Monogamy is, if thinking in terms of game theory for quality of family life, the optimal solution for society: most players win with this model with minimal harm.

This is almost entirely correct. You said minimal harm. There is no harm.

However, if thinking in terms of nature, polygamy is better suited.
Polygamy is if our natural instincts are allowed to play out. The best genetics reproduce the most. So more and more children are born either beautiful, clever, athletic, or all of the above. Generations born of polygamy are more likely to be chosen as mates because they simply have better genes. I believe this is true even in the event that their upbringing was insufficient due to a lack of a father.

You are entirely wrong. In western countries there is a constant pollution of the minds of young people done by a select few, with the express goal to confuse their natural instincts and convince them that monogamy is bad, and polygamy is good. This has been going on in ever increasing doses at least since the 1950s.

The result is not people who are healthier, smarter or fitter. Quite the opposite, our health, intelligence and dexterity is decreasing and worsening at an ever accelerating rate.

The goal is to destroy western society, bring about the Great Replacement, and create a whole world of submissive slaves where nobody has the capacity or willingness to stand up to them. Then their power will be absolute, and when they decide they no longer need slaves, because machines have gotten to the point where they self design, assemble and repair, the slaves will be eliminated with no resistance possible.

Monogamy allows for more men to reproduce sure, but then the quality of human genes is lowered. This is made even worse by arranged marriages where even the worst genes are allowed to pass on.

In a polygamous context, the best males reproduce so that as generations go on, the genetic stock is improved. I do not know the limit to this, but it's easy to imagine the percentage of attractive, desirable people would greatly increase. So in a way, this is the better solution as more people are born as attractive, and able.

You're entirely missing the point. Under a civilized context, polygamy not only doesn't select the best genes, it in fact selects the worst genes. Genetics are not better off under polygamous debauchery, to the contrary, they are getting worse at an alarming rate, along with the rest of health. This is clearly not due to an excess in monogamy. The west has experienced an unparalleled destruction of the nuclear family unit, as planned. Once you destroy the family, the individual crumbles.

The polygamous male to female ratio of reproduction is at its worst (smallest) when there are few attractive men and many average or unattractive males caused by monogamy being forced for too long. The male to female ratio of reproduction is at its best (closest to 1:1) when more people in a society are attractive, healthy, with good genetics. So in perfect fashion, nature almost selects for monogamy if played out perfectly. To prevent genetics from deteriorating over generations, I believe a primarily raw diet is important as is the avoidance of unnatural medicine most notably vaccines which are especially potent at corrupting genetics.

Polygamy greatly favours the slave mentality, the slave diet which is veganism+insectivorism, and a total submission to harmful drugs, injections, radiation and other treatments sold as "medicine".

You keep missing the point, that in a monogamous culture, the traits that make a mate more attractive, are completely different to the traits that make a mate attractive under a polygamous culture.

You haven't addressed how you are going to deal with the 80%+ men who can't find a mate under your ideal polygamous culture. You can export them off to other countries, therefore exporting your problem onto others, and that's being done as well. Eventually the whole world will have this problem, and the only three possible solutions are:

1) Reversal of the decivilizing debauchery and a return to normalcy and monogamous nuclear family structures, as western civilized society has done for thousands of years and to great success. This must include mass deportations, as happened during the Crusades.

2) Mass castration of 80% of men, either forcible through surgery, covertly through injections, drugs and poisons, or via entertainment like videogames, sports and porn.

3) Massive wars where somewhere close to 80% of men are either severely injured or killed.

2) Is already underway. But it's unlikely to be enough when men start rebelling. You're probably going to have to choose 1) or 3). Even if 2) is enough, you should know that that's what you're really advocating.

It depends on how strong your teeth are. This is a double edged sword, biting on bones can damage your teeth, but the marrow and soft bone can heal them.

Ideally you would find a way to eat these without putting your teeth under major stress.

I think we should aim to utilize as much of the animal as possible. It's more ecological, it's more economical, and it's more healthy.

Where is this mythical Monogamous society you speak of?

There are none.

Did you understand what the study said?

From the older times of 1 to 17, to:

"In more recent history, as a global average, about four or five women reproduced for every one man."

Laws were made to push monogamy, but...

Humans do not reproduce monogamously... the genetic studies do not show it.  Genetic statistics show humans to be polygamous.

All of western european, Most eastern european, as well as Chinese and Japanese societies, were all founded on the basis of the monogamous nuclear family structure. The same was the case for all of the overseas colonies that became successful. Of the major religions, only one condones polygamy, and it's precisely the one which is most prevalent in countries that became underdeveloped for many centuries, until recent events turned the tides for only some of them. There would simply be no modern science, technology, and there would only be scarce writing and communication without monogamy. World population would be at most 10% of what it is today.

In the civilized world, everything that is good derives from private property, which relies on monogamous nuclear family structures to function.

Over the past century, and particularly over the past 50 years, the world, and the west in particular, is experiencing a process of de-civilization. That is why you see monogamy being eroded more and more, just as health and everything else is being degraded, polluted, corrupted and destroyed.

Whether paleo people lived monogamously or not is irrelevant, because we don't live in that world anymore. There are good reasons why things changed once we started to develop civilization. The paleo health experience is about undestanding what made them healthy, but a healthy body, and a healthy society, can be very different things at different times.

Today, polygamy only generates war, sickness, poverty, death and despair. With the very real possibility that it could end all human life as we know it. It's one of the main driving forces of the most dangerous thing for humanity. With great power, comes great responsibility. Paleo people were not powerful. Civilized people are. Different times, different needs.

What are you talking about?

I guess you forget the nonsense you write pretty quickly.

The sad thing is that the Rich men who can afford hgh thyroid and testosterone properly executed HRT will be healthier and live better quality of life than any primal raw meat eater..

This is fact.

Don't store meat in a plastic bag. You're adding chemical toxicity to it for no good reason. Keeping it in the bag is also the cause of the mold that you don't want. Keep it open to low humidity air and it will be more likely to dry out rather than go moldy.

Who cares about diet, pollution or lifestyle, just go shoot up some more synthetic roids, that'll cure whatever problems you have.

Nice try vegan troll

I would would not go into this by underestimating the DA, he may not be as helpless as you think, and there's a decent likelihood that when this comes to trial, he'll be putting up a fight, and to the extent that he's allowed to by the judge, he'll be showing stuff about your public persona to the jury, including your posts here. And while there's some chance the jury might listen about the bug hoax and pharma takeover, there's almost no chance they'll listen to many of the other intricacies that make you a unique individual, and that, in the eye of the general public, make you at best a nutcase, and at worst someone dangerous. All the DA has to do is show the jury a few of those and their brain will completely shut off to anything you have to say or argue.

My suggestion would be to not open that door for the DA, my understanding is that he may not be allowed to bring in evidence about your personal life until you bring that up first.

Best of luck and I'm here if you wanna discuss anything regarding this.

Best of luck tomorrow.

Had this talk with Bart a while back,
https://youtu.be/fxL10Ubgn7g

Beautiful.

Today marks the three year anniversary of Tyler's vanishment.

Ending another year without a word on what happened to Tyler.

In 8 days it will be 3 years since he disappeared.