a total of $500 in tuition far all my degrees through PhD. I don’t have a clue how your brother paid for a PhD. Or do you mean total cost from post high school through PhD?

        11. I would argue this point. A MBA from Podunk U is pretty much useless; I know I got one and it did nothing for my advancement. It is like law school, if you go to an elite school it costs a ton, but it earns you a ton. Anything else is almost no return on your investment of money and time.

        12. That’s good stuff Mike. Getting professional certificates gave me credibility on the job and put me on the path towards accreditation, which ultimately got me a raise (accreditation is at least a five year process in my field). I think the accreditation will be a game changer if I decide to move onto a different company or go out on my own. I haven’t tested the waters yet since I plan on staying put in the short term, but I’m pretty sure I’ll be in a better position to market my skills when the time comes. I view it as the kicker to my BA. The BA would be essentially worthless to me (career wise) if I didn’t have my accreditation and if I tried to market myself, but the Bachelor’s was an educational requirement to get my accreditation.
          I’m considering adding certificates and a second accreditation, or alternatively an MBA. I’m leaning towards the former since I know I can do that while continuing to work where I am. Also, I’m actually interested in developing the extra skills and I know that the company will pay for it to boot. As for the MBA, I never thought about the company paying for it, but I guess it couldn’t hurt to ask. In itself, I’m not terribly interested in business school, I just thought it would be a nice hedge if I ever needed/wanted to move into the actual sector where I’m currently just a service provider (equipment leasing and finance).
          Haha, yeah, my bro’s debt includes Master’s and PhD tuition and further loans for living expenses (NY and CA). He didn’t work while in school so it was all funded by student loans, they were both expensive private schools, and in general his tastes are not cheap so he maxed out the living expenses part. He’s a strange bird, but I have made sacrifices for his wellbeing and will continue to do so as long as he lives. I truly believe in the value of what he will one day create.

        13. Now I get why you’re such a miserable troll of unknown gender. You got fired from your last job and you spend your day trolling as a means to convince yourself that you’re “working”. Yup, better to stay under the bridge in the shadows than have the testicular fortitude to confess that you’re a frightened, angry man (or woman) who is inches away from going postal.

        14. Agreed tried returning to college a few years back didn’t work out to well aside from some laziness on my part all this PC nonense killed what little motivation I had as I never enjoyed the class environment. Going to try some online college courses next.

      2. Yep.
        I’ve always believed that the college degree is vastly overrated. I wish I could go back and save the money I (and my parents) spent acquiring it.
        Unless you want to do STEM/medicine/law, it’s worthless, and even then it’s not a rational measure of your capability, desire, or intellect.

        1. I always thought that starting at high school, boys should be taught practical things they can use to earn a living like auto or machine repair, carpentry etc while girls are taught how to cook, sew etc. This way, there HS education will be worth something financially. And college degrees should only be necessary for specialized fields. Many jobs you could’ve learned on the job 30, 40, 50 years ago now require a college degree that doesn’t help one bit with the actual job. A degree you have to invest years to get and lots of money to get. Instead, you’re forced to attend 14 years of school, which does nothing for you. I had almost a 4.0 in the 4th grade. To this date, it hasn’t netted me 2 nickels to rub together. And then, you must attend for another 4 to 6years, at your own expense. On top of that being forced to spend the first 2 years relearning what you just spent 4 years in high school learning.

        2. I don’t even own a lawn mower, but my 6th grade shop class where we did a month on small engine repair is something that is still valuable to me to this day. It’s sad that we only had one class in my entire 12 years of public school that was devoted to men’s issues.

        3. The liberal arts always take a bad rap, but a classical liberal arts education (uninfected by leftism) is fantastic. It teaches you to think critically. Please remember that — you’re sweeping away two millennia of really smart dead white guys, the same way that leftists do, when you dismiss anything that isn’t STEM.
          If you breezed through college putting in minimal effort, the way so many people do, then you didn’t challenge yourself, you didn’t learn to think critically, and you wasted the money.
          Still, a college degree IS a measure of your capability. See the article: “Elite colleges changed their admissions policies to place a greater emphasis on intelligence and less on wealth.” This is true. College is more meritocratic than ever, believe it or not. It’s true that there are other measures, but this is still a good one.

        4. I think college should be only for those craftsmen and journeymen ready for the jump to more executive management jobs.

        5. Harold, something like 60 to 70% of today’s jobs didn’t even exist twenty years ago. IOW, if you view college as training for a job, you’re going to be up shit’s creek when that job gets automated or changed. Better to use time at the university to learn how to think, stay flexible, and take small sideways steps. There are lots of studies done showing that liberal arts majors progress the furthest — not necessarily right out of the gate, since starting salaries are so low, but across the whole length of a lifespan.

        6. Yeah there was an article here recently about what the classical liberal arts USED to mean and how it’s been perverted.

        7. Wow. Did they even have home ec? Most of the guys thought it was silly, but it’s important for both sexes to have some basic cooking, home finance, etc. training. It’s probably the only lesson in cooking some chicks get these days…

        8. I have to agree. Though I did learn cooking from my family, home ec did teach me a bit extra. Our teacher, who was a complete sweetheart, even went out of her way to take us out to a an apartment complex to teach us the basics of renting.

        9. “The liberal arts always take a bad rap, but a classical liberal arts education (uninfected by leftism) is fantastic.”
          True, but that classical education has been dead for quite some time. Would recommend, “Great Books of the Western World”, if you can find a set, that would recapture the education students are suppose to be getting.

        10. They dont offer any of that shit anymore- probably bc its too “dangerous” and the schools dont want any lawsuits. Friend of a friend went to high school in the late 70s, the school offered flight lessons for a select few…

        11. You know, I read somewhere that lots of high schools (and prisons, Sonny Liston and Ron Lyle both started on prison boxing teams) used to have amateur boxing teams. I guess that was before everyone was scared shitless of violence. But then I guess it would logically follow that they’d get rid of boxing teams because they did get rid of dodgeball.

        12. My red pill buddy took home ec and met tons of nice HS girls back in our HS days….I WISHED I had taken that and also metal shop instead of going on “job block” in my senior year (leaving early to go clean a pool/lifeguard etc)…

        13. What a super-cool teacher! I call that “life 101”. Like how to get a car loan *(go to the dealer first, not the bank), how to do your taxes (EZ form only!) how to get car insurance, how to buy a house…

        14. I LOVED dodgeball. It was so cool. We used volley balls much better than the dopey red rubber balls.

      3. Yep they want you to be able to walk in and do your job from day 1 with no training. How is someone supposed to have specialized experience in something at the entry level? Makes no sense

      4. I applied to a local Lockhead/Martin facility almost 20 years ago. They even had me take a knowledge and skills test. I only had a high school diploma, but still aced the test. Their HR department promptly sent me an invitation for an interview. The thing is that they sent it to the wrong address. I found out a couple years after the fact after getting into another line of work.

    2. The pillars of American Society from the article of Industriousness, Honesty, Marriage , and Religiosity are in the decline for both classes.
      For the lower class in the US, Industriousness is punished by the creation of welfare state and punishment of hard work in the forms of taxes and decrease wages. Honesty is removed due to the import from low trust society of the 3rd world. Marriage is useless since women has Daddy State to take care of them. God is remove from culture and being religious is mocked.
      For the Upper Class, Industriousness is dying virtue as men and women are born into wealth and expect mommy and daddy to help them. Add in the lack of exposure from the lower class hardship and work ethic, doesn’t give a person the kick in the as to be industriousness. Honesty is not value anymore as long as the person get results/ profit to the right people regardless of the methods. Marriage is disregard as women focus on careers and hypergamy take over rational thoughts. Men give up marriage as they see effects of divorce rape. Religiosity is destroy as God is replace by the State in progressive religion.
      American of all class strive to regain these tenants of American idenity will be first step in long road to repair our culture and securing our nation.

      1. “For the lower class in the US, Industriousness is punished by the creation of welfare state and punishment of hard work in the forms of taxes” The bottom 40% of the population doesn’t pay any taxes, but that doesn’t matter that much because they only have 0.2% of all wealth.
        “For the Middle Class, Industriousness is dying virtue as men and women are born into wealth and expect mommy and daddy to help them.” You seem to ignore how fucked up the economy is. This meme explains it pretty good: https://www.google.com/search?q=old+economy+steve&biw=1920&bih=955&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjUoN-zvajMAhVBmoMKHaq-CckQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=_

    3. The guy on the left with the degree is $100k in debt and working in Starbucks. I know a guy like this. And I do not think he EVER considered working with his hands, learning a trade. Whoops!

      1. A lot of guys who came from a middle class/upper middle class upbringing would be disowned by their parents if they went into a trade right out of high school. It’s easy to say that he was stupid in retrospect, but when the idea of going to college has been ingrained in your head for decades it’s hard to know better. Trees/forest

  10. The “Greatest Generation” allowed their “Baby Boomer” spawn to completely shit away the greatest society in modern history.
    In 1960, there was no other country (the USSR had a 1st rate military covering up their otherwise 3rd world country) that was close to the USA. Fact.
    Look how fast and far the fall has been. Great job fucktards.

    1. Im going to say it again:
      90% OF HOMES IN THE US HAD A TV SET BY 1962.
      What was this article talking about then?

    2. Yep now we have a first rate military covering a soon to be 3rd world country.
      Big Government in our lives is mostly too blame.
      1. Prohibition: Meant to decrease crime (Guess no one listened to President Lincoln ) actually increased it and glorified the criminal class, The War on Some Drugs does this still today.
      2. Welfare reforms: the government’s failed war on poverty. etc. lead to increase of single motherhood and many of the problems in poor communities.
      3.Hart Celler Immigration bill: changed the demographic and character of the USA not to mention lower wages for working class whites and blacks, at least the ones lucky enough to still have jobs. 3 I thought of probably more…
      “Prohibition… goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes… A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.” President Lincoln.

      1. The only think keeping America afloat is the fact that American’s (and their respective governments) have access to some of the best credit in the world. If this wasn’t the case, it would be like South Africa.

    3. “The ‘Greatest Generation’ allowed their ‘Baby Boomer’ spawn to completely shit away the greatest society in modern history.
      “In 1960, there was no other country (the USSR had a 1st rate military
      covering up their otherwise 3rd world country) that was close to the
      USA. Fact.”
      America was doomed in the 1960s, because of choices made in the 1930s under FDR, because of choices made Wilson in 1913 and later, because of choices made Lincoln in 1861, because of choices of the Founding Fathers, because the entire western half of Western civilization was flawed, because of the Great Schism in 1054, because of the fall of the western half of the Roman empire and the gradual deviation and alienation from eastern half (“the Byzantine empire”) that survived, until 1453 and beyond through Russia.
      America doomed to become Mystery Babylon before the New World was even discovered.

        1. So you mean reconstruction? That was more of Congress’s fault. I think had he not been assassinated, he probably would have done a much better job at healing the north and south.

  11. I’m not sure I buy into the declinist hypothesis. It is far easier (even with Obama’s obsession with regulating the economy out of existence) to start a business today than it was in 1960. There was no “silicon valley” phenomenon in 1960.
    Objective metrics of social decay (crime, drug addiction, teen pregnancy) have significantly improved over the past 25 years. The crime rate has ticked up in the past 5 years, but is limited to a certain social-economic group (if you catch my drift). Other than that, it is generally safer to move about than it was during, say, the 1970’s.

    1. “It is far easier (even with Obama’s obsession with regulating the economy out of existence) to start a business today than it was in 1960. There was no “silicon valley” phenomenon”
      It may be easier to start a business, but to try to make said business profitable is very difficult due to all the hoops put in place to prevent growth. Many suspect that the top companies in each business sector got the government to implement absurd regulations to ensure the little guy didn’t stand a chance to suceed against the big companies already have the market.
      It was much easier to start a cafe back in 1960 than today. Likewise for a small bar / pub with so-called “liquor-license” price varies state by state, but costs starting in the hundreds of thousands; nothing more than a governmental bribe.

      1. I hear what you are saying. I think excessive regulation is a huge part of the problem. In face, I think its the single biggest problem we have in America today. However, almost never do I see discussion of this in alt-right blogs such as this.
        Why is that?

        1. “Why is that?”
          I’ve been asking myself that same question. I’m guessing that many are speculating on a good civil war or break up of the usa into 2 or 3, 4 separate nations. Usually a civil war cleanses out shit like bureaucrats, taxes, socialist doll outs and functionless government fees.

        2. Most of the alt right is focus on the culture war right now. Change in the ideas and identity of Western Civilization is the top priority due to the lasting affective on the population. Economy will prosper once deregulation takes place, but you need to have majority to population to understand and ask for such action.

        3. I think this is the ass backwards approach. Resolve the economic issues and the rest will resolve itself on its own. I cite the 90’s Gen Xers as proof of my argument. The Gen Xers were slackers in the early 90’s because there was no opportunity (there was lots and lots of wailing in the media about this at the time). As soon as the economy took off, they because a lot more career and or entrepreneurial oriented. American people do work plenty hard (and get their personal shit together in the process) WHEN there is opportunity to make it worth it to do so. What a lot of the alt-right people don’t seem to get (especially those into religion) is that being a slacker is a rational life choice in a stagnant no-growth economy. You want people to work hard and generally have their shit together on a personal level, create the conditions for a dynamic growth-oriented economy. It is silly to pretend there is any other option.
          Create the opportunity and everything else will take care of itself on its own.

        4. Well said. Creating opportunity means the feds and regulartory agencies need to get out of the way– they are the ones stifling any chance of growth. The current batch of rulers rather have unlawful control, cronyism and graft (it is the democrat party way) and have no one’s best interest at heart.

        5. Bullshit. The 90’s were still a decline. The white population went down dramatically, gays started being “embraced” rather than just “tolerated”, massive increases in gun regulation, declined marriage rates, looser attitudes towards drugs, fixing the economy wont do shit for social issues.

  12. There is another issue that does represent social decay as far as I’m concerned that none of you alt-right guys have picked up on. This is the decline of entrepreneurship and the concentration of industry among fewer giant companies that has occurred over the past 15 years. As you all know, true economic growth and prosperity is led by small to medium sized companies. An economy dominated by a few giant companies is not good at all. David Stockman and “Spengler” have talked about this lately. My friends and I think there are two causes. One is Federal Reserve bubble generation that started around 1995, with the large corporations getting first dibs at that money. The second is the growth of government regulation, which started with Clinton and ballooned dramatically with Obama. Both of these factors can be described as crony capitalism.
    It is my personal experience and conviction that this crony capitalism is the ONE and ONLY problem we have in America today. The reason why I say that is that Americans are largely an industrious people when there is opportunity for such industriousness to be of value to ones’ self. This requires a growth-oriented entrepreneurial economy with minimal government regulation and taxation. When you have an overly regulated no-growth economy, being a slacker in life IS a rational life choice. Many young people are simply making a rational choice in the face of the current economic situation. Create the conditions for economic growth and people will start to work hard again.

    1. Exactly, if there is any fundamental problem with the american economy, it’s the lack of entrepreneurship.

  13. There are so many factors that have lead to our current condition in America. I am of the school of thought that politics is downstream from culture.
    If we correct our culture we correct our nation. Culture is taught to children before math and english. It is the foundation of intelligence and cements the concepts of manners, honor and self-reliance during the formative years.
    Since culture permeates everything we do as a society; school, work and play, then we need to reclaim it from Hollywood, SJWs and government run educational institutions.

    1. Which means if we took total control today we wouldn’t stop the collapse in time because of the lag effect.

    2. Unfortunately, that’s not going to happen. America no longer has any discernible culture, and, thus, nothing for anyone to assimilate into. And continuously importing third-worlders and acting as though they can become Westerners will go down as the stupidest idea in history. For America to somehow be saved, you need a White demographic of at least 85%. The way it’s going it looks like America will eventually collapse into civil ethnic warfare. And all the people who tell me that won’t happen need to look into multi-ethnic nations and empires and their histories. Yugoslavia, for example, was peaceful, with Bosnians and Serbs living side by side, and devolved into total civil war over the course of a year, with neighbors literally killing neighbors.

      1. We use to have a culture until it was eroded away. Once the dust settles from the inevitable ethnic conflict we can review how our nation was before the rot and rebuild in its image.
        I have faith we can reclaim our nation, but yes, conflict looms.

        1. Yeah, I agree. The last discernible culture in America was the grunge era of the 90s, which, really, when I think about it now, was symbolic of the death of America. Before that you had the 80s, which was all about excess and decadence. The typical downward spiral of all empires.
          I personally don’t think we can wholly reclaim America without deporting everyone who came in post-1965 immigration act. That act is the single most destructive piece of legislation that’s ever passed in America. I’ve seen towns and cities decimated by third-world immigration. And now the left acts as if all borders in the West are simply arbitrary and all nonWhite people are interchangeable with Whites.

  14. Everything that happens in a society is the result of social engineering. In other words, everything is meticulously planned out decades in advance, and executed according to that blueprint. Societies do not flourish and decay by accident. Societies flourish and decay by design.
    An elitist insider spilled the beans regarding exactly what was in store for America, during an off-the-record talk he gave, way back in 1969. If you read the transcript, you’ll soon realize that he knew exactly what he was talking about – because he was privy to the aforementioned blueprint.
    You can read the transcript of that talk, which was recorded by audio tape and then transcribed, at the following link –

  15. Everything that happens in a society is the result of social engineering. In other words, everything is meticulously planned out decades in advance, and executed according to that blueprint. Societies do not flourish and decay by accident. Societies flourish and decay by design.
    An elitist insider spilled the beans regarding exactly what was in store for America, during an off-the-record informal speech he gave, way back in 1969. If you read the transcript of the reminiscences of that discussion, you’ll soon realize that the insider in question knew exactly what he was talking about – because he was privy to the nuances of the aforementioned blueprint.
    The following paper is a transcript of three tapes of reminiscences made by Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, of the speech given on March 20, 1969, by Dr. Richard Day, an elitist insider. The tapes were recorded by Randy Engel, National Director of the US Coalition for Life, in 1988, and they provide conclusive proof that nothing happens by accident, especially when it comes to a nation’s future –

  16. 1960 is when the generation who grew up eating paint chips, playing with mercury from thermometers, and watching 8 hours of TV a day came of age and starting doing drugs, breaking laws, and fucking anything they could catch.
    The problem is that we live in the world created by the, quite literally, brain damaged “ME” generation.
    Baby boomers, in other words. The worst plague to ever scour the Earth.
    With the advent of the boomers, our stories went from being about American greatness and family to being about crime and despair. Mister Roberts and Rear Window vs. Death Wish Escape from New York.
    A society is only as good as its people, and baby boomers are trash. The world we suffer is their world, made from their halfwit degenerate ideas.

    1. So much upvote. However, it’s always easier to place blame on someone else’s shoulders than to examine one’s own life and choices. Sort of like feminists screeching “but, teh patriarchy”.

  17. Average annual U.S. income in 1912: $5,201.00
    Inflation index: 1 1912 Dollar = 24.21 2016 Dollars
    Average income in 2016 Dollars: $125,939.71
    You will need to earn $125,939.71 in 2016 to equal the earning power of the average American worker in 1912. Federal Reserve Act has crushed industry and wealth in this country and is what facilitates the welfare state.

    1. Not to mention income taxes are a part of the Federal Reserve Act of 1912 and we pay 3X the amount of taxes that medieval peasants paid to the Crown. End the Fed and the Welfare State will begin to die with it.

    2. Haha. The only thing that means to me is how bunk any sort of long-term inflation index might be.
      Whatever you know, can you say that the average 1912’er lived or earned any better than you with your $30,000 or whatever income? You can be downright comfortable these days with $30,000 per year, and according to you, that’s about 1/4 the average of what a 1912’er earned? That’s just silly to me.

      1. If you don’t see how 3% annual inflation is bad for individuals on fixed salaries [majority of the workforce], then this isn’t even worth debating.

        1. It really just depends on what the fixed salaries are spent on and what the inflation is based on, right?
          For instance, if I spend $2.00 on a bulk purchase of frozen meat from a salvage store, which I can feed on quite well for a month, then I’d say I’m doing pretty good for someone who budgets $20 per month for food, you know? I can still get fresh Kale at $1/lb., cans of spinach or pounds of fresh spinach at a similar price, and other foods as a luxury, etc.
          I don’t make this shit up. These are California prices… oddly better than what I’m getting in Florida now.
          “Haha” at people telling me about inflation or whatever; that’s like people telling me that things were awesome when I graduated college and that there was something wrong with me for not being able to find a job other than Starbucks or the military.
          If inflation fucks you these days, then you you’re either not shopping in the right places or you’re shopping beyond your means.
          It’s insulting for me to know how cheap shit is for survival when I hear people complain about their “necessary” expenses that are multiple times my budget in tough times.

        2. The fact that you are resourceful in wisely using your funds does not negate the fact that inflation destroys the purchasing power of you and everyone who works for a living, and that inflation significantly reduces your purchasing power, even if you are still able to live fairly well off.

        3. I get it. But CPI and PPI, etc., track specific baskets of goods. And they’re averages. Doesn’t mean that you have to buy these baskets of goods with your income or pay these average prices. That’s my point I guess. Other than that, sure, inflation will erode savings and it will generally erode your purchasing power.

        4. I’m glad you brought that up. What you’re referring to is known as “Chained Consumer Price Index”.
          Inflation “fucks” you as new money is created from thin air, causing prices to rise while wages stagnate. Everyone not tied to the banks becomes progressively poorer as the dollar buys less.
          The result?
          The welfare state intervenes in the form of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and UE benefits for the newly poor. Dramatically increased taxes. 1 worker can no longer support a family so women enter the work force. Credit and loan industry grows to supplement weaker incomes creating massive debt bubbles.
          In my opinion, the 1960’s was the symptom while 1912 is the disease. Everything ROK members vent about are an extension of the welfare state brought on by the inflationary machine known as the Federal Reserve.

        1. Well, I’m currently in Florida, but I’m making way more these days and I finally have some savings. When I was in California, oddly, I was able to survive on a fraction of my current income… actually less than $30K per year.
          Maybe I was being hyperbolic when I said “comfortable.” But then again, it wasn’t terrible, I just had to make some sacrifices. I actually lived beyond my means successfully in order to accommodate my brother whom I lived with at the time. I didn’t accumulate any debt and it was a bit of a struggle coming up with $1700 per month for rent. Even so, we were somewhat comfortable.

        2. Take into account that you are living alone. Normally a man older than 25 in 1912 had a family and 3 or 4 children as well as a wife. Technological advances have offset some of the inflation but it’s pretty obvious that what you get today for what you pay in goods that exist in both eras (land, food, clothing) is much much less on average (pay 10 times more for apples that have one fraction of the flavor and nutritional value than their 1912 counterparts, etc, etc…)

        3. Good point.
          I don’t know why I was being a dick about this. It’s not like I deny the existence of inflation or deny that it can have devastating consequences.

      2. It is the reduction of purchasing power that is the point adjusted for Inflation. I would also say that cheaper technological devices and services my off set some of that, but in then end the decline is real.

      3. Actually inflation calculators work, but Tony basically pulled those numbers out of his ass. For one thing, inflation calculation only really goes back to 1913 when the Federal Reserve Banks started monitoring it. Second, the average income in 1913 was around 800 dollars, or 19k today.

    3. Yeah, but the population trippled in this space of time and the wealth is shared by many more people!

    4. That’s incredible considering it was usually only the man out working and his wife probably had a garden, made all the food from scratch, sewed the clothes, etc.

  18. I would be more nuanced about saying things are more screwed up since the 1960’s. I would say that institutions and industries that liberals have gotten in charge of – public schools, universities, MSM, etc. are FUBAR. Institutions and industries that do not have liberals in charge seem to be doing just fine as far as I can tell. In many cases of the latter, things are actually much better than the 1960’s.

  19. Society is changing at a very fast pace. I graduated high school in 2005 and did a few years at a community college. As far as I am aware there was no SJW culture or other related B.S. to the extent that it exist a short decade later. Even then I recognized the West hating culture of various teachers that was being propagated. I was having red pill thoughts, just didn’t know it. I may end up back in school to finish my bachelors but god knows if I will be able to tolerate some of the yuppies that inhabit these institutions today.

    1. My college in the bible belt now publishes regular articles about trannies and rape culture. That was none existent last decade. I think you’d be surprised at how infected your local college or university has gotten.

    2. It was already in full force by the early 200s in medical school.
      The shift started in the NY area around the late 90s.
      White unconnected heterosexual males were literally on the bottom of the totem pole in terms of admissions.
      Women with far lower MCAT scores were already being admitted over equivalent males.
      Im sure it has gotten worse.

  20. Apart from self improvement and networking I don’t see much we can do for the time being. We got to let the system fall apart a bit more. Until then I have popcorn ready.

  21. I agree. I also think today’s popular music is a big reason for the decay of young people’s morals.

    1. 90% OF HOMES IN THE US HAD A TV SET BY 1962.
      What was this article talking about then?

  22. Go find a high scale neighborhood with multi-million dollar homes. Knock on the doors of those homes and ask if a doctor or lawyer or engineer lives in any of those homes. Most likely it’s successful business owners, CEOs, trust fund babies, or a combination of being both a trust fund heir plus being a lawyer or doctor.
    The ‘good money’ white collar professions are “upper middle class” assuming the person with those degrees/education is actually successful. For example, there are plenty of “law schools” around that let almost anyone in. Typically females. I run into so many females in my time that had “law degrees”, but were either working in a profession that didn’t require a law degree or were unemployed. One 40 year old woman I personally know, did the whole “I’m going to law school” act years ago. Today she is a full time nanny with a law degree. And has no kids of her own.
    And I wouldn’t even include engineers in the upper middle class. They are straight middle class. Union workers in the trades do just as well if not better than the average employed engineer.
    Then you have another dimension. People that have canceled themselves out of a class due to student debt. People that have found decent employment with their white collar degree, but they’ve got student debt the size of a mortgage. So a portion of their income goes towards that debt for many years after graduating.
    But yes, the most sad thing about the current times we live in, is that my grandfather only had a 5th grade education. He found work at a candy factory working on an assembly line. He was able to work and retire from that same job with a pension. He was able to support a family of 4, and my grandmother never worked. He was able to support a family with a candy factory wage.

    1. Engineering isn’t a particularly safe career either. I know many top level engineers who can’t get work as they get older due to:
      1) Tech changing every 5 years, so the engineer requires consistent redevelopment of their skills. So its not just hard work but they have to keep up with the education
      2) Go with the younger engineers due to cheaper salaries plus education closer to the newer tech. Every 5 to 10 years, they go through this cycle where older engineers get crushed.

    2. “And I wouldn’t even include engineers in the upper middle class. They are straight middle class. Union workers in the trades do just as well if not better than the average employed engineer.”
      I second this. Modern engineers in the US are treated like crap by the soulless corporations who employ them. The exception might be Silicon Valley software engineers who get big dollars from startups, but that’s about it.
      Wages are stagnant for engineers, engineers are getting replaced by H1-Bs and cheaper low-quality foreigners as fast as possible, and they don’t garner a lick of respect from their employers no matter how much money they make for the company.

  23. The intelligent, arrogant with their abilities and an inherited goliath of a country, think they can completely rewrite the rules of nature. This puts the natural order in a position where it has no choice but to destroy that society and start over.

  24. “The elite must stop pushing social boundaries to the detriment of the lower classes.” Ha!
    They will stop pushing it only when they admit that this destruction benefits them — and keeps others from wiggling into their social stratum.

  25. Cutting off welfare for single moms is the only way the family will become the norm again among the lower and working class. Because the social safety net exists, lower class women can indulge their crude, primitive tastes in deciding who fathers their children. If welfare didn’t exist, poor women would choose decent men who would make stable, quality husbands and fathers. Of course, welfare will not be cut so the family will keep trending towards oblivion outside the upper classes.

  26. Soon as I saw Charles Murray’s name mentioned, my uh oh meter went off. I actually took that idiotic “are you in a bubble test.” Whole point of it is that if you don’t watch trash TV, drink swill beer, or follow NASCAR (yee haw!!) then you are an effete snob. I’ve got 2 words for Chucky M. and they’re not happy birthday. Oh, and as for the “Bell Curve”, some of it might have a point, but Murray didn’t have the balls to submit it for peer review, so that makes it suspect.

  27. “The rapid divergence of American social class”
    … i originally read this as “raped”, and now im disappointed by this article

  28. Yes, the old America, where did you go? Now in the new Amerika, even working well and showing effort does not win you any awards even if you are an engineer or some other white collar degree. If you are a paid a salary and get health benefits, you are still little more than a ‘house n__ger’.
    Then, even you make a decent wage, you are taxed into oblivion to support the warfare state and the welfare state to breed stupid entitled parasites that your job skills probably keep alive by keeping the technology functioning so less people die of starvation or disease.

  29. Do you want to know who is responsible for all this?
    Here I’ll help you out and introduce you to a book written by your bank masters and a recollection of history and WWII:
    5 mins long:

    ( A book from Jewish intellectuals.) 3 and half hours long.
    Please note that speaking the truth doesn’t translate to racism if it doesnt work on that races favour.

Comments are closed.