By Serge Kreutz

While it is ok to live in reasonable comfort, many modern luxuries are a diversion from what is important.

More luxurious cars, nicer houses, expensive shoes or jewelry? Who needs that?

The only thing that counts are optimal sexual relationships. If one’s sex life is optimal, it’s alright to live in a bamboo hut and use public transport… or even just walk, and that for many, many kilometers.

Many men spend money on luxuries, not because they enjoy them but because luxuries express status, and they want to express status because they want to attract attractive females. If being a homeless, begging monk would be most suitable to attract women, then you would see a very large number of men switching to that lifestyle.

But if luxuries are an unneeded diversion, what should men who possess a lot of money spend it on?

Sooner or later, it will be political causes. Causes that benefit them directly, not just economically but, ultimately, sexually.

It is impossible for constructive processes to have such an effect. Only destructive causes are radical enough to change the modes by which humans live together so fundamentally that men with means, and brains, will have a far-reaching chance to benefit.

Possible causes include movements that fractionate countries, especially the USA. More, and smaller, countries mean more options. Smaller countries have also less capacity to intervene in other countries. Any political independence movement in the Western world deserves support.

Another possible cause are movements that favor the liberalisation of drugs. Drugs undermine conventional morals and value systems. Drug subcultures also undermine the common sexual discrimination of older people.

Possible minor causes can be isolationist political agendas, any kind of multiculturalism, as it is a seed for fragmentation, and causes that ease worldwide migration. Mixing up things has the potential to result in conflict, conflict is destructive, and opportunities follow destruction.