A Bardic Circle was a place for our ancestors to go to hear and share beautiful stories and music. This new stream/podcast will be ostensibly about sharing stories based on two major themes - kicking ass and navigating the freak show we live in.
June of 2015 appears to be a particularly freakish month - and it's only half over. Episode 1 of the Bardic Circle is with a longtime buddy and accurate social critic, Immortal Watchdog. In it, we discuss the freakishness we've seen this month, some underlying causes behind the freak show the West has become, and the need for a new philosophy to counteract the degenerate narrative, one based on a return to achievement and beauty that is at once fulfilling individually and socially. This lifestyle philosophy is what I call "True Glory," which I think will be crucial for a new overall social narrative. We talk about what it means and the mindset to get there.
- Intro.
- 1:27: Immortal Watchdog on how technology contributes to the freakishness, and relays his story of attending a conference of leaders in different circles, division among the Latino community's politics, but nevertheless a uniting to "keep the crazy at bay."
- 4:27: The division between old school liberals and the "social justice" crowd, with some personal examples, and #NotYourShield.
- 9:45: Bruce Jenner and the lionization of transgenderism - bordering on child abuse, malicious attention whoring, and the shortcomings of psychology as a science.
- 18:54: Deconstructivism and the "Social Justice Industrial Complex" - degeneracy as a form of self-aggrandizement.
- 20:08: Information access and narcissism in the West.
- 23:05: The need for external struggles, using my grandfather's example. The race to the bottom with the need to create a struggle from nothing.
- 26:43: Mattress Girl makes a porno.
- 32:51: "Rape culture" as a fad, and the skepticism that must come when examining public rape accusations, "Roosh's Law."
- 37:16: Real rape cultures.
- 38:55: "Rape culture" as part of the Social Justice Industrial Complex, the abuse of Title IX, and perverse incentives.
- 43:07: Does college serve a purpose anymore? The negatives surrounding universities in the present economy.
- 45:39: Despair and stagnation in the West leading to neurotic behavior as seen in "social justice." Possible futures.
- 52:30: Resource shortages and more on possible futures.
- 1:01:32: Rachel Dolezal and "transracialism." Is oppression the the aspiration of Westerners now? Is that the calling?
- 1:09:40: The disconnect between African immigrants and African-Americans, how the left has failed Black culture, identity politics supplanting the New Deal Coalition, with disastrous consequences for the groups it claims to represent, politics and voting as a tribal activity.
- 1:17:40: Correcting social issues, manufactured problems, and irresponsible media manipulation.
- 1:22:09: Future social problems centered around identity and resources, irresponsible media manipulation continued.
- 1:26:22: The Duggars and the hypocrisy vis a vis Lena Dunham, and the normalization of pedophilia.
- 1:42:33: IWD's Libertarianism, the deadness of Europe.
- 1:44:58: Social justice in action in New York City with Bill de Blasio as Mayor, libertarianism must have with it a "duty to the polis."
- 1:50:25: Status whoring by showing how "tolerant" you are and how that relates to politics, Hillary Clinton, her failures, and identity politics driving her candidacy.
- 1:54:51: The True Glory philosophy a part of the answer to the neuroticism and degeneracy in the West.
- 1:56:53: Bruce Jenner as an example of kleos gone wrong, the cosmic perspective, the necessity of accomplishing work greater than yourself.
- 2:00:56: The genetic legacy you leave behind as part of your work.
- 2:03:56: The capability of humans to leave behind a legacy beyond their DNA as being the most important part of the work, the ethos of the Homeric heroes needing to guard against disgrace to their names.
- 2:05:30: Anyone can leave a mark on history, the civic obligations in blood and deeds, the individual combined with the social responsibility in True Glory.
- 2:12:46: My own path.
- 2:13:18: The need to not be destitute even while pursuing your path. The average person probably needs to find a glory in the pursuit of wealth like Crassus or Rockefeller, however, the pursuit of wealth for its own sake can lead to misery.
- 2:16:01: The hero who failed in his lifetime, but whose deeds are known afterward, the unsung hero as a model of nobility.
- 2:16:19: Pursuing True Glory does not mean you'll get there, the importance of doing the work, the fickleness of fortune, the danger of a dopamine rush without the work - these are the actions of a drug addict.
- 2:19:20: The importance of faith, convictions, and enthusiasm in the integrity of your work and beliefs, how they must never be compromised, get up every day wanting to kick ass, even when your own ass gets kicked, the example of Marcus Luttrell in BUD/S.
- 2:23:03: The role of the ego and delusion in pursuit of True Glory.
- 2:25:51: Kleos as the social perspective to keep your work from getting neurotic.
- 2:27:28: The bicentennial of the Battle of Waterloo, analysis of the battle and its effects, and analogies to today.
- 2:37:30: The need to put forward a different narrative to "social justice," and some last thoughts on the path.
Wednesday, June 17, 2015
Thursday, June 4, 2015
What is True Glory?
You will always find in me the same perseverance in labor, the same firmness of resolution, the same love for my people, the same passion for the prosperity of my state, and the same ardor for true glory.So said Louis XIV, the most powerful and memorable man of his age.
For a long time now, I have been thinking about what it means to live a good, purposeful life. Those who know me will know that I detest the culture of the modern Western World, calling it degenerate and soulless. Why is it, I keep thinking to myself, that we now have people from first world countries joining ISIS? Albeit this only has happened in very small numbers, why would people from the West, often educated, even conceive of joining such a group?
I pondered this a bit further. The only conclusion that I can draw is it is part of a desperate search, because life in the West has completely lost all meaning. There is no "It" factor - no drive or guiding cause that people are fervently devoted to and will risk everything to bring to fruition. There is no drive to greatness. There is no greater call to labor for something magnificent. There is only a race to be the biggest degenerate attention whore.
 |
| The leader of the free world. This is it? Is this what the West is offering? |
The West used to have "It." The followers of George Washington at Valley Forge and Morristown who didn't desert had "It." Joan of Arc's soldiers had "It." As a friend of mine rightfully remarked, Martin Luther King and his followers had "It" too. Henry V's speech in the Shakespeare play of the same name personifies "It:"
Having thus elucidated perhaps on a long tangent, I return to Louis XIV. He had "It" as well, as did France throughout his reign. Although he was born lucky, he did not rest on these laurels as did his successor, Louis XV. He had a clear vision of what he wanted France to be, a clear vision of bringing glory to himself and his country, and worked long and hard to fulfill that vision. He was not just attractive as a king, he was attractive as a man. He was willing to embrace hardship to make France and himself great.
Embracing hardship is another key concept that is required to attain True Glory, and it is a key component of why the West is spiritually dead, but more on that in a moment. Seeking True Glory is something akin to spirituality. When doing so it almost feels like you are conversing with your higher self.
For most of the existence of civilization, religion served as a guidepost for people's lives. It gave them direction and focus and it gave them a cause to serve. Religion was the great task for people to devote themselves to accomplishing, a task that went beyond mindless immediate self-gratification. It took effort and sacrifice to serve your god, and saving your soul, in certain traditions, was a lifetime commitment. Other traditions had other commitments, but they all had commitment in common. The tangible rewards might not have been apparent to most people, but they were certain that the otherworldly rewards for their spiritual labors would eventually come.
 |
| Joan of Arc's devoted service to France was, in her mind, the same as her pious service to God. |
Two things were without doubt necessary: very hard work on my part, and a wise choice of persons capable of seconding it.Louis was a man that would not be satisfied with anything less than sensational, and the only way to achieve something of that nature is precisely through the method he outlined above - very hard work on your part and the right kind of help.
So.......what is True Glory? How, exactly, do we define it?
In my mind, True Glory is the achievement of something spectacular, something that people will remember you by for a long time to come. The story of Achilles is one that exemplifies this. He had two choices: stay in Greece and have a loving family, but be forgotten, or go to Troy and live a short life full of glory, where his feats, and hence his name, would be spoken of from the lips of the countless generations yet to be. Although the Troy movie didn't quite do the story right, I think it more or less got that part down as well as it could:
Which fate would you choose?
Fortunately, in the real world we likely won't have to choose an early death to achieve True Glory.
The ending of this video about Louis XIV also I think gives us a good obituary, and lets us know unmistakably that he had achieved True Glory.
True Glory can thus be seen as a massive and...glorious accomplishment (or accomplishments), worthy enough for people to remember you by long after you die. The ancient Greeks called this kleos (everlasting glory and renown - "what others hear about you."). Fortune is too fickle regarding who gets remembered in the end, but living a life worthy of remembrance and admiration is a goal the elect who choose to strive for it can achieve. All of the Twenty Men on my list achieved (or have achieved) states of True Glory in their lifetimes, but in their own different ways.
 |
| The physical, tangible reminder of Louis XIV's glory. |
However, that end is a privilege. Very few people wind up achieving states of True Glory.
As you can see, this is quite different from simply, "finding your life's purpose." Quite often "finding your life's purpose" means the following:
Flailing about in, to again quote Louis XIV, "inactivity and indolence," a narcissistic hedonism from which you essentially accomplish nothing. #YOLO, it's all about me and what makes me happy, yo.
Someone can easily say that his life's purpose is to sleep with as many girls as he possibly can, devolving into the worst PUA bullshit along the way. While a good sex life is certainly a component of living a fulfilling life, and Giacomo Casanova (one of the above-mentioned Twenty Men) did achieve a state of True Glory partially in this way (through the literary acumen he had to pass his exploits down), better things can likely be done, and Casanova was more than a seducer, but an interesting adventurer.
 |
| Breaking out of prison was one of Casanova's feats. |
The difference between True Glory and "finding your life's purpose" can therefore be seen as an added objective element - will the sum of your life's work be worthy of remembrance in the eyes of others ("what others hear about you")? While you must not live for others, this element requires a degree of contemplation beyond hedonistic drives. In essence, it ensures you are not an island unto yourself, which "finding your life's purpose" can often be an excuse to mean.
Attaining True Glory requires a great deal of discipline and fortitude to deal with setbacks. You must fervently believe that the thing you're doing is right. If you don't, you will not have the vigor to achieve the glory. All of the men on the linked list, even though there was surely an undercurrent of opportunism, felt to their bones that they were doing the right thing for themselves. People that achieve states of True Glory are filled with unbridled enthusiasm, ready to go out into the world and kick some ass, even when at times, it's their own asses that get kicked.
Modern Western culture does not have this, and it is not promoted. We are told instead to be isolationist automatons whose purpose in life is to be consumers. Technology has made this worse. It is perhaps not so surprising that destructive ideologies take root, as they offer adventure and meaning where there is little to be found in a sedentary, consumerist lifestyle.
 |
| The iPhone camp. This is, so we are told, the good life. |
In that same regard it's not so surprising to me that many people are becoming social justice warriors. While the rise of the social justice warrior is I think a confluence of many factors, this is one of them. Our lives in the industrialized world, long devoid of any real hardship or challenges, inspire a lack of drive, especially with decreased economic opportunities (despair is the other side of this particular equation, but that will be addressed in another post). There is a very primal quality in philosophies that offer not comfort, but struggle. They call to our deepest needs. Part of the reason that war stories resonate with so many people, and why people are fascinated by war, is because it requires a courage, valor, self-sacrifice, and discipline that peacetime rarely does. This is why, in the absence of any other struggle, people seem to need to make up their own struggles, no matter how irrational or destructive, to find meaning. ISIS and "social justice" are both manifestations of this.
 |
| Mattress girl's lying attention whoring is a perfect example of the deep-seated human need for struggle, even when none can be found. |
You must wake up every day with enthusiasm. You must know yourself and where you want to go, and have a vision for the direction of your work. You must make tireless day to day efforts to bring that vision to reality. You should want to achieve something great, something worthy of remembrance and praise - not for others, but to achieve your own immortality. Athena says it best in this 1997 adaptation of Homer's Odyssey:
Odysseus: I see you're no longer with me, Athena, and it's alright. I can do everything myself.
Athena (appearing with a laugh): Is that any way to speak to your protector?
Odysseus: Athena!
Athena: I think the wine swells your head, my Odysseus. Are you drinking because you fear your future?
Odysseus (drinking, laughing, smirking): Me? I'm afraid of nothing!
Athena: I'm teasing you. You're angry with me.
Odysseus: Athena! You could have helped me persuade Agamemnon, on the day of my son's birth no less!
Athena: I'm a goddess after all. I have other duties. And don't forget, I can be seen by whom I choose. I did not want you to escape this journey, because I want you to go. I want you, my brave Odysseus, to defeat the Trojans.
Odysseus: I've fought long enough.
Athena: No. You're destiny's to do battle, to become immortal, to have your name on the lips of endless generations!
Odysseus: No! I have no need to be remembered by endless generations.
Athena: Odysseus! You cannot lie to me! I know your true character! I know your pride, your vanity!
(Some more dialogue.)
Athena: You see the good in them (your men) because they love you. You must use this good to defeat the Trojans. You must be brave, my Odysseus.
Odysseus: I have no fear, as long as you're with me (Athena vanishes before he finishes).
This conversation encapsulates the Homeric hero, and indeed it is Homer's example which I wish to emulate on my own journey to this True Glory, as it is most in line with my natural talents. He became like his heroes, achieving a state of True Glory, of kleos, by writing about them. I hope to do the same.
 |
| Homer became, like the heroes he wrote about - immortal, by writing for posterity his stories of Troy. |
True Glory is different from happiness and contentment. It's of course important to be happy, and I do not need much to be happy and content. However, happiness and contentment are most often excuses for stagnation - the very disease Western civilization is suffering from, while others are hungry for something more. We of course need to be happy in life, but we must never rest on those laurels, lest we become complacent. The greatest part of being human is our ability to do feats of greatness, to leave a legacy for eternity in finding and experiencing this beauty and this True Glory, which are only possible in this time and place in the universe's history - a universe whose future likely promises to be cold and dark, and the possibility of glory will sink into the blackness with it. We owe it to ourselves and to the universe that created us to burn as brightly as we can while time still allows, to be living (for life is a unique creation of the universe) expressions of the natural beauty of the cosmos.
Carl Sagan used to say that "we are a way for the cosmos to know itself." In the same tradition, True Glory is a way for us to be agents for the universe to glorify itself through the deeds of life.
Louis XIV wrote:
Praise is of a very delicate texture, and we should be very careful how we are caught by its dazzling appearance, as it requires much penetration to discern truly our flatterers from our real admirers.But however obscure the intentions of our courtiers may be, there is nevertheless, a certain mode by which we may turn everything they say to our advantage; which is simply, to examine ourselves closely on the subject of praise which others have bestowed on us; for when we hear certain encomiums which we ourselves are unconscious of deserving, it will immediately lead us to reflect on them (according to the temper of those who bestowed them) either as a malignant reproach for some error, which we, in consequence, should immediately endeavor to correct, or as a secret exhortation to a virtue to which we have hitherto been insensible.Supposing even that we conceive ourselves really deserving of that which is spoken in our favor, instead of simply contenting ourselves with the praises which we have received, they ought rather to serve us as a stronger stimulus to merit new encomiums; for this assuredly is one of those mediums whereby the elevated mind may be distinguished from those who never rise beyond mediocrity; to behold the latter charmed with the empty noise of applause which is incessantly flattering their ears, abandoning themselves to inactivity and indolence, eager to persuade themselves that they have done enough; while the former, continually burning with an equal ardor, seem never fully satisfied, as if everything which is lavished to allay that fire with which they seem to burn only to increase its violence.It is only after this manner, my son, that glory becomes amiable; the thirst for which it inspires is not a weak passion which becomes cloyed with possession; it is never obtained but by strong efforts, and never becomes satiating; and he who can rest contended without seeking new favors is unworthy even of those which he has already received.
Although we may never achieve the state, it is the desire, the zeal, and the work that make life meaningful and which rescues us from indolence and nihilism. That is its greatest virtue - fulfilling this deep human need. The journey to True Glory is equally as great as the destination.
At the conclusion of this entry, I'm still somewhat unsatisfied. Is this the true way to live a good life? I think I'm heading in the right direction, and I believe my underpinnings are right, but is what I've said the correct path? I'm still not entirely sure what it all means. I'll just have to keep looking, and adding to this thesis, with words and deeds, as time goes by.
 |
| The fate of the universe doesn't look good. Burn brightly now! |
Sunday, May 24, 2015
Neomasculinity, Schisms, & The Future
There has been a fair amount of controversy over the past few days regarding a philosophy that has been crystallized into something that Roosh calls Neomasculinity. Some on The Red Pill subreddit have called Roosh a sellout and accused him of simply attempting to profit. Manosphere laureate Rollo Tomasi got in on this act. Others of the MGTOW persuasion have accused the ideas of attempting to get men back onto "the plantation."
Roosh made a video response below:
I'll interject some thoughts onto this whole affair - Neomasculinity, the schisms, and the future that Roosh speaks of. While there was always some underlying tension within the broader cross-section of the net known as the Manosphere, this is perhaps a more substantial earthquake than what we've seen in the past between "The Red Pill" and MGTOW on one side and the philosophy that Roosh is crystallizing on the other.
It is however, helpful to remember that The Red Pill subreddit doesn't necessarily encompass the whole of the belief system. In fact I'd strongly argue that "The Red Pill" is by itself not a belief system at all. The Red Pill is simply a thing - the thing that signifies that you are aware of certain truths that modern, feelings-based society wishes to cover up: namely, that equality is a false construct, and it is questionable how desirable civilization should be in adhering to it. Clearly, some degree of an imposed equality is necessary for the functioning of a just social order, but where should the line be drawn? To those of us who take the Red Pill, it is very clear that the "equality" train has long gone off the rails.
In my mind, the Red Pill was always simply a thing, not a belief system in and of itself. Frost has explained the different Red Pill stages very well on his own blog.
Of course, "taking the Red Pill" will inevitably lead you to see, to some degree or another, the profound sickness and malaise of Western civilization in its current state. How you interact with this fact, and what you intend to do about it, is what will comprise your actions and your belief system.
The tenets that Roosh simplifies as Neomasculinity is one such belief system. I'll begin with my own history to outline some of the value I see in this.
I first became aware of game in late 2009. I suppose you could call this my first encounter with "the Red Pill" as Frost describes above. My realization that being attractive to women was in some respects a skill that could be manipulated of course thrilled me. However, I never really committed to it. I just didn't develop the discipline. I now see why that was.
2009 was, I suppose, the tail end of what has come to be called "Game 1.0" - the behaviors and lifestyles popularized by the early pioneers in the modern field of seduction such as Ross Jeffries, Mystery, and Neil Strauss. However, while this work was innovative and unquestionably established the foundations of all that has come since, like all early efforts, it was imprecise and lacking in something. It was still a child growing up.
It was a child growing up because it focused too much on certain behaviors being a magic pill to cure your problems. Though the old PUA doctrines were not exactly advertised this way, and they did make many mentions of overall self and life improvement in terms of social status, bodybuilding, etc., it did not emphasize this enough, I think. There was also no greater meaning attached to game. The only goal was to maximize your sexual self-fulfillment, which is of course very important to your happiness as a man, but this goal existed in a vacuum and was not connected to any underlying meaning. It was these two factors that I now see as responsible for failing to instill any kind of higher zeal and discipline in me, because they simply were not motivating enough, even with the promise of sexual improvement. I have always been a big picture thinker, and Game 1.0 was only one small part of a whole, a whole that was, in that community, a vacuum.
In the spring of 2013, I found Return of Kings. Although the quality of the overall content and comment section has declined as the site has grown, before 2014, it was a bastion of collected insights and experiences from a wide range of men (albeit with the sprinkling of clickbait). Quintus Curtius' articles were, and continue to be, the foundation of the site's quality, and it was his work, above all others, that started the genesis of my own evolution as a man.
Return of Kings, with Quintus exemplifying it in its highest degree, took the bedrock of what I already knew about game and infused it with higher purpose. The first aspect of this was rediscovering and bringing out your full potential as a masculine man. Game was seen as part of being who you were born to be - a masculine man fulfilling your life's purpose. This was something on the tip of my tongue and that I always knew instinctively from the time I was a little boy, but seeing it in front of me solidified it. This was a truth that politically correct society does not want men to know.
There was also rich content about history and polity - identifications of cultural problems, negative mindsets, and incubating a positive belief system that was motivational for men to act in their natural role to fix the social degeneracy that is blatantly on display for all to see. At once, a world of substantial self-improvement of mind and body was linked with a higher belief system - the striving for beauty, excellence, glory, truth, and a flourishing of life for both yourself and your society. This changed everything. I ultimately became the person I am now, and will become the person I will be, because of it.
A month ago, I read Daniel Lubetzky's Do The Kind Thing, a book which goes over his life's story of how he evolved from a kid always attempting to sell something, to a struggling businessman with big dreams and grit, to the founder of a sprawling business enterprise and how he got rich. I have meant to write a post about the lessons I gleaned from that book, but haven't gotten around to it. One central theme of importance in the book is toward the start, where Lubetzky outlines a crucial motivational factor - that your business be one of social importance. In his own case, he attempted to bring together people in conflict regions through economic cooperation by selling the products they made together. This allowed him to do his part in bringing peace to those regions. It was this higher purpose that motivated him to build his business, even when times were tough. This higher purpose and belief system - that what he was doing was right, motivated him to continue. However, he makes one crucial point:
The social mission of your enterprise and your desire to produce a high quality product fuse in Lubetzky's philosophy - the former motivates the latter. His devotion to his social mission greatly helped him to develop the discipline he needed to become successful in life.
Lubetzky calls this the "And Philosophy." It is possible to get out of many seeming conundrums by realizing that they are not conundrums at all, by thinking with "And" instead of "Or." It is possible to build a profitable business AND have a higher social purpose at the same time.
This is what I saw with the doctrine that people like Roosh and Quintus Curtius were putting forward. It is possible to have a good life, get good with women, AND fight for a world you value - rooted in history, pursuant of an ethos of beauty, and conducive of a society based on "liberty - not license" (credit again to Quintus). It also helps you to fight against a society that engages in politically correct social engineering, which strips people of their inherent characters in order to build a homogenous world of equalist automatons. This is the AND philosophy that has been offered in what Roosh is calling Neomasculinity.
And you know it's the real deal because it does not sell any magic pills like the empty Game 1.0 did. Neomasculinity is nothing in fact new, it is simply a useful simplifier to describe the things that people like me have already been doing. Those that get too caught up in labels, as I have done before, are usually those that are prone to mob thinking.
As for the future? Which will survive in the long run - Neomasculinity, MRAs, MGTOWs?
These things are for the most part dependent on the social, political, and economic environment. Movements and belief systems don't arise in a vacuum. What I think will survive depends in large part on the probability of societal outcomes based on a distribution curve of likely futures that I see unfolding. This will be explained in another post.
I do however think that it is most likely that MGTOW will fall by the wayside and Neomasculinity will be more stable, for a few other reasons besides what I see as the likeliest social outcomes:
1. MGTOWs are overwhelmingly composed of bitter, angry men with nothing positive to offer. They spend 90% of their time bitching about women. While this may be understandable, it is not productive.
2. Most will not reproduce. In the minds of MGTOW, game is somehow "gynocentric" (as are most things regarding masculinity).
3. It is an empty philosophy. To them, anything positive seems to be "gynocentric." Again, they have a need to attack women by "going their own way," revealing that they are, in fact, not "going their own way." Consider this comment below by Jose Martinez:
Also, I have a hint for you MGTOWs out there: what we have now is the product of a cross-section of economic, political, and social trends. It cannot simply be reduced to "women voted all this shit in." Women did not "vote in" resource depletion, offshoring, perverse tax incentives, and global Ponzi credit, just to name a few things.
4. They, like feminists, and incidentally MRAs, deny the true nature of the sexes, as you can see by the implication above. To deny that men benefit enormously from the company of good, feminine women is to deny the true nature of men. Consider this absurd comment from Sandman, a popular MGTOW who I responded to in the previous post:
Anyway, upon hearing further about this "Sandman" character, my initial distrust has increased. Supposedly he wants in the end to buy an egg, hire a surrogate, and be a single father. Apparently, it's fine for the Manosphere to rail against single motherhood, where a child is deprived of his or her father and thus a crucial part of forming his or her identity, but it's alright to deprive that same child of his or her mother. I can only speak for myself, but having a loving mother was very nourishing, even if she did take it a bit too far. This mentality, I predict, will only continue to fuck up the identities of future generations. This information reveals fundamentally that MGTOWs operate on the same "everything goes and nothing matters" mentality as the radical "social justice" left that we are fighting, and they claim to hate.
Neomasculinity however, stands for something more solid. It is, in Roosh's words "a living philosophy" of the "AND" kind that blends individualism with social responsibility and higher purpose. It may be a minority, but as Quintus Curtius often remarks - "minorities can and have achieved lasting change." He is right. This is the most potent minority I've ever encountered. This is why I believe in the end we will be the ones standing.
Update: I have released a video regarding this matter:
Roosh made a video response below:
I'll interject some thoughts onto this whole affair - Neomasculinity, the schisms, and the future that Roosh speaks of. While there was always some underlying tension within the broader cross-section of the net known as the Manosphere, this is perhaps a more substantial earthquake than what we've seen in the past between "The Red Pill" and MGTOW on one side and the philosophy that Roosh is crystallizing on the other.
It is however, helpful to remember that The Red Pill subreddit doesn't necessarily encompass the whole of the belief system. In fact I'd strongly argue that "The Red Pill" is by itself not a belief system at all. The Red Pill is simply a thing - the thing that signifies that you are aware of certain truths that modern, feelings-based society wishes to cover up: namely, that equality is a false construct, and it is questionable how desirable civilization should be in adhering to it. Clearly, some degree of an imposed equality is necessary for the functioning of a just social order, but where should the line be drawn? To those of us who take the Red Pill, it is very clear that the "equality" train has long gone off the rails.
In my mind, the Red Pill was always simply a thing, not a belief system in and of itself. Frost has explained the different Red Pill stages very well on his own blog.
Of course, "taking the Red Pill" will inevitably lead you to see, to some degree or another, the profound sickness and malaise of Western civilization in its current state. How you interact with this fact, and what you intend to do about it, is what will comprise your actions and your belief system.
The tenets that Roosh simplifies as Neomasculinity is one such belief system. I'll begin with my own history to outline some of the value I see in this.
I first became aware of game in late 2009. I suppose you could call this my first encounter with "the Red Pill" as Frost describes above. My realization that being attractive to women was in some respects a skill that could be manipulated of course thrilled me. However, I never really committed to it. I just didn't develop the discipline. I now see why that was.
2009 was, I suppose, the tail end of what has come to be called "Game 1.0" - the behaviors and lifestyles popularized by the early pioneers in the modern field of seduction such as Ross Jeffries, Mystery, and Neil Strauss. However, while this work was innovative and unquestionably established the foundations of all that has come since, like all early efforts, it was imprecise and lacking in something. It was still a child growing up.
It was a child growing up because it focused too much on certain behaviors being a magic pill to cure your problems. Though the old PUA doctrines were not exactly advertised this way, and they did make many mentions of overall self and life improvement in terms of social status, bodybuilding, etc., it did not emphasize this enough, I think. There was also no greater meaning attached to game. The only goal was to maximize your sexual self-fulfillment, which is of course very important to your happiness as a man, but this goal existed in a vacuum and was not connected to any underlying meaning. It was these two factors that I now see as responsible for failing to instill any kind of higher zeal and discipline in me, because they simply were not motivating enough, even with the promise of sexual improvement. I have always been a big picture thinker, and Game 1.0 was only one small part of a whole, a whole that was, in that community, a vacuum.
In the spring of 2013, I found Return of Kings. Although the quality of the overall content and comment section has declined as the site has grown, before 2014, it was a bastion of collected insights and experiences from a wide range of men (albeit with the sprinkling of clickbait). Quintus Curtius' articles were, and continue to be, the foundation of the site's quality, and it was his work, above all others, that started the genesis of my own evolution as a man.
Return of Kings, with Quintus exemplifying it in its highest degree, took the bedrock of what I already knew about game and infused it with higher purpose. The first aspect of this was rediscovering and bringing out your full potential as a masculine man. Game was seen as part of being who you were born to be - a masculine man fulfilling your life's purpose. This was something on the tip of my tongue and that I always knew instinctively from the time I was a little boy, but seeing it in front of me solidified it. This was a truth that politically correct society does not want men to know.
There was also rich content about history and polity - identifications of cultural problems, negative mindsets, and incubating a positive belief system that was motivational for men to act in their natural role to fix the social degeneracy that is blatantly on display for all to see. At once, a world of substantial self-improvement of mind and body was linked with a higher belief system - the striving for beauty, excellence, glory, truth, and a flourishing of life for both yourself and your society. This changed everything. I ultimately became the person I am now, and will become the person I will be, because of it.
A month ago, I read Daniel Lubetzky's Do The Kind Thing, a book which goes over his life's story of how he evolved from a kid always attempting to sell something, to a struggling businessman with big dreams and grit, to the founder of a sprawling business enterprise and how he got rich. I have meant to write a post about the lessons I gleaned from that book, but haven't gotten around to it. One central theme of importance in the book is toward the start, where Lubetzky outlines a crucial motivational factor - that your business be one of social importance. In his own case, he attempted to bring together people in conflict regions through economic cooperation by selling the products they made together. This allowed him to do his part in bringing peace to those regions. It was this higher purpose that motivated him to build his business, even when times were tough. This higher purpose and belief system - that what he was doing was right, motivated him to continue. However, he makes one crucial point:
The purpose does not sell the product. The product sells the product.When talking about your own life, you are the product. What you get out of it is what you sell, and you need to be high quality to sell yourself. This is most obvious in game, but it is also present in everything that you do.
The social mission of your enterprise and your desire to produce a high quality product fuse in Lubetzky's philosophy - the former motivates the latter. His devotion to his social mission greatly helped him to develop the discipline he needed to become successful in life.
Lubetzky calls this the "And Philosophy." It is possible to get out of many seeming conundrums by realizing that they are not conundrums at all, by thinking with "And" instead of "Or." It is possible to build a profitable business AND have a higher social purpose at the same time.
This is what I saw with the doctrine that people like Roosh and Quintus Curtius were putting forward. It is possible to have a good life, get good with women, AND fight for a world you value - rooted in history, pursuant of an ethos of beauty, and conducive of a society based on "liberty - not license" (credit again to Quintus). It also helps you to fight against a society that engages in politically correct social engineering, which strips people of their inherent characters in order to build a homogenous world of equalist automatons. This is the AND philosophy that has been offered in what Roosh is calling Neomasculinity.
And you know it's the real deal because it does not sell any magic pills like the empty Game 1.0 did. Neomasculinity is nothing in fact new, it is simply a useful simplifier to describe the things that people like me have already been doing. Those that get too caught up in labels, as I have done before, are usually those that are prone to mob thinking.
As for the future? Which will survive in the long run - Neomasculinity, MRAs, MGTOWs?
These things are for the most part dependent on the social, political, and economic environment. Movements and belief systems don't arise in a vacuum. What I think will survive depends in large part on the probability of societal outcomes based on a distribution curve of likely futures that I see unfolding. This will be explained in another post.
I do however think that it is most likely that MGTOW will fall by the wayside and Neomasculinity will be more stable, for a few other reasons besides what I see as the likeliest social outcomes:
1. MGTOWs are overwhelmingly composed of bitter, angry men with nothing positive to offer. They spend 90% of their time bitching about women. While this may be understandable, it is not productive.
2. Most will not reproduce. In the minds of MGTOW, game is somehow "gynocentric" (as are most things regarding masculinity).
3. It is an empty philosophy. To them, anything positive seems to be "gynocentric." Again, they have a need to attack women by "going their own way," revealing that they are, in fact, not "going their own way." Consider this comment below by Jose Martinez:
That is the point though and our objective is to starve the beast. And I am fine with it because all of us who are gen x and millenials never had a future to be a husband, father, and the head of the household to begin with. And you have to understand that women voted in all this shit that men today have to deal with. So you have to ask yourself why should you continue to white knight when they see no problem with men being killed in war and putting themselves in danger the most compared to women? I think it is time for women to get the full equal treatment and let them fend for themselves without our help. That would be the only way to see real change.This reveals essentially, a "gynocentric" worldview. Instead of building their own world and achieving something like a Homeric hero (something which women will want to be a part of), their goal is to not do something. There is also a blatant and humorous implication that women will be the ones to change things because men are "going their own way," which strips men of their natural leadership role as well as of any agency.
Also, I have a hint for you MGTOWs out there: what we have now is the product of a cross-section of economic, political, and social trends. It cannot simply be reduced to "women voted all this shit in." Women did not "vote in" resource depletion, offshoring, perverse tax incentives, and global Ponzi credit, just to name a few things.
4. They, like feminists, and incidentally MRAs, deny the true nature of the sexes, as you can see by the implication above. To deny that men benefit enormously from the company of good, feminine women is to deny the true nature of men. Consider this absurd comment from Sandman, a popular MGTOW who I responded to in the previous post:
A man needs love from a woman like a fish needs a hook. Love kills a mans creative spirit. I kills his ambition. It's like a tranquilizer. I have never felt more alive then when single and have a purpose in life.I have heard this comment, almost word for word, from someone else before. Want to guess who it is? Want to guess what ideology it was in service to? It's also wrong (unsurprisingly), but it would take another post for me to elaborate on why.
Anyway, upon hearing further about this "Sandman" character, my initial distrust has increased. Supposedly he wants in the end to buy an egg, hire a surrogate, and be a single father. Apparently, it's fine for the Manosphere to rail against single motherhood, where a child is deprived of his or her father and thus a crucial part of forming his or her identity, but it's alright to deprive that same child of his or her mother. I can only speak for myself, but having a loving mother was very nourishing, even if she did take it a bit too far. This mentality, I predict, will only continue to fuck up the identities of future generations. This information reveals fundamentally that MGTOWs operate on the same "everything goes and nothing matters" mentality as the radical "social justice" left that we are fighting, and they claim to hate.
Neomasculinity however, stands for something more solid. It is, in Roosh's words "a living philosophy" of the "AND" kind that blends individualism with social responsibility and higher purpose. It may be a minority, but as Quintus Curtius often remarks - "minorities can and have achieved lasting change." He is right. This is the most potent minority I've ever encountered. This is why I believe in the end we will be the ones standing.
Update: I have released a video regarding this matter:
Friday, May 22, 2015
Labels, MGTOW, & Neomasculinity
The video below is mainly an outcropping of this post, critiquing "Sandman's" MGTOW-centered critique of Roosh's conceptions of Neomasculinity.
Monday, May 18, 2015
Reevaluating Nightgame
Last Friday night, I went out with a new group of wings. This was a rare foray into night game for me, as I have day gamed exclusively for the past year. As I have been honing my craft and getting good at game during daytime interactions with women, I was curious to see how those skills would transfer over to a night game environment.
I have previously been very skeptical about spending time on night game because in my mind, it did, and quite frankly still does, have numerous disadvantages:
1. There are cockblockers.
2. You need to compete with loud music to have a conversation.
3. Girls are usually in groups with friends that you need to navigate, which could easily turn into cockblocking.
4. The demographics are often unfavorable - there are usually more men than women in the venue.
5. All the betas in the place - often drunk, will make girls more defensive.
The question is however, whether the advantages of night game can outweigh these assumed disadvantages. In my mind, there are two major advantages of night game that seem to make it well worth the time and which I have perhaps failed to grasp fully:
1. There is less approach anxiety because it is a social venue and you are expected to meet people (irrelevant if you're already at a stage where your approach anxiety has been reduced to the margins, but significant for beginners).
2. Most importantly, at least some of the girls there are sexually available (and as you will recall from my Craig Proctor post, some is all you need). They are open to the possibility of meeting a cool guy and having sex with him - either that night or after some dates. As a proportion compared to the general population, there will be far more sexually available women in a night venue than during the day.
I noticed immediately upon entering that I felt basically no approach anxiety. As expected, my accumulated experience in the day kept that on the margins. Still, I played how I usually played, staying back and looking around for girls that I thought were likely to be receptive. The story of how this eventually played out can be seen in the link at the top.
Overall my experience that night made me question some of these assumptions I had about night game:
1. The cockblocking was there, but it was done in such an inept fashion that a guy with some game experience could have easily gotten through it, and I did.
2. The demographic situation of the night was certainly at base unfavorable. In the first place we went to, there were many different age groups, but it was somewhat expected since it was a high-end place in Midtown. For what it's worth, this is a shot of the skyline view from the joint:
However, an astute man can turn seemingly unfavorable situations like these into favorable ones by being aware of the principal of assortative mating.
Readers should be familiar with this principle. The entire purpose of game awareness is essentially assortative mating - to improve your success in attracting high quality women by becoming high quality yourself. High quality women want high quality men and vice versa. If you manipulate this to your advantage, you will get those high quality women.
Consider some of what I said on RVF. In stark contrast to a lot of guys there, including the one that tried to cockblock me, my friends and I were all dressed like winners and were young and fit. The point is that while the demographics in absolute numbers may not be favorable, you can in effect take advantage of something like a per capita rate by excelling all the betas and thus driving the hot young girls to you. This is in effect what happened at this place both with my friend and with myself. From there, use game to find the sexually available women.
One point I would however make is that you don't want to walk into a place that's a sausagefest. No matter how good you are, you should select a place that has a reasonable amount of women looking to buy. One of the places we walked into on Friday was a massive sausagefest so we left immediately.
Night game, because of the sexual atmosphere, also allows for greatly amped physical escalation, which would be inappropriate during the daytime. The leads you generate will therefore probably be more solid. Whereas I often find myself losing momentum too quickly from daygame girls, night game momentum, due to the increased sexualized atmosphere, is far more concrete. I'm maintaining momentum with minimal effort with Friday's girl. The experience of being sexually ramped up with another person is not lost so easily.
I'm still only really scratching the surface. It will take some more time to figure out all of the assumptions and how they can be tweaked based on empirical experience, but I think I'm on the right track.
I have previously been very skeptical about spending time on night game because in my mind, it did, and quite frankly still does, have numerous disadvantages:
1. There are cockblockers.
2. You need to compete with loud music to have a conversation.
3. Girls are usually in groups with friends that you need to navigate, which could easily turn into cockblocking.
4. The demographics are often unfavorable - there are usually more men than women in the venue.
5. All the betas in the place - often drunk, will make girls more defensive.
The question is however, whether the advantages of night game can outweigh these assumed disadvantages. In my mind, there are two major advantages of night game that seem to make it well worth the time and which I have perhaps failed to grasp fully:
1. There is less approach anxiety because it is a social venue and you are expected to meet people (irrelevant if you're already at a stage where your approach anxiety has been reduced to the margins, but significant for beginners).
2. Most importantly, at least some of the girls there are sexually available (and as you will recall from my Craig Proctor post, some is all you need). They are open to the possibility of meeting a cool guy and having sex with him - either that night or after some dates. As a proportion compared to the general population, there will be far more sexually available women in a night venue than during the day.
I noticed immediately upon entering that I felt basically no approach anxiety. As expected, my accumulated experience in the day kept that on the margins. Still, I played how I usually played, staying back and looking around for girls that I thought were likely to be receptive. The story of how this eventually played out can be seen in the link at the top.
Overall my experience that night made me question some of these assumptions I had about night game:
1. The cockblocking was there, but it was done in such an inept fashion that a guy with some game experience could have easily gotten through it, and I did.
2. The demographic situation of the night was certainly at base unfavorable. In the first place we went to, there were many different age groups, but it was somewhat expected since it was a high-end place in Midtown. For what it's worth, this is a shot of the skyline view from the joint:
However, an astute man can turn seemingly unfavorable situations like these into favorable ones by being aware of the principal of assortative mating.
Readers should be familiar with this principle. The entire purpose of game awareness is essentially assortative mating - to improve your success in attracting high quality women by becoming high quality yourself. High quality women want high quality men and vice versa. If you manipulate this to your advantage, you will get those high quality women.
Consider some of what I said on RVF. In stark contrast to a lot of guys there, including the one that tried to cockblock me, my friends and I were all dressed like winners and were young and fit. The point is that while the demographics in absolute numbers may not be favorable, you can in effect take advantage of something like a per capita rate by excelling all the betas and thus driving the hot young girls to you. This is in effect what happened at this place both with my friend and with myself. From there, use game to find the sexually available women.
One point I would however make is that you don't want to walk into a place that's a sausagefest. No matter how good you are, you should select a place that has a reasonable amount of women looking to buy. One of the places we walked into on Friday was a massive sausagefest so we left immediately.
Night game, because of the sexual atmosphere, also allows for greatly amped physical escalation, which would be inappropriate during the daytime. The leads you generate will therefore probably be more solid. Whereas I often find myself losing momentum too quickly from daygame girls, night game momentum, due to the increased sexualized atmosphere, is far more concrete. I'm maintaining momentum with minimal effort with Friday's girl. The experience of being sexually ramped up with another person is not lost so easily.
I'm still only really scratching the surface. It will take some more time to figure out all of the assumptions and how they can be tweaked based on empirical experience, but I think I'm on the right track.
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
How to Stop Eating Junk Food
I've been eating too much junk food lately. I fortunately have good genetics so I don't need to worry about gaining body fat from it, but there are still negatives. Sugar decreases testosterone and has long-term health effects. My grandfather had diabetes, which I need to keep in the back of my mind for the long term.
Eating junk food every once in a while isn't a problem, but making a habit out of it is. As my diet has improved over the past couple of years, so has my physique, attitude, and sex drive. Cutting junk food to marginal levels is essential for a healthier nation, so I want to now share two extremely simple tips that won't be shared in the mainstream because there's no opportunity to make money off of them. There's no surgery or magic pill involved, just good choices and relatively easy discipline.
Follow these two steps to reduce your junk food intake, guaranteed.
1. Eat something else.
When you have a craving for junk food and that sugary rush, eat something else. Fresh fruit like an orange is usually the best bet to fill that sweet tooth, but I've often found that eating something else, anything else, will reduce the craving for junk food significantly, to the point that the craving is essentially satisfied and you won't need to eat it.
In my experience the effects of this are short term, but it will be enough to tide you over and subsequent cravings won't be as strong.
2. Don't have junk food in your house.
This is the easiest and most effective way to marginalize or eliminate junk food from your diet. As the old saying goes - out of sight, out of mind. If you don't have junk food in your house, you won't think about it, period. I know the grocery store's stockpiling of junk food can be tempting to snatch, as it has a certain way of calling out to you, but you must avoid these Sirens. They are destructive forces that want to wreck your masculine ship.
Instead, move over to the produce section and buy healthy snack alternatives like nuts and fresh fruit. Your diet will be much improved and thus will your station in life.
Big agribusiness makes their products deliberately addictive so you keep buying more of them and eat more than you need to, thus getting fat. Junk food epitomizes this in its highest degree. Don't let the factory food producers have more of your money than they are worth at the expense of your health.
Eating junk food every once in a while isn't a problem, but making a habit out of it is. As my diet has improved over the past couple of years, so has my physique, attitude, and sex drive. Cutting junk food to marginal levels is essential for a healthier nation, so I want to now share two extremely simple tips that won't be shared in the mainstream because there's no opportunity to make money off of them. There's no surgery or magic pill involved, just good choices and relatively easy discipline.
Follow these two steps to reduce your junk food intake, guaranteed.
1. Eat something else.
When you have a craving for junk food and that sugary rush, eat something else. Fresh fruit like an orange is usually the best bet to fill that sweet tooth, but I've often found that eating something else, anything else, will reduce the craving for junk food significantly, to the point that the craving is essentially satisfied and you won't need to eat it.
In my experience the effects of this are short term, but it will be enough to tide you over and subsequent cravings won't be as strong.
2. Don't have junk food in your house.
This is the easiest and most effective way to marginalize or eliminate junk food from your diet. As the old saying goes - out of sight, out of mind. If you don't have junk food in your house, you won't think about it, period. I know the grocery store's stockpiling of junk food can be tempting to snatch, as it has a certain way of calling out to you, but you must avoid these Sirens. They are destructive forces that want to wreck your masculine ship.
Instead, move over to the produce section and buy healthy snack alternatives like nuts and fresh fruit. Your diet will be much improved and thus will your station in life.
Big agribusiness makes their products deliberately addictive so you keep buying more of them and eat more than you need to, thus getting fat. Junk food epitomizes this in its highest degree. Don't let the factory food producers have more of your money than they are worth at the expense of your health.
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Joss Whedon is a Fucking Pussy
Those hovering around our corner of the internet have certainly heard of the latest iteration of "social justice" outrage. As far as outrages go, this was actually far from ordinary. Predictably, but nevertheless hilariously, the "social justice" mob turned on one of its own - white knight extraordinaire Joss Whedon.
You, my dear reader, will likely remember how this character routinely stood with the "social justice" mob before, lambasting GamerGate and submitting himself to the feminist will.
Now, the tables have turned. Joss Whedon was "chased off of twitter" yesterday by the same mob that he has so gleefully sided with in the past. His crime? In the new Avengers movie Black Widow was sterilized and wanted to run off with Bruce Banner (AKA The Hulk). Or something. Don't know. Haven't seen the movie and I don't plan to. Once again it was manufactured outrage.
It was all too ironic that this "man" criticized Jurassic Park for "sexism" only months earlier. He later retracted his comment, saying it was "bad form."
Some twitter mob extracts:
 | ||
| Yet another low-T status whore. |
Now, the tables have turned. Joss Whedon was "chased off of twitter" yesterday by the same mob that he has so gleefully sided with in the past. His crime? In the new Avengers movie Black Widow was sterilized and wanted to run off with Bruce Banner (AKA The Hulk). Or something. Don't know. Haven't seen the movie and I don't plan to. Once again it was manufactured outrage.
It was all too ironic that this "man" criticized Jurassic Park for "sexism" only months earlier. He later retracted his comment, saying it was "bad form."
Some twitter mob extracts:
You can find more here.
This is all too delicious for me. Once more, it shows that you cannot ally with these people. You cannot ally with them because they cannot be satisfied. You will eventually run afoul of them. The perpetual outrage machine will run on, and in an attempt to status whore and appear holier-than-thou, the degenerate "social justice" mob will eventually find someone to be outraged at. Always remember, white knights, tomorrow, the target might be you.
The only way to deal with these degenerates is to treat them with contempt, as insufferable subjects that must bow to your will, for that is what they truly are.
As a final note, Joss Whedon is a pussy for letting these degenerates get to him. He's a big Hollywood guy, to submit to these losers is indicative of his vacillating character. He certainly looks the part. He deserves it all though. Fuck him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)