Zooming Out and Zooming Back in Again
The so-called "men's movement" is a complete train wreck. It is not proceeding efficiently toward any goal. There is nothing of discipline or policy or strategy about it, let alone any kind of governing philosophical worldview. Wise heads do not prevail, and braying jackasses dominate the field everywhere you look.
I am frankly bored spitless by most of the yakkety-yak I am hearing among our ostensible comrades-in-arms.On and on they go, flogging the same old dead horses. On and on they go, natttering about the same old dreary, unimaginative garbage. Round and round they go, stepping in the same old pitfalls, the same old pisspuddles, the same old dog shit, time after time after time.
Yup. It reminds me of the Three Stooges or the Keystone Kops.
You call that a "revolution"? Pshaw!
For the record, there has never been a revolution without a vanguard of some kind. Without a central cadre of some kind. Oh very well: without an elite of some kind. There, I said it!
To balance the gloomy picture, I will admit there IS an inner circle of philosophers and strategic thinkers -- in fact, several such. I have sat in on some of their tete-a-tetes, and can report that my time was well spent. But such occasions are very much an exception to the general hee-haw, jackassery, and time-wasting bullshit that you will find in our visible realm of public rhetoric.
Very well, I shall proffer some words to the wise which ought to be sufficient. The vanguard forms HERE. Yes, I hereby appoint myself dictator and preceptor-general of the non-feminist project, and invite all who have the right stuff to gather in the vicinity. There, I said it.
Yes, I know. Nobody wants to be the guy with the big ego, but then again, sometimes that's the only way to get things done. Nowadays, sadly, you are required to apologize like hell for even having an ego at all. This is considered "trendy". You are expected to shrink your ego to the size of a pinto bean and hide it in a drawer, like an unclean secret, under meaningless clutter and old papers that should have been thrown out long ago.
Away with all of that! Death to all of that! I don't mind saying that I have an ego of robust and healthy dimension. In fact, I contain multitudes, stretching to the limit of the known universe. . .and even beyond! That is precisely how big my "ego" is, and I wish others could encompass a similar magnitude. I really do.
But enough about me.
This is not about me!
We do not mix the personal with the political, so when I speak ex cathedra as preceptor-general of the non-feminist project it is not about "me", or about any singular personality, or about the personal dimension of reality. It is about powers and principalities, thrones and dominions, forces of nature, forces of history, and other such goodies. In a word, it is about politics in the largest way you can imagine. And that requires the aggrandizement of my ego, and yours, until it breaks through to the other side and . . . pouf! It disappears!
The enemy wants to rid you of your ego by reducing it to the infinitessimal -- that is, by sucking the life out of it. I, your humble preceptor-general, want to rid you of your ego by ballooning it to the infinite -- that is, by filling it with life in superabundance! Hell's bells, why be a "petty Napoleon" when you can be an infinitely large one, eh? Pettiness is the last thing we need around here. Urbanity and collegiality are the order of the day, my friends! And trust me, those things are deadly weapons.
Sit quietly now, and meditate. Feel your life force rippling in all directions, on the wings of a cosmic particle wind, to the limit of the furthest galaxies and quasars. That is how big I want your ego to become. When this is over, you should never look at "going your own way" in quite the same old way again.
But most of all, you'll need this for the politics that lies ahead, right here on earth.
I am frankly bored spitless by most of the yakkety-yak I am hearing among our ostensible comrades-in-arms.On and on they go, flogging the same old dead horses. On and on they go, natttering about the same old dreary, unimaginative garbage. Round and round they go, stepping in the same old pitfalls, the same old pisspuddles, the same old dog shit, time after time after time.
Yup. It reminds me of the Three Stooges or the Keystone Kops.
You call that a "revolution"? Pshaw!
For the record, there has never been a revolution without a vanguard of some kind. Without a central cadre of some kind. Oh very well: without an elite of some kind. There, I said it!
To balance the gloomy picture, I will admit there IS an inner circle of philosophers and strategic thinkers -- in fact, several such. I have sat in on some of their tete-a-tetes, and can report that my time was well spent. But such occasions are very much an exception to the general hee-haw, jackassery, and time-wasting bullshit that you will find in our visible realm of public rhetoric.
Very well, I shall proffer some words to the wise which ought to be sufficient. The vanguard forms HERE. Yes, I hereby appoint myself dictator and preceptor-general of the non-feminist project, and invite all who have the right stuff to gather in the vicinity. There, I said it.
Yes, I know. Nobody wants to be the guy with the big ego, but then again, sometimes that's the only way to get things done. Nowadays, sadly, you are required to apologize like hell for even having an ego at all. This is considered "trendy". You are expected to shrink your ego to the size of a pinto bean and hide it in a drawer, like an unclean secret, under meaningless clutter and old papers that should have been thrown out long ago.
Away with all of that! Death to all of that! I don't mind saying that I have an ego of robust and healthy dimension. In fact, I contain multitudes, stretching to the limit of the known universe. . .and even beyond! That is precisely how big my "ego" is, and I wish others could encompass a similar magnitude. I really do.
But enough about me.
This is not about me!
We do not mix the personal with the political, so when I speak ex cathedra as preceptor-general of the non-feminist project it is not about "me", or about any singular personality, or about the personal dimension of reality. It is about powers and principalities, thrones and dominions, forces of nature, forces of history, and other such goodies. In a word, it is about politics in the largest way you can imagine. And that requires the aggrandizement of my ego, and yours, until it breaks through to the other side and . . . pouf! It disappears!
The enemy wants to rid you of your ego by reducing it to the infinitessimal -- that is, by sucking the life out of it. I, your humble preceptor-general, want to rid you of your ego by ballooning it to the infinite -- that is, by filling it with life in superabundance! Hell's bells, why be a "petty Napoleon" when you can be an infinitely large one, eh? Pettiness is the last thing we need around here. Urbanity and collegiality are the order of the day, my friends! And trust me, those things are deadly weapons.
Sit quietly now, and meditate. Feel your life force rippling in all directions, on the wings of a cosmic particle wind, to the limit of the furthest galaxies and quasars. That is how big I want your ego to become. When this is over, you should never look at "going your own way" in quite the same old way again.
But most of all, you'll need this for the politics that lies ahead, right here on earth.
posted by Fidelbogen at 9:19 PM
8 Comments:
Don't worry too much about the lack of a singular direction for MRAs.
- The feminist voices were not at all united in the early-1900s.
- The Keystone Cops eventually became today's highly organized and over-paid police force.
- The teacher's unions were viewed as simplistic morons in the 1950s.
Spend more time reminding men of feminist nonsense and united action with strong leadership will eventually occur. Success is measured in decades.
I never understood why there needs to be a MRM. Men can decide just not to play that game. Use pre-nuptuals, and trusts, and corporations to keep the power in your hands, and do not marry. Women say they want equal rights - let them have their own place to live, insist on it. Never live together - always keep it so that you aren't common law, and prior to ever having children, have it contracted and written in stone.
I would say, just to not do it - but I know that women will whine and whine and men will give in. So make sure that there are no "family law" judges, keep it to corporate law or some other without all of the willy-nilly decisions of man-hating judges. Make is so that ever decision has to deal with all pre-existing corporate law - if they fuck with it, there are far reaching ramifications and a LOT of major players who don't want it fucked with. So use it to protect your ass...
Don't waste your time hoping for things to change - they won't. So take action on your own. Do not accept the status-quo - make your own...
The MRM is dead because it has no goal or solution in mind, because MRAs fear delving too deep and coming up with truths about men and women that aren't PC or mainstream enough.
I could link you to about four articles detailing why the MRM is dead. It is not much different from feminism for men.
The future for men's activism is in the manosphere / alt right blogosphere. Sites like Amerika.org are talking about the issues. And I suggest reading at least the last several paragraphs of Mencius Moldbug's piece "How to Actually Defeat the US government".
This is about more than "men's rights". It's about restructuring society to make sense once again, encouraging traditional masculine virtues, etc. etc.
Today we live in a modern liberal feminized world. We can either remain there or head toward a more conservative world dominated once again by men, where life has meaning, where families are intact, and we can defend our nation.
@The three commenters so far:
You folks don't quite 'capisch' what is being talked about here, but oh well. It builds progressively upon previous ideas, and it's a lot to digest if you are new to it all.
@Jeremiah:
Perchance, are you the same Jeremiah who comments on Reddit sometimes?
Anyhow. . thanks for sharing your view of things. I see which flag you march under, and just for the record, it is not the flag which I myself march under. (I admit I don't always make that flag very clear -- not because I am being evasive about this, but because even with the best will in the world it is inherently difficult to explain.)
But the real point is, that many armies under many flags are marching against feminism. And from a strategic viewpoint, the problem to to establish consensus about the nature of the enemy and the nature of the battle terrain.
One more thing. You say the "MRM" is dead. Actually, the "MRM" is not dead, because it was never alive.
That's right: There is no such thing as the "MRM".
Still, we cannot doubt that something is going on. But personally, I draw the line at calling this 'something' the "MRM". I believe that is far too simplistic. It obscures sorely needed clarity about the objective nature of the situation.
Plus, it is not the best use of narrative-building ingenuity.
@Anon932:
You seem to have a more narrow view of the issues than I do. The things you speak of are important, no doubt. But for myself, I take a more panoramic view of the terrain.
For example, when you dwell on the "women and relationships" aspect of things, you skirt a bit too close to mingling the personal with the political. And when you do THAT, you are right in the ballpark where the feminists want you. I prefer to take a different rhetorical tack altogether. My narrative building efforts are in the realm of broad political categories. The way I see it, if you push the right dominoes in the beginning, the targeted dominoes (further down the line) will eventually fall. (That is, provided you've got things lined up correctly in the first place!)
So that is why I tend to "think macro" -- although I am continually seeking out paralells between the macro and the micro, since they DO mirror each other quite a bit, and such comparisons can be extremely useful.
"Do not accept the status-quo - make your own... "
Exactly. That is the core of my thinking.
@Anon844:
I am not at all worried about a "singular direction for the MRAs", but maybe I didn't make that point clear in my short article.
Simply put, I do not recognize "the MRAs" as an entity to begin with, so I can't very well think about a singular direction for something which does not exist...right?
Protip: Semantics matters.
But yes, the important thing is to keep reminding men and women of "feminist nonsense", and leadership (or various leaderships under various flags) will emerge.
And success could very well be measured in less than decades if bold, masterful action occurs under bold, masterful leadership.
Fidelbogen - I would follow such a cause if you and Dr. Rookh Kshatriya were the two leaders - but not you by yourself.
Sorry - I am not trying to deflate your ego. As much as I have disagreed with you - I'd say that you are among the "least worse" that I have seen.
I agree with you - things lately have become unraveled.
I believe that is by feminist design however. Stop and think about it for a minute.
I know that my blog - in your eyes - qualifies as a "pisspuddle", or "general hee-haw jackassery" - but I consider that my weapon.
Ridicule is a weapon. Making an idea (or a group of people) look foolish in the eyes of anybody reading it is indeed - fighting such idea or group of people.
Jackassery - yes, tomfoolery - yes.
Fight idiocy with faked idiocy - make a joke out of it.
I am not the intellectual you or Dr. Kshatriya are - I fight this "bad attitude" in our culture in the best NON VIOLENT way I can.
P.S. Imagine what would have happened if the U.S. troops broadcasted their attack plans in German (and uncoded) with the allied troops when attacking Nazi Germany...
A long time ago - I mentioned "back doors". Well, myself and one other have found one. We are exploiting it.
Wanna know what it is - tough - we will not tell...
Thanks for the response.
Yes, I am the same Jeremiah who occasionally posts on Reddit and used to post at AVfM.
The flag I march under is the only flag I have found that has any answers.
The problem is that some of those who are fighting feminism, in fact most of them, the mainstream "MRAs", they don't want to end feminism. They just want to tailor it to their own wishes. Maybe calm it down a bit, but in the end they still want liberalism, of which feminism is just one component. And that's a bleak future. You can't separate feminism from the rest of it.
In fact you touch on this somewhat in your piece here:
"Nowadays, sadly, you are required to apologize like hell for even having an ego at all. This is considered 'trendy'. You are expected to shrink your ego to the size of a pinto bean and hide it in a drawer, like an unclean secret, under meaningless clutter and old papers that should have been thrown out long ago."
And the fact is, changing this attitude is a priority. It can't happen without changing the entire system, fighting modernity you might say. The alternative is horrifying.
If we don't do that we're looking at either collapse of civilization (may be inevitable) or a dystopian global Brave New World. We're already on the way. At the very least we should be talking about how to rebuild when civilization collapses. JD Unwin's Sex & Culture shows that every human society that embraces women's lib (and does away with male dominance) collapses shortly thereafter. We can't just ignore that so we can play the equality game.
Conservatism (like the Amerika.org variety) is the only ideology I've found that sees the problem fully. I used to be a moderate liberal, and still am an atheist, but I like to think I'm rational, and conservatism is its purest sense is consequentialism.
I'll leave you with a quotation from Jack Donovan's The Way of Men. Sorry for the length.
In the future that globalists and feminists have imagined, for most of us there will only be more clerkdom and masturbation. There will only be more apologizing, more submission, more asking for permission to be men. There will only be more examinations, more certifications, mandatory prerequisites, screening processes, background checks, personality tests, and politicized diagnoses. There will only be more medication. There will be more presenting the secretary with a cup of your own warm urine. There will be mandatory morning stretches and video safety presentations and sign-off sheets for your file. There will be more helmets and goggles and harnesses and bright orange vests with reflective tape. There can only be more counseling and sensitivity training. There will be more administrative hoops to jump through to start your own business and keep it running. There will be more mandatory insurance policies. There will definitely be more taxes. There will probably be more Byzantine sexual harassment laws and corporate policies and more ways for women and protected identity groups to accuse you of misconduct. There will be more micro-managed living, pettier regulations, heavier fines, and harsher penalties. There will be more ways to run afoul of the law and more ways for society to maintain its pleasant illusions by sweeping you under the rug. In 2009 there were almost five times more men either on parole or serving prison terms in the United States than were actively serving in all of the armed forces.
If you’re a good boy and you follow the rules, if you learn how to speak passively and inoffensively, if you can convince some other poor sleepwalking sap that you are possessed with an almost unhealthy desire to provide outstanding customer service or increase operational efficiency through the improvement of internal processes and effective organizational communication, if you can say stupid shit like that without laughing, if your record checks out and your pee smells right— you can get yourself a J-O-B. Maybe you can be the guy who administers the test or authorizes the insurance policy. Maybe you can be the guy who helps make some soulless global corporation a little more money. Maybe you can get a pat on the head for coming up with the bright idea to put a bunch of other guys out of work and outsource their boring jobs to guys in some other place who are willing to work longer hours for less money. Whatever you do, no matter what people say, no matter how many team-building activities you attend or how many birthday cards you get from someone’s secretary, you will know that you are a completely replaceable unit of labor in the big scheme of things.
Fidelbogen:
Thank you for saying what needed to be said. It seems that during the last three months, at least here in America, that most of the MRM has being doing of three things: (1) Going 'mainstream' by adopting a concilliatory attitude towards feminism; (2) Accepting feminism as the 'new mormal' and becoming Game-cocks, or (3) Pronouncing the men's movement dead and giving up all together.
The first position is an illusion; the second is despicable; the third is the one I'm having a hard time grasping. I've often compared elsewhere the position of American men today as similar to that of Occupied Europe; with the MRM as the Underground.
To the feminists 'the personal is political' and by that definition, even walking away and refusing to fight is, to the feminist revolutionary mindset, an act of defiance in itself. Under these circumstances, choosing or not choosing to fight doesn't make any difference---the enemy regards anyone who's not with them as against them.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home