/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Also attached: his manifesto

Source: https://www.rebelnews.com/manifesto_reveals_alleged_montreal_gunman_s_antisemitic_far_left_and_incel_ideology

The full manifesto is over 100 pages as attached and linked, not that 37 page nationbuilder one circulating around.

YFW the shooter deff lurked leftychan.

>>497112

leftypol.org deleted it within minutes

>>497110
another Seth photo

I don't know who this is.
Who did he shoot?

>>497116
he is reported to have targeted pornhub. think it just turned into a spree shooting though

>He killed a police officer.
Uh hello, based department?

>>497113
Well yeah they are fags who worship reddit.

Poor kid, his heart was in the right place, just needed some guidance. Someone that dedicated to revolution would have been invaluable long term.

>A civilian, Michael Mizrahi, also died during the incident, though reports indicate he may have been shot by a police officer. Rabbi Mendel Raskin said Mizrahi had originally come from Lebanon before moving to Israel and later settling in Montreal.
Were the police the real danger all along kek.

Is this the first revcel shooter?

>>497128
CBC has gone to great lengths to counter his self-presentation, illegally obtaining old online history of his.

With what little they show unredacted he appeared to be an anti-commie chud 3 years ago.

But the manifesto itself is commie through and through.

>>497129
their "evidence" of his being anti-commie was just him liking an anti-Soviet White Army video 3 years ago, and liking Paul Joseph Watson videos.

Apart from that they redacted most everything else so who knows, but his manifesto doesn't really show any signs of insincerity considering he tried to kill an organization related to one of his targets in the manifesto.

>>497129
the Paul Joseph Watson videos were just sperging about feminism though, so the only 'anti-commie' media were 1-2 favorited videos, out of 50, 40 that were redacted by the CBC

High School friend said he had an "interest in Karl Marx" and history in general

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/what-we-know-about-seth-hatfield-the-suspect-in-montreal-shootings-that-killed-a-cop-and-a-civilian

>>497132
I doubt he even read Marx. His manifesto right out the gate starts talking about 'muh human nature'.

>>497133
He references obscure Marxist-Leninist stuff but Marx himself is not a primary source. Typical tankie.

>>497127
>cops shoot an "Israeli"
>super scary "mass shooter" shoots cops
Alternate version of events from what the media says: a weird loner discovered (or was lead to discover) an impending zionist false flag plot which was going to be perpetrated by Montreal police, rushed to the scene to stop it, and was framed as the attacker with a big forged manifesto which awkwardly crammed in a bunch of weird "incel" bullshit into an aesthetically socialist package.

CLASS A TARGETS (Bourgeois/Systemic)
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 1. CEOs & corporate leaders │
│ 2. Investment bankers (BlackRock, etc.) │
│ 3. Elite politicians (both parties) │
│ 4. Zionist-aligned corporations │
│ 5. Health insurance CEOs (US) │
│ 6. Pornography industry heads │
│ 7. Resource extraction execs (oil, logging) │
│ 8. Real estate speculators & slumlords │
│ 9. "Plastic surgeons" │
│ 10. Crypto/stock speculators │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

CLASS B TARGETS (Lumpen/Criminal)
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 1. Drug dealers │
│ 2. Gangsters │
│ 3. Pedophiles │
│ 4. Sex traffickers │
│ 5. Animal abusers │
│ 6. Porn producers │
│ 7. Rap/music industry exploiters │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

SWINDLERS
│
┌────────────────┼────────────────┐
▼ ▼ ▼
┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐
│ "ALPHA MALE" │ │ CHRISTIANITY │ │ SPECULATION │
│ ────────────────│ │ ────────────────│ │ ────────────────│
│ • Andrew Tate │ │ • Promise of │ │ • Crypto │
│ • Mindset │ │ afterlife │ │ • Stock trading │
│ • Confidence │ │ • Tradition │ │ • Drop shipping │
│ • PUA "coaches" │ │ • Anti-communism│ │ • "Passive inc" │
└─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘
│ │ │
└────────────────┼────────────────┘
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ALL SERVE BOURGEOIS INTERESTS │
│ • Pacify common males │
│ • Extract money from dispossessed │
│ • Prevent revolutionary consciousness │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Revolutionary Strategy

DISPOSSESSED MALES
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 1. SELF-CULTIVATION │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ (i) Bodily Purification (abstain from: drugs, │
│ alcohol, sugar, nicotine, energy drinks) │
│ (ii) Intellectual Advancement (study Marx, Lenin, │
│ Robespierre, Mao, Plato) │
│ (iii) Physical Ability (running, hiking, weapons │
│ training, NOT weightlifting) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 2. DISSEMINATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ LEGAL: │
│ • Educational videos (anonymous) │
│ • Pamphlets/leaflets │
│ • Word-of-mouth (carefully) │
│ • Literature (autobiographies, manifestos) │
│ │
│ ILLEGAL: │
│ • Revolutionary terror operations │
│ • Target Class A + B elements │
│ • Use guns, bombs, FPV drones, blades │
│ • One-way missions (die fighting) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 3. POST-REVOLUTION ORDER │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ • Abolish private property │
│ • State-controlled economy │
│ • Remove women from workforce (robots) │
│ • Ban pornography, dating apps, social media │
│ • "Extraordinary Branch" (augmented enforcers) │
│ • Liquidate bourgeois & lumpen elements │
│ • Global permanent revolution │
│ • Restore monogamy │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

>>497145
>permanent revolution
Even worse than an incel; a Trotskyist.

>>497152
>>497152
ahahahahaha

>>497110
The larger incel communities seem almost entirely capitalist now. They started celebrating the shooting, anxiously waiting a manifesto, then as soon as the manifesto came out they all said he was an NPC, nothing, Wikipedia copypaste, not worth paying attention to etc.

So now we see we have come full circle. The alt left is now no different from their right wing counterparts

As I said before, socialism and fascism share more similarities than differences

The current year association of leftism with radical liberalism is ironic

>>497162

There is not much to celebrate actually, all these shootings help the government to justify repressions against incels and men in general. Only a strong disciplined revolutionary party like the Bolsheviks can lead incels to victory. Lenin once said, "We'll come another way", meaning that terrorism is not the best way to fight against the system.

About incels supporting capitalism - I think, it's a vivid demonstration of political illiteracy among young people today, especially in the U.S. The solution of this problem can only be socialist, because the are just not enough young girls so every man can get a wife, and these right-wing incels definitely do not want to marry 30+ yo women. So, the only solution is the polygamous system, which is in fact common ownership of sex.

About the manifesto - quite interesting, much more than Elliot's. Seth understood the reasons of inceldom quite well. Although I do not agree with some of his statements (such as the blackpill idea that female sexual behavior is only defined by biology), the term "hypergamy", that he uses in his manifesto, is very close to what one Russian incel blogger Alexey Podnebesny (Alex Undersky) calls "vaginacapitalism".

>>497166
> About incels supporting capitalism - I think, it's a vivid demonstration of political illiteracy among young people today, especially in the U.S.

It’s not an issue of “illiteracy”. Just because young people don’t support your ideology doesn’t make them illiterate

By your definition, most older people are politically illiterate and it’s not just an American problem. Even outside the US, a lot of people associate leftism with SJWs

>>497166
> The solution of this problem can only be socialist, because the are just not enough young girls so every man can get a wife, and these right-wing incels definitely do not want to marry 30+ yo women.

First off, do you mean young women? Young girls would be human females under twelve year so age. Idk why people use “woman” and “girl” interchangeably when talking about prime age adult females but they never do this with prime age adult males.

Also, there’s equivalent numbers of men and women in the west. The problem is individual preferences.

>So, the only solution is the polygamous system, which is in fact common ownership of sex.

Polygamy will just end up with bastard children that are unwanted by other spouses

> About the manifesto - quite interesting, much more than Elliot's. Seth understood the reasons of inceldom quite well. Although I do not agree with some of his statements (such as the blackpill idea that female sexual behavior is only defined by biology), the term "hypergamy", that he uses in his manifesto, is very close to what one Russian incel blogger Alexey Podnebesny (Alex Undersky) calls "vaginacapitalism".

First off, that’s redpill, not blackpill. Redpill is just sore losers making doom-and-gloom theories about gender psychology due to not getting any action

Black pill sees the absurdity of pursuing redpill and blue pill paths

>>497169

> It’s not an issue of “illiteracy”. Just because young people don’t support your ideology doesn’t make them illiterate

It does, if they support their class enemies. If a worker support capitalist - he is political illiterate, if an incel support capitalists (those, who do everything to deprive most men of having sex) - he is political illiterate. Just because they do not understand the class war theory.

> By your definition, most older people are politically illiterate and it’s not just an American problem.

Yes, it's true.

> Even outside the US, a lot of people associate leftism with SJWs

As well it is.

>>497170

> First off, do you mean young women? Young girls would be human females under twelve year so age.

Sorry, English is not my native language. Of course, by young girls I mean adolescent females 14-23 (approx), young women for me is 23-30.

> Idk why people use “woman” and “girl” interchangeably when talking about prime age adult females but they never do this with prime age adult males

Because there is a difference between 16 yo and 29 yo. The first one is much more attractive and valuable as a sex partner or a girlfriend. About males - probably, because the age works the other way around for them. Not many women would like to date a 16 yo guy, that is, let's say, 10 years younger than her.

> Also, there’s equivalent numbers of men and women in the west

Yes, but most women are 30+. There is not much value for a 30 yo male to date a woman 30 yo, despite they are the same age. Most of men would like to date a young one. So, that's how great deficit appears. The idea of matching men and women by age would work in only one case - if everyone got married very early, 12-13-14 yo, and divorces were banned. In this case every man would have sex with his young wife since his adolescence, and every couple would live the whole life together. But today most men are masturbating till they are 30, young girls are having sex with chads, and when this girl gets 30, she wants to settle down and marry some of those, who were alone for the whole life. There is no social justice in that, and incels feel it quite well.

> Polygamy will just end up with bastard children that are unwanted by other spouses

In our current society - yes. But if the current system, where children are raised in families, will be replaced by another system, in which all children are raised by the whole society, there will not be such problem as bastards.

> First off, that’s redpill, not blackpill.

The idea that there's only biology that defines female sexual behavior is definitely blackpill. And that is not true, because humans are just animals with instincts, we are social creatures. I do not say that all of his manifesto is blackpilled, I'm talking about just one statement.

> Black pill sees the absurdity of pursuing redpill and blue pill paths

Blackpill leads to nothing, blackpilled incels do not even declare that women must be obliged to give sex to them. I'm not even talking about something more complicated - for example, to establish another basis of so-called sexual economics in our society. Or to change the sexual morale narratives of women (and men, actually).

>>497172
> Sorry, English is not my native language. Of course, by young girls I mean adolescent females 14-23 (approx), young women for me is 23-30.

Bruh, that definition is infantilizing. Adolescent would be twelve thru seventeen

Young adult (by legal definition) is 18 - 25

> Because there is a difference between 16 yo and 29 yo.

In age number, yes. Historically speaking, 13-16 was the beginning of adulthood. That changed around the eighteenth century

>The first one is much more attractive and valuable as a sex partner or a girlfriend.

Both would be attractive for men. You’re also forgetting that youth doesn’t automatic beauty for women. There’s a lot of women who were plain or ugly in their teens that glowed up in their twenties.
Men are ok with wanting a woman in her thirties. The idea that men are averse to dating a woman over thirty is marketing hype to get women to buy into cosmetic procedures
Women in their thirties don’t suddenly grow grey hair and wrinkly skin.

Even if that were the case, that’s mainly white people. Brown people retain their hood looks throughout middle age unless they’re doing a lot of drugs or do heavy duty work.

>About males - probably, because the age works the other way around for them. Not many women would like to date a 16 yo guy, that is, let's say, 10 years younger than her.

That’s mainly due to status. Men are not valued for their looks. Boys are raised to be jesters and warriors. They’re pathologized for beauty.

Men are taught that age numbers are virtue points for them. And since women are disciples of the status quo, why not believe that bullshit?

Women can and do crush on younger hot men but it’s stigmatized.

Young women are not required to prove themselves but young men are

Because of that, young men are only sexually and romantically appreciated by other men.

>>497172
> The idea that there's only biology that defines female sexual behavior is definitely blackpill. And that is not true, because humans are just animals with instincts, we are social creatures. I do not say that all of his manifesto is blackpilled, I'm talking about just one statement.

To believe that human sexuality is purely biological is redpill.
The black pill would be the statement you said about humans being social animals with primal drives.

I have come to see blackpill as acceptance.
Too many people wanna radicalize others or themselves into spiting the inevitable, to get back at life for not conforming to their utopian preferences

Redpill is just a placebo. It’s just sheeple that think themselves as too cool for school while seeking validation from other sheeple.

>>497173
> >About males - probably, because the age works the other way around for them. Not many women would like to date a 16 yo guy, that is, let's say, 10 years younger than her

Women aren’t willing to date a man that’s more than fifteen years her senior unless he’s rich and witty and good looking.

The common assumption that women want older guys is purely conditional. If the older guy was a broke neck beard with no wit or is unworldly, he would be seen as a creep.

>>497172
> Sorry, English is not my native language. Of course, by young girls I mean adolescent females 14-23 (approx), young women for me is 23-30

I find it funny that referring to young adults as “kids” is acceptable and encouraged but it’s considered disrespectful to refer to early middle aged adults as “old” because it triggers their fear of aging

>>497166
> About incels supporting capitalism - I think, it's a vivid demonstration of political illiteracy among…

It's literally mostly because Caamib was a reactionary, Diego Galante being anti-leftist, and Lamarcus Small a Republican Party capitalist. They drove their forum's culture in the political direction they wanted, it's not much more deep than that.

>>497173

> Bruh, that definition is infantilizing. Adolescent would be twelve thru seventeen
> Young adult (by legal definition) is 18 - 25

If you are talking about so-called the age of consent, it has nothing to do with the real biology, physiology and the ability for a female to have sex (and their wishing to). All these laws are made by the capitalist elites so men could not have sex with young females, except the elites themselves. Feminists are the main supporters of this nonsense politics. They are already talking that the age of consent should be 21 or even 25. Old women want to get rid of their young rivals.

> Both would be attractive for men. You’re also forgetting that youth doesn’t automatic beauty for women. There’s a lot of women who were plain or ugly in their teens that glowed up in their twenties.
Men are ok with wanting a woman in her thirties.

That's old women's cope. There was a research, that showed that the most attractive female age for men is 15 years old. 16 is less attractive than 15, 17 is less attractive than 16 and so on. Men date 30+ women just because they have no other choice. 15- (or 17-, depending on country or state) are illegal, the legal ones are to few so every man could have at least a young woman. But some men go principal and say that is unfair, that a woman 30+ had a lot of sex and love in her young ages, but they had not, and refuse to date such women. I think, this is a good and right position, though it might be called volcel-ish.

> The idea that men are averse to dating a woman over thirty is marketing hype to get women to buy into cosmetic procedures

Cosmetic procedures don't really help much, lol. Often it makes it even worse. Didn't you see the women with huge lips? It's just disgusting.

> Even if that were the case, that’s mainly white people. Brown people retain their hood looks throughout middle age unless they’re doing a lot of drugs or do heavy duty work.

Dunno, I would say that about Eastern Asians, but not about Africans or Afro-Americans.

> Because of that, young men are only sexually and romantically appreciated by other men.

Or younger female, if he is a chad. Anyway, the most of males are those who are deprived of sex, love and relationship. Not young females (of course), not even 30+ women (even they can find sex easily). Only men, no matter what age. You said that women can and do crush on younger hot men but it’s stigmatized, but feminists call men, who date younger girls, pedophiles, despite that the "little girl" may be 20 years all. And the whole politics and society opinion is going in this direction. Silly men can't even understand, that it's a politics of terror against them. It's like the Jews were supporting the Nazis.

>>497174

> The black pill would be the statement you said about humans being social animals with primal drives.

But blackpilled incels only talk about attractiveness, I am talking about changing the whole society basis. For example, to teach girls since middle school, that all men are equal, that sex is a male need, that it's bad to divide men to semigods and garbage. If most females will be taught such an idea, they will agree to have sex with no-chads voluntary. I've never seen something similar among blackpilled incels. The are talking about their skulls, their height, how everything is bad (and indeed it is), and what to do - lay down and rot, commit a shooting or commit a suicide. I think all these options are bad and men should fight for their right to have sex, often and for free, just like workers fought for their 8-hours working day etc.

>>497175

> Women aren’t willing to date a man that’s more than fifteen years her senior unless he’s rich and witty and good looking.

Agree.

>> 497176

> I find it funny that referring to young adults as “kids” is acceptable and encouraged but it’s considered disrespectful to refer to early middle aged adults as “old” because it triggers their fear of aging

Well, youth is better than eldery :)

>>497177

> It's literally mostly because Caamib was a reactionary, Diego Galante being anti-leftist, and Lamarcus Small a Republican Party capitalist. They drove their forum's culture in the political direction they wanted, it's not much more deep than that.

But other incels do not have to agree with them. Btw, in former USSR countries there are right incels, but many, maybe even most, are leaning to the socialist ideas. Including the most famous one.

>>497179
> But other incels do not have to agree with them.

If they countersignal the general inward directed right-wing social darwinism on the big english board, they get banned. Then they often have trouble finding alternatives. This place is nearly impossible to find.

And Podnebesny turned out to be a pedo creep with a narcissism issue. A pity because he had potential.

>>497180

> If they countersignal the general inward directed right-wing social darwinism on the big english board, they get banned. Then they often have trouble finding alternatives. This place is nearly impossible to find.

Yes, that's very bad. Left incels must create their own source and make it famous in the incel community. But the good news is that sooner or later, incels will start to realise that right and social-darwinist ideology will not and, which is more important, not gonna propose any systematical solution to their problem. And they will start to find alternatives.

> And Podnebesny turned out to be a pedo creep with a narcissism issue. A pity because he had potential.

You know him? Very interesting. I thought he is mostly known in Russia and other Russian-speaking countries. But he had online conversations in English with some western guys.

Narcissism - yes, but for a leader it's not the worst thing. Pedo - definitely no, the girl, that he got in jail for, was 15 years old, pedo - is under 12 (approximately, the correct way to classify - before adolescence started). By the way, Podnebesny is the one, who popularized the term "pedohysteria" in Russia, and explained, why it's a very hostile politics to men. Even that 15yo, that Podnebesny had sex with, - not only she was not a virgin, she had a lot of sexual partners before Alex. Completely grown female. And the state sends men to prison for having sex with such females. Nothing but nonsense and terror.

>>497184
whatever if she was 10 or 15, he was a fuckup, ephebophile/pedophile whatever advocacy is literally the worst way to advocate for incels. literally dragging them down 10 more notches.

Also when Podnebesny went on TV he was so self-focused he couldn't even properly advance any single opinion because he was too stuck on his mercy fuck seeking sob stories.

>>497187

> whatever if she was 10 or 15, he was a fuckup, ephebophile/pedophile whatever advocacy is literally the worst way to advocate for incels.

There is a huge difference between 10 and 15. Incels must not support pedophiles, but they must counter feminists, who tell that grown man and young adolescent female is pedo. If we will not counter them, who will do? Supporting pedohysteria is supporting the politics of terror against normal men. Which is a class betrayal and opportunism.

And talking about society opinion - yes, today it's very biased to pedohysteria. But revolutionary is the one who changes the society, not the one who agrees with it's every nonsense, created by propaganda. Most men are attracted by 15 yo females, they just conceal it.

> Also when Podnebesny went on TV he was so self-focused he couldn't even properly advance any single opinion because he was too stuck on his mercy fuck seeking sob stories.

I have no idea which exact show you are talking about, but he has a very strong ideology and tells about it in every interview. Anyway, if you do not like him - OK, the most important here is the ideology, not one person. And his ideology fits incels interests the most. I would even say, his ideology is the only one existing that proposes a systematical solution to the problem of inceldom.

>>497190
>yes, today it's very biased to pedohysteria.
Stop doing this stupid bit in every fucking thread you reply in.

>>497178
> Dunno, I would say that about Eastern Asians, but not about Africans or Afro-Americans.

I am black. And people over thirty aren’t all decrepit. Elderly women in their seventies and eighties still look good for their age

> Well, youth is better than eldery :)

Yea but when it comes with the obnoxious smothering and moral obsession, it comes off as fear of irrelevance. We need to stop treating and addressing young adults as “kids”. It’s part of why we have so many ridiculous sociopolitical spectacles.

> But blackpilled incels only talk about attractiveness, I am talking about changing the whole society basis.

Those are redpillers then.

>For example, to teach girls since middle school, that all men are equal, that sex is a male need, that it's bad to divide men to semigods and garbage. If most females will be taught such an idea, they will agree to have sex with no-chads voluntary. I've never seen something similar among blackpilled incels. The are talking about their skulls, their height, how everything is bad (and indeed it is), and what to do - lay down and rot, commit a shooting or commit a suicide. I think all these options are bad and men should fight for their right to have sex, often and for free, just like workers fought for their 8-hours working day etc.


I am all for teaching female youth to respect males. Girls often talk shit about boys for the slightest flaw and nuance but if the opposite happened, girls would cry “misogyny”.

Girls also love to brag about themselves as being better than boys but then complain about chauvinism when they encounter tasks they cannot do easily that boys can easily accomplish.

Male sexuality should be respected and not demonized just because it doesn’t gel with female whims

But everything else is unnecessary hogwash.


>>497187
> whatever if she was 10 or 15, he was a fuckup, ephebophile/pedophile

That’s like saying Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.

>>497193
As long as we can ban talks about “male loneliness” or anything remotely related to sex and romance or family making.

>>497190
what solution did Podnebesny even propose?

I guarantee you he was raised by a single mum.

>>497166
>all these shootings help the government to justify repressions against incels and men in general.
Justification does not matter. Where those with the power do not have justification, they will manufacture it.

>>497127
>A civilian, Michael Mizrahi, also died during the incident, though reports indicate he may have been shot by a police officer. Rabbi Mendel Raskin said Mizrahi had originally come from Lebanon before moving to Israel and later settling in Montreal.
How is it possible to not know the difference between wounds caused by two different types of firearms?
>>497111
>rebelnews
>uses Cloudflare
Wow, such rebelness.

>>497194

> Elderly women in their seventies and eighties still look good for their age

Are you kidding? What should even happen to a man so he would be OK with the idea of having sex with old grannies? Not even mentioning that lowering and lowering male standards for women do not motivate young females to have sex with non-chads while they are young. Which is bad for incels. And this is, actually, the main reason, why I dislike all this "old women may be sexual" stuff. It works against men.

> Yea but when it comes with the obnoxious smothering and moral obsession, it comes off as fear of irrelevance

If young females would have this fear, they might be thinking twice before spending her young ages with chads, knowing that she will still be able to find someone after she gets 30.

> Those are redpillers then.

How so? Physical attractiveness is the main topic of blackpillers. And these guys call themselves blackpillers.

> I am all for teaching female youth to respect males. Girls often talk shit about boys for the slightest flaw and nuance but if the opposite happened, girls would cry “misogyny”.

Girls also love to brag about themselves as being better than boys but then complain about chauvinism when they encounter tasks they cannot do easily that boys can easily accomplish.

Male sexuality should be respected and not demonized just because it doesn’t gel with female whims

I agree.

> But everything else is unnecessary hogwash.

Exactly what and why?

>>497207

> what solution did Podnebesny even propose?

He proposed even two of them. The first one is a strict monogamous system. When a boy becomes adolescent and start having sexual needs, he is paired with a girl of his age by psychological tests or even pure random, and they become a married couple, he is now her husband and she is his wife. Divorces are absolutely forbidden as well as cheating, especially for women. Providing sex to husband is obligatory for women.

The benefits of the system are clear - all men will be provided with sex since the moment they start to need it, 0% divorces, women will most likely go back to their traditional roles. But there are major downsides of this system. First of all, forget about sexual diversity. Men will have sex with one female through life, no more (if they don't want to be punished for cheating, of course). Second one, forget about sex with young females after your wife gets 30. Third one, you may not even like the young wife you got! You might not like what she looks like. She may not like you, behave herself badly, you might not be physiologically suited to each other despite the test results and so on. But you will not have the right to change her for another. And you must now live the whole life with her.

The second one, which I consider a much better one, is sexual communism, a polygamous system. In this system the is no marriage, there are no husbands and wives, no "private" children, all children are common and raised by the whole society. Sex itself is consider a common good, there is no prostitution in any form, and all people just have sex with each other. Women do provide sex to every man just because they are not infiltrated with anti-sex, feminist and vaginacapitalist propaganda, like now. Since young ages they are taught that rejecting men is terrible, dividing men to handsome and ugly is inappropriate, that the main qualities in men are not height, money and attractiveness, but their intelligence, their kindness, and so on. There is just another cultural matrix in the society. I know, it's hard to imagine, but think about, for example, slavery - 300 years ago it was normal. Now it's not. Today many people, especially women, believe, that it's normal, that most men do not have sex. People in the sexual communist society will think of it in the way we think of slavery.

>>497234
> How so? Physical attractiveness is the main topic of blackpillers. And these guys call themselves blackpillers.

It’s no different from Khazars calling themselves Jews and then wanting to take over Palestine.

> Are you kidding? What should even happen to a man so he would be OK with the idea of having sex with old grannies? Not even mentioning that lowering and lowering male standards for women do not motivate young females to have sex with non-chads while they are young. Which is bad for incels.

Who said anything about getting sex from grannies? I’m just saying that non white women can still look good past their thirties.

>And this is, actually, the main reason, why I dislike all this "old women may be sexual" stuff. It works against men

The old stereotype about women having a higher sex drive in their thirties and forties remains to be seen. Or maybe their sex drive isn’t the same as wanting to chase after those of the opposite sex. They just may tend to stick to sex toys.

> Exactly what and why?

You saying that sex is a male right and that men should fight for their rights for sexual gratification. Like bruh what drugs you on?

That comes off as entitlement.

Male sexuality should be respected but not excessively catered to.

Sex isn’t the sole inherent value of people. There’s a lot of women who go years without sex or romance. Why can’t men do the same?
If you’re so down bad, just get a sex doll.

>>497237
This system sounds like a cover for coerced sexual gratification in favor of males.
I’m all for romantic pairings for teens and communal child rearing and teaching girls to respect boys as individuals and equals rather than as castes.

But don’t be doing this whole “women don’t have a say in satisfying their husbands”


That’s just no different from religion.

You’re just mirroring the bourgeois feminists.
If anything, I would be more in favor for mandatory birth control for all secondary school students. And sex dolls for them.

>>497228

> Justification does not matter. Where those with the power do not have justification, they will manufacture it.

I agree. But it's easier for them to do it if there are incel terrorists, that when there are not. But the most important thing is that, this guy Seth could have done much more for incels and men in general, than just killing a couple of guys. Because he is educated and smart, he probable could become a great leftcel theorist (not terrorist, lol). But now it will never happen, unfortunately.

>>497238

> Who said anything about getting sex from grannies? I’m just saying that non white women can still look good past their thirties.

Then what is the point of "good looking" in this context? We were talking about sexual attractiveness.

> The old stereotype about women having a higher sex drive in their thirties and forties remains to be seen.

So? Sex with young females is the objective for men, not with 30+ and 40+ women. But most men cannot get sex with young females in modern society. So they have no other choice than getting in with 30+.

> You saying that sex is a male right and that men should fight for their rights for sexual gratification.

Exactly. And without understanding this idea there is no solution of incedom problem. No one is gonna help men, if they are not ready to fight for their rights. And the situation will only be getting worse.

> Sex isn’t the sole inherent value of people

This is of the main male needs. Needs of people must be satisfied. Wouldn't you tell a hungry guy, that food isn't the only value in this world?

> There’s a lot of women who go years without sex or romance

It's their choice. They are volcels, unlike men (incels).

> Why can’t men do the same?

Why should they?

> If you’re so down bad, just get a sex doll.

It has nothing common with sex. Just another way of masturbation.

>>497239

This system sounds like a cover for coerced sexual gratification in favor of males.
I’m all for romantic pairings for teens and communal child rearing and teaching girls to respect boys as individuals and equals rather than as castes.

But don’t be doing this whole “women don’t have a say in satisfying their husbands”

Which system do you mean? Pairing teens is the monogamous one, communal child rearing, if I correctly understand this, is communist/sexual communist.

About "coerced sexual gratification in favor of males" - it is in the monogamous system, and always have been, while religion was strong. That's why feminists hate religion so much. But in the sexual communism system females provide sex not because they are forced to, but because they have different mindset.

> You’re just mirroring the bourgeois feminists.

Bourgeois feminists want to cancel sex, I want all people to have it.

> If anything, I would be more in favor for mandatory birth control for all secondary school students. And sex dolls for them.

Birth control - yes, the society must provide contraceptives for everyone. Sex dolls is nothing more than masturbation, sex besides the physiological has a great physiological meaning. That's why masturbation (including sex dolls, sex robots and so on) cannot replace real sex.

>>497242

> physiological has a great physiological* meaning

*psychological

>>497241
> This is of the main male needs. Needs of people must be satisfied. Wouldn't you tell a hungry guy, that food isn't the only value in this world?

Food is actually necessary for immediate survival. Sex isn’t. Sex was meant for procreation in the first place. We have already nearing ten billion humans and semi-artificial poverty and you wanna whine about “TFW no GF”?
Fuck outta here man

> It's their choice. They are volcels, unlike men (incels).

Men can choose to have sex with women over thirty and they do.
If we go by your logic, there’s mostly volcels rather than incels.

> It has nothing common with sex. Just another way of masturbation.

It is sex just with an inanimate object. Masturbation is using your hands to stimulate your genitals with no other devices.


> About "coerced sexual gratification in favor of males" - it is in the monogamous system, and always have been, while religion was strong. That's why feminists hate religion so much. But in the sexual communism system females provide sex not because they are forced to, but because they have different mindset.

So then, the feminists aren’t coercing men into being sexually deprived, but rather that men have a different mindset nowadays.

You’re trying to justify coercion

May as well say capitalism isn’t coercing us we are just have a different mindset than from a socialist society

May as well say that government-sponsored Zionist apologia isn’t coercion but that people are of a different mindset from anti-Zionist folk.

>>497242
> About "coerced sexual gratification in favor of males" - it is in the monogamous system, and always have been, while religion was strong. That's why feminists hate religion so much. But in the sexual communism system females provide sex not because they are forced to, but because they have different mindset.

So if feminists were to impose a sociosexual utopia where only women over thirty-five, fat, ugly, smelly, slutty, etc are told that men must sexually satisfy them, it’s not coercion.
It’s just men being raised under a different mindset. They’re satisfying those women because they want to under that system

>>497242
> Bourgeois feminists want to cancel sex, I want all people to have it.

They don’t wanna cancel sex they merely wanna regulate it.
If they wanted to cancel sex, they would’ve already been imposing compulsory sterilization for men and women

>>497241
> Then what is the point of "good looking" in this context? We were talking about sexual attractiveness

Sexual attractiveness is a thing for women over thirty.
Women don’t stop being single just because they approach three hundred sixty moons old

>>497178
> That's old women's cope. There was a research, that showed that the most attractive female age for men is 15 years old. 16 is less attractive than 15, 17 is less attractive than 16 and so on. Men date 30+ women just because they have no other choice.


Not true on the last sentence. Also a lot of men don’t see incremental aging of teen girls as less attractive.

> 15- (or 17-, depending on country or state) are illegal, the legal ones are to few so every man could have at least a young woman. But some men go principal and say that is unfair, that a woman 30+ had a lot of sex and love in her young ages, but they had not, and refuse to date such women. I think, this is a good and right position, though it might be called volcel-ish.

That’s the only good point you made on here

>>497244

> Food is actually necessary for immediate survival. Sex isn’t.

Life is not just about physical survival. If you will be put in a tiny prison cell and fed only with bread and water, you will survive for a long time, but it can hardly be called a decent life. Neither can be life without sex for a man.

> Sex was meant for procreation in the first place.

Doesn't matter. Sex is a need even if it doesn't lead to a birth. 99%+ of all sexual intercourses do not end with a new child. Humans are not animals, that do it only for procreation.

> We have already nearing ten billion humans and semi-artificial poverty and you wanna whine about “TFW no GF”?

Not only me, as you might have noticed. Sex is male need, no matter how many people live on Earth.

> Men can choose to have sex with women over thirty and they do. If we go by your logic, there’s mostly volcels rather than incels.

Absolutely not. Their "choice" is the choice between absolute loneliness and lining with an old hag, that spent her young ages having fun with chads and now, when she is no longer young and beautiful, wants to settle down, find a good cucky and drain benefits from him. If a man has pride and rejects such a role, he cannot be called volcel. Because it's unfair - other men (chads) had sex with a lot of young females, and he had not. You cannot say that one is provided with food, if all food that is available to him is waste from a trashcan.

> It is sex just with an inanimate object

That's a vulgar understanding of sex. If it really was sex, incels could just do it and be happy. But for some reason it does not work and incels need real sex with a live young female, not with their hand or a sex doll.

> So then, the feminists aren’t coercing men into being sexually deprived

They are. By not providing sex and telling other women to do the same. Feminists are the main anti-sex movement nowadays.

> You’re trying to justify coercion

Coercion might be justified, if the alternative leads to worse consequences. That's why I prefer strict monogamous system to current feminist system. It's a much lesser evil. But compared to sexual communism, it has a lot of downsides. That's why I prefer sexual communism to all this patriarchy-religion stuff.

>>497245

> So if feminists were to impose a sociosexual utopia where only women over thirty-five, fat, ugly, smelly, slutty, etc are told that men must sexually satisfy them, it’s not coercion.
It’s just men being raised under a different mindset. They’re satisfying those women because they want to under that system

That's exactly what is happening right now. And a lot of men think that is OK. Lol.

>>497247

> Women don’t stop being single just because they approach three hundred sixty moons old

Of course they don't, young females are not available for most men.

>>497246

> They don’t wanna cancel sex they merely wanna regulate it.

Yeah, for example, ban sex with females under 25, just a small (lol) regulation.

> If they wanted to cancel sex, they would’ve already been imposing compulsory sterilization for men and women

That's too foolish and straightforward, their current methods are much more effective. But who knows, maybe in the future they will be promoting even such things.

>>497126
If he's retarded in his actions he's certainly retarded. No amount of manifestoposting will change that.

>>497249
> Life is not just about physical survival. If you will be put in a tiny prison cell and fed only with bread and water, you will survive for a long time, but it can hardly be called a decent life. Neither can be life without sex for a man

Then we can conclude that you’re mentally ill with your obsession with sexual gratification.
There’s men who lead healthy lives without obsessing over sex.
Honest question: are you accomplished your life? Do you have hobbies or tasks that you do to keep you occupied?
Because I think that would help a lot more for your personality type.

> That's a vulgar understanding of sex. If it really was sex, incels could just do it and be happy. But for some reason it does not work and incels need real sex with a live young female, not with their hand or a sex doll

Maybe because sex dolls are expensive and not all incels have their own domicile?

> Absolutely not. Their "choice" is the choice between absolute loneliness and lining with an old hag, that spent her young ages having fun with chads and now, when she is no longer young and beautiful, wants to settle down, find a good cucky and drain benefits from him. If a man has pride and rejects such a role, he cannot be called volcel. Because it's unfair - other men (chads) had sex with a lot of young females, and he had not. You cannot say that one is provided with food, if all food that is available to him is waste from a trashcan.


I know it’s hard for you to believe but even the average young woman nowadays is having less sex. They’re more likely doing webcam sessions rather than throwing it out in meatspace.

> Not only me, as you might have noticed. Sex is male need, no matter how many people live on Earth.

Then maybe start by decriminalizing male youth sexuality.
Or maybe be more considerate about unchecked population growth?

The fact you don’t care about population growth over your sexual gratification is exactly why we have ghettos being overcrowded.

> Coercion might be justified, if the alternative leads to worse consequences. That's why I prefer strict monogamous system to current feminist system. It's a much lesser evil. But compared to sexual communism, it has a lot of downsides. That's why I prefer sexual communism to all this patriarchy-religion stuff.

So you admit to waning coercion.
Well, what if under sexual communism, we still have incels?

>>497256
I like how you start it with relatively reasonable-sounding critique of incels and only slowly build back to your pedo shitposting fixation. Subtle shitting up of the board.

>>497256

> Then we can conclude that you’re mentally ill with your obsession with sexual gratification.

Let's continue this logic and say that lots of people in Africa are mentally ill with their obsession with food gratification.

> There’s men who lead healthy lives without obsessing over sex.

There are also men that commit shootings because they cannot get sex. Like the one in the OP post. And also a bunch of men that don't shoot anyone but have huge depression and apathy because they don't have sex. Your statement is a pure feminist manipulation. Sex is needed for men.

> Honest question: are you accomplished your life?

Of course not, I'm an incel.

> Do you have hobbies or tasks that you do to keep you occupied? Because I think that would help a lot more for your personality type.

You are wrong. I have hobbies, but that cannot replace having regular sex.

> Maybe because sex dolls are expensive and not all incels have their own domicile?

There are incels in rich countries, like US or Germany, lots of they surely buy a sex doll. Anyway, masturbation with a hand costs nothing, but it definitely doesn't replace sex for incels, otherwise they wouldn't be complaining about inceldom.

> I know it’s hard for you to believe but even the average young woman nowadays is having less sex.

It is only their choice. Young woman has no problem with finding sex in modern society. If you are familiar with main incel theory, you must know about such experiments on dating apps. Tens or even hundreds of matches for even an average woman within a few hours.

> They’re more likely doing webcam sessions rather than throwing it out in meatspace

This is called vaginacapitalism. Because sex is a valuable and deficit resource, and women have monopoly on it, they try to sell it to men. And men pay for it, and not only for sex - even for a picture of sex, like webcam. It's a system that lets women exploit male sexual needs, because most of men cannot happily live without sex. This system is the key reason of inceldom, and it must be destroyed, if we want to solve the problem of incels.

> Then maybe start by decriminalizing male youth sexuality.

What do you mean?

> Or maybe be more considerate about unchecked population growth?

This is another problem. Come on, it's 21st century and people still cannot separate sex from births. Not even mentioning that population is mainly growing in Africa, but the inceldom problem is much more actual for the Western world, post-Soviet countires and Eastern Asia.

> The fact you don’t care about population growth over your sexual gratification is exactly why we have ghettos being overcrowded.

There is no logic in this. We could decide the incels problem, but also control population growth. Sex doesn't lead to birth in 999 cases of 1000.

> So you admit to waning coercion.

No, I don't want in. I want women to understand that men are also humans, not some garbage or slaves. That men need sex and it's crucially important for the whole society stability and safety so all men have regular sex, not just top 20%. Sexual communism is the system when women finally understood all of this and provide sex to men VOLUNTARILY.

But there is one important thing. If women refuse to understand that, we have a situation of choice - either men will somehow coerce women to provide sex (I do not mean straightforward rape, there are another ways, like social ostracism or economic methods), or either women will continue to coerce men live in inceldom or pay for sex in every possible way. And here I choose the first option. Because the second one leads the civilization to certain degradation and possibly even death. So the first one is the lesser evil. And so must understand all of men. That feminism and current elites politics are not just about fun, trolling or joking. It's the politics of pure enslavement for men.

> Well, what if under sexual communism, we still have incels?

If we have incels under sexual communism, it can only be in some radical scenarios, when, for example, some new deadly virus killed 90% of all women. Otherwise it's just impossible. If there are incels there is no sexual communism then.

>>497276
>Let's continue this logic and say that lots of people in Africa are mentally ill with their obsession with food gratification.

Unlike with your obsession with sexual gratification, they actually need food to survive.
You have plenty of food, maybe too much food, since you wanna keep rationalizing your excessive prioritizing of male sexual gratification.

>There are incels in rich countries, like US or Germany, lots of they surely buy a sex doll. Anyway, masturbation with a hand costs nothing, but it definitely doesn't replace sex for incels, otherwise they wouldn't be complaining about inceldom.

You sure about that?
Maybe the incels that are crying about lack of sex are a minority?

>If we have incels under sexual communism, it can only be in some radical scenarios, when, for example, some new deadly virus killed 90% of all women. Otherwise it's just impossible. If there are incels there is no sexual communism then

Hmmm, yea sure buddy, keep telling yourself that.

>>497274
What’s up with your obsession with “pedoshit”? I mean seriously? You’re sounding delusional just like this “sex is an essential need” anon

>>497276
>It is only their choice. Young woman has no problem with finding sex in modern society. If you are familiar with main incel theory, you must know about such experiments on dating apps. Tens or even hundreds of matches for even an average woman within a few hours

You too can get the same results.
But you don’t like the results you get. Once again, your definition of incel is more volcel


>No, I don't want in. I want women to understand that men are also humans, not some garbage or slaves. That men need sex and it's crucially important for the whole society stability and safety so all men have regular sex, not just top 20%. Sexual communism is the system when women finally understood all of this and provide sex to men VOLUNTARILY.

>But there is one important thing. If women refuse to understand that, we have a situation of choice - either men will somehow coerce women to provide sex (I do not mean straightforward rape, there are another ways, like social ostracism or economic methods), or either women will continue to coerce men live in inceldom or pay for sex in every possible way. And here I choose the first option. Because the second one leads the civilization to certain degradation and possibly even death. So the first one is the lesser evil. And so must understand all of men. That feminism and current elites politics are not just about fun, trolling or joking. It's the politics of pure enslavement for men.

So you’re using a countermeasure of coercion to get rid of another form of coercion. Good to know.

>>497250
Wrong. We don’t have this type of dystopia at all. Men simply turn those kind of women down except for cheap thrills

>>497249
>99%+ of all sexual intercourses do not end with a new child. Humans are not animals, that do it only for procreation.

Other species also have recreational sex

>>497328
Honestly, no creature on earth is thinking about propagating the species when it has sex.

>>497276
> There are also men that commit shootings because they cannot get sex. Like the one in the OP post. And also a bunch of men that don't shoot anyone but have huge depression and apathy because they don't have sex. Your statement is a pure feminist manipulation. Sex is needed for men.


Your rationale here is making men look bad. You sound like a whiny ass bitch NGL. Sex is not a need. It’s a want.
It sucks majorly to not have it but it’s not the end of the world.

Get a sex doll or some hookers or some desperate college-age female wallflower and get over yourself.

>>497276
>You are wrong. I have hobbies, but that cannot replace having regular sex.

So I see that your cognition is shot to hell.

> Of course not, I'm an incel

I’m not talking about your sex life. Are you accomplished with a career or a steady job and a decent domicile of your own?

If the answer is no, get good. Women don’t wanna deal with brokies. If the answer is yes, then shut up and be grateful. There’s lots of sexually successful men who are stuck with a nagging wife and feisty kids to raise in crummy apartments.

>>497229
>>rebelnews
>>uses Cloudflare
>Wow, such rebelness.
If you thought that was rebellious, get a look at their backers:
Robert J. Shillman
David Horowitz
The Middle East Forum
and their founder, Ezra Levant. Total rebellion against the will to stop collaborating in zionist war crimes.

>>497326

> Unlike with your obsession with sexual gratification, they actually need food to survive.

I already mentioned that life is not just about survival. Humans have other needs, not only food and oxygen. Sex is one of them.

> You have plenty of food, maybe too much food

Yes. So? There are no more things humans need besides food?

> Maybe the incels that are crying about lack of sex are a minority?

Insels, that write about their problems on the Internet, are indeed a minority. But the definition of incel is a man that doesn't have sex on regular basis. And these are the majority of men, especially among young men (63%, according to a research in the US). But the fact that a lot of incels don't speak about the problem, doesn't mean that they are OK with it. Our society is deeply feminized and antisexual. Men, that start to speak about inceldom, get mocked by women and their simps. And one doesn't have to be a genius to understand such simple thing.

> Hmmm, yea sure buddy, keep telling yourself that.

Everything you have to say? Lol.

> You too can get the same results.

I'm not a woman or a chad. Though even chads don't get so many matches as women.

> But you don’t like the results you get.

I do not get any results. 0 matches.

> So you’re using a countermeasure of coercion to get rid of another form of coercion. Good to know.

It's called class struggle, man. Should know what it is, if you are on LEFTchan.

> Men simply turn those kind of women down except for cheap thrills

If you mean ONS by "cheap thrills", you just proofed yourself wrong, lol. Because these women still can get sex. While incels don't.

> Other species also have recreational sex

Only dolphins and highest primates. Which are a tiny part of all species.

> Your rationale here is making men look bad.

In what way?

> You sound like a whiny ass bitch NGL

You sound like an NPC cuck, brainwashed by feminists and bourgeois mass media.

> Sex is not a need. It’s a want.

Want is a something, that can be easily denied, and one doesn't get any damage to his physical and psychological health. For example, a yacht. I would want to have a yacht, but now, while I don't have, I have absolutely no discomfort about that. Sex is an absolutely different story. If a man doesn't have sex for a long time, he is living in constant stress, that provokes heart diseases, he gets prostatitis, he gets apathy and depression, which might lead to suicide (men commit suicide much more often than women), rape, murders or mass shootings. So this is why it's a need, because lack of it affects human's health.

> Get a sex doll

You are hungry? Just eat some cow shit!

> or some hookers or some desperate college-age female wallflower and get over yourself.

You are homeless? Just buy a house!

> Women don’t wanna deal with brokies

So you admit that women are prostitutes, or, to be more precise, vaginacapitalists? What a progress, lol.

> If the answer is yes, then shut up and be grateful

Grateful for what? Money won't buy us happiness (c). But sex will.

> There’s lots of sexually successful men who are stuck with a nagging wife and feisty kids to raise in crummy apartments.

So what? What does that proof?

>>497344
> You sound like an NPC cuck, brainwashed by feminists and bourgeois mass media.

Case in point. You’re just a whiny ass bitch to the point that you call me the typical indignatory slurs of “NPC” “cuck” and “bourgeois”.

Have you been considered that sex and romance are oversold as a way to immoderate insecure people like you?

> Grateful for what? Money won't buy us happiness (c). But sex will.

Have you ever talked to people who had a lot of sex? They will tell you that their sexual escapades didn’t make them happy for long afterwards.

Also, “money doesn’t buy happiness “ is the biggest pathetic excuse for loserdom ever.
People who say this shit have never lived in poverty.

Money gives you security which gives you ample ease to pursue gratification.
People act like happiness is supposed to be instantly handed to them, hence why they say “money doesn’t buy happiness”. They’re too shallow to be content and build their own happiness.

>>497344
> I already mentioned that life is not just about survival. Humans have other needs, not only food and oxygen. Sex is one of them.

Sex is only needed for procreation to begin with.

> You are hungry? Just eat some cow shit!

In some third world countries, that’s what people have to resort to. Your comparison for inceldom is a gross exaggeration.

Again, you come off to me as an obnoxious manchild who doesn’t have any real struggles in life.
You’re too fixated on sex and romance.

Like bruh, this is shit you’re supposed to grow out of by age twenty-two.
I can sympathize if you’re thirteen thru nineteen and you’re getting left behind in the sex and romance department, because at those ages, you don’t have much opportunities to get laid.
But after that, it’s all on you.

> So you admit that women are prostitutes, or, to be more precise, vaginacapitalists? What a progress, lol.

Not wanting to deal with low prospect people isn’t being a prostitute.
By your logic, men who don’t want single moms or non-virginal single women over thirty five are pedophiles.

> It's called class struggle, man. Should know what it is, if you are on LEFTchan.

Class struggle is about abokishin wage labor and making all amenities and treats be in the hands of the workers who make them.
Not forcing women to have sex with incels.

Your definition of class struggle is what’s rampant in a lot of right-wing chat spaces.

> Only dolphins and highest primates. Which are a tiny part of all species.

You sure?

> Our society is deeply feminized and antisexual.

In what way is society being feminized? Anti-sexual I can give you that, but even then, it’s more sex-negative.

> Sex is an absolutely different story. If a man doesn't have sex for a long time, he is living in constant stress, that provokes heart diseases, he gets prostatitis, he gets apathy and depression, which might lead to suicide (men commit suicide much more often than women), rape, murders or mass shootings. So this is why it's a need, because lack of it affects human's health.

Can you provide proof of sex as being essential to health?
Also men suffer more from mental illness and depression than women due to society treating men as expendable attack dogs.

>>497237
> First of all, forget about sexual diversity. Men will have sex with one female through life, no more (if they don't want to be punished for cheating, of course). Second one, forget about sex with young females after your wife gets 30.

What’s so bad about this?
If you complain about women freely switching partners, why should it be okay for men?

>>497114



ＲＥＳＴ ＩＮ ＰＯＲＮ

>>497229
Not using Cloudflare is just masochism

>>497471
Reminder there is a revolving door between Clownflare and the US government and for the past two years now they've been working to enforce Google's monopoly on the web by gatekeeping non-Google-approved browsers from half the web with their malicious browser "check". There are many DDoS/botscraping protection alternatives now. If you "protect" your site with Clownflare you are actively making the web worse.