Andrew Tate embraces conspicuous consumption, flaunting his supercars, diamond watches, and other luxuries while at the same time extolling having children. This combination of pro-natalism and consumerism arose during the Reagan era, inspiring film director John Carpenter to produce the 1988 science fiction film They Live.
The film is about aliens who control the world by using mysterious signals that prevent humans from seeing them as they really are – deathly-looking ghouls — and as human instead. This has enabled them to take over all the prominent positions in society without being noticed. The signals likewise prevent humans from seeing the actual messages on billboard advertisements (see figure 1) and elsewhere, which are actually subliminal messages encouraging humanity to do what the aliens want. A few dissenters invent a special type of sunglasses that allows them to see through the aliens’ illusions. The film mocks the false promises that marketers use to get people to purchase their junk. Andrew Tate is essentially advocating for this himself when he teaches people to sell his products by persuading them that doing so will allow them to make the fantasy lifestyle of personal success and happiness that he projects their own.
Greg Johnson has said that Tate reminds him of the documentary American Pimp, which features African-American pimps peacocking with their fine clothes, cars, and jewelry. Tate was a cam-girl pimp, which puts him closer to Hugh Hefner than a pimp, but certainly resembles the people in that film: “Gorgeous Dre.” Tate’s peacocking is very black, but he also does his fair share of Trump-like peacocking when he brags about his riches and markets himself as a quintessential rich guy. Vanity isn’t exclusive to blacks, but Tate’s degree of it outpaces even Trump, and reflects his partial African ancestry.
It’s socially unhealthy to foster the expectation that most men should aspire to such a degree of wealth. If, instead of expecting to get rich, men in a particular ethnic group accept that they are destined to be poor, women won’t expect it of them, and reproduction can occur without much strain. This is part of the reason why African-American women outbred white women by a factor of nine between 1800 and 2020, as the US black population exploded from one million to over 40 million; whites globally only grew from 200 to 900 million.
Similarly, Palestinians have outbred Ashkenazi Jews despite the fact that they are oppressing them and preventing them from developing economically. Being an underclass is actually good for a people’s demographic future.
When foreign workers increasingly do the grunt work and permit a society to float on their labor in a service economy, however, then wealth accrues to older men and the amount one needs to attract a woman grows too high; then, people in such a society must wait to get married until the peak fertility period has already passed. (An exception to this is arranged marriages, such as in India or what the medieval nobility practiced.) Polygamy can solve this problem, however, because then rich older man can take multiple wives.
What we see globally in Figure 2 is that the largest gaps between men and women exist in Africa, followed by the Middle East.
What we see in Figure 3 is that nations having larger average age gaps also practice more polygamy.
Today, polygamy is most common in West Africa, though this may not have always been the case, because the Middle East has westernized to a greater extent. One study suggests that the ancestors of Middle Eastern people and South Asians were actually more polygamous than Africans. Tate characterizes polygamy, which he supports, as a fundamentally Muslim thing and extols Islam for giving men obedient young wives. While this practice is most closely associated in people’s minds with Middle Eastern peoples, but west Africans practice it as well, and in fact nowadays they are significantly more likely to be doing it than Middle Easterners.
Tate’s concept of sexual relations is fundamentally African and Muslim. He claims men are born with no value and must work to acquire it, whereas women are born with value and lose it as they age. This is similar to, but slightly different from, Goethe’s claim that “girls we love for what they are; young men for what they promise to be,” because Goethe focuses on men’s future possibilities, whereas Tate focuses on men’s current condition. My hypothesis is that Eurasians, and especially whites, are more future-oriented and abstract in their thinking, whereas Africans are more present- and sensory-oriented. The African way of thinking translates better into polygamy for older men, and the white/East Asian way into monogamy.
I would guess, however, that as Eurasian women age, specifically into their mid-20s, they adopt an Africanized sexuality and look more at income and social status. This is in keeping with data which shows that they start preferring men who earn the same as their father’s salary at that age, and data presented in Figure 4 shows that the income gap between married and single men grows with age. That Eurasian women develop a more negroid mindset with age makes sense, because it seems that in some ways Eurasians are more neotenous than Africans.
The age gap between white couples may be increasing to something like four years, on average. The main reason for this, of course, is men marrying younger women. This is leaving many young men single. According to Pew Research, there was a 2-3 ratio of single women to single men in the 18-29 demographic in 2020, but by 2023 the ratio had decreased to 1-2. It’s not quite so bad for whites, however. Given that men in the 18-29 group are about twice as likely to be single, we might assume that if 27% of whites are single, then 54% of white zoomer men are single, and only perhaps a third of white zoomer women. That’s a 3 to 5 ratio, but since about 10% of people from both genders are lifelong celibates, then the ratio of marriageable single white zoomer men to marriageable single white zoomer women is 44% to 23%, or roughly 1 to 2. The odds don’t favor single young men, so they need to try much harder to get the girls before older men do.
A microcosm of millennial men overshadowing zoomer men can be seen in Tate’s interactions with his protégé, a quadroon named Aiden Ross who became moderately rich as a Twitch streamer. Tate teases Aiden for not being as masculine, rich, and smart as he is. This reaches a pinnacle in one video in which Aiden complains about his girlfriend leaving him, whereupon Tate jokes that she is probably now with a guy like him. Tate meant that she is probably with a guy who is as “alpha” as he is, but he could have easily meant a man who is as old as he is.
It’s ironic that the most modest societies — those of whites and East Asians — are also the richest, and the poorest societies in Africa indulge in the most grandiose displays of wealth. If you want to be richer, then one should be more modest, whereas if you want to be poorer, you should be immodest like Tate.
Andrew’s brother Tristan wants to build his own personal castle in Romania. But what’s a castle without a king? I suggest we dub him the King of OnlyFans and crown him there.
Forgive me for being utilitarian, but big, empty mansions please nobody. We only need one castle for one king. Everyone else should, at the very least, settle for homes of under 10,000 square feet. If they want opulence, they should spend money on things everyone can enjoy, such as public parks, neoclassical government buildings, and gothic revival cathedrals. People are collectively much fonder of such places than of mansions.
* * *
Like all journals of dissident ideas, Counter-Currents depends on the support of readers like you. Help us compete with the censors of the Left and the violent accelerationists of the Right with a donation today. (The easiest way to help is with an e-check donation. All you need is your checkbook.)
For other ways to donate, click here.