Welcome, Manospherians, Alphas, Sigmas, and other Greek characters:
The launch of this endeavor comes in response to the state of the manosphere. There is hardly any other forum which one can find unabashed truth thrust with a duelist’s precision at the heart of the world. Nor, without recourse to those cliched period’s of history–decadent Rome, decadent Italian city states, decadent and dandy England– might one find ugly truth so expressly fuzed with onanism, mental masterbation hardly a step improved over the literary trash that fills the list of acclaimed modern writers.
Evolved from Mystery’s methods of pussy extraction and Roissy’s magniloquence, the manosphere has come far in advocating and modeling a certain masculinity that in recent generations has been all but obliterated, and, where not destroyed, shamed to the umbral underbelly of acceptable society. All of this amalgam of disparate androphilia resuscitates those soft, deprecating half-men who have found the message at the right time when they were open to red-pill truths, but there is something that all the red-pill truth in the world cannot repair. Onanism, as Ferdinand alla the late IMF would have it, vapid self-involvement, inane self-centeredness does not a complete man make.
One ought to build strength, especially if he is a pasty-soft manboy. Aristotle agrees, as do I. “[H]ealth, beauty, and the like, as being bodily excellencies and productive of many other good things; for instance, health is productive both of pleasure and of life, and therefore is thought the greatest of goods, since these two things which it causes, pleasure and life, are two of the things most highly prized by ordinary people.” (On Rhetoric I. vi.)
One needs to control his frame and maintain confidence, not just to moisten the sexual gates, but because if you are not a bitch, you should not act like one. Aristotle again. “[S]ince rhetoric [ed: and Game] exists to affect the giving of decisions–the hearers decide between one speaker and another, and a verdict is a decision–the orator must not only try to make the argument of his speech demonstrative and worthy of belief; he must also make his own character look right and put his hearers, who are to decide, into the right frame of mind.” (On Rhetoric II. i.)
More on Aristotle later. The point here is that the very minutiae that the better parts of the manosphere advocate consists in the fundamentals Western society had taken for granted 2800 years ago. These are the very first steps in being a human. Where the manosphere has greatly faltered is that it has gone no further; those very skills–confidence, charisma, strength, self-reliance–which the ‘sphere inculcates en masse come with no oughts, as though we had bought wholesale the insanity of modern relativism. Is the purpose of being a better man only notch counts, or, as I believe, are notch counts just the carrot before the horse, the impetus needed to pull the indoctrinated, Matrix-loving sheeple out of their stupor and into the light of truth? Or put another way, is the pinnacle of man’s being as man reached by accumulating notches, or is there something beyond and better which men have actually striven after? Is Roissy’s 3rd Maxim more than a means to a higher N count?
The manosphere does a great service in all of its unplugging, and pussy chasing, for all its deficiencies, makes a fine alternative to the wasteland of Marriage 2.0 or 3.0 or whatever moniker is the accepted at the moment. The shame is that the manosphere has not gotten around to telling men that they have a heritage in Western culture that looks nothing like this wasteland, that it has nothing to do with feminism, or with notches. Remember 1600 years ago when you’re families were all barbarians living in huts and kicking the shit out of post-fall Romans? The heritage I refer to is the collection of all of the cultu atque humanitate provinciae* that Gaius Julius Caesar determined the Belgae were longissime absunt,** that without them caused their being vicious and brutal bastards. That most readers won’t know this very basic line of Latin, that a student one hundred years ago couldn’t have gotten through the first month of sophomore year (of high school nonetheless) without its mastery, speaks at the very edge of what we’ve lost.
When one of the better read–not to mention an advocate for reading as Game training–proponents of the ‘sphere by his own admission knows very little about Roman history, we’ve lost something. Not everyone can be Vox Day and quote Romans and Church Fathers, Greeks and Persians, and any number of Western figureheads extempore, but we all have a right to our inheritance.
We’ve taken the red-pill, we know that propaganda is legion, yet who is telling young men that their heritage is there for the taking? There is no need to have a pity party about the years that the locust have eaten while one sat in those conditioning camps for k-12. This is the age of the gotdang’d internet. The only impediment to one’s citizenry in Western Culture is himself, and the need of a guide.
Worry not, coming from the red-pill might be like Dante’s forest awakening:
Midway upon the journey of our life
I found myself within a forest dark,
For the straightforward pathway had been lost.
Ah me! how hard a thing it is to say
What was this forest savage, rough, and stern,
Which in the very thought renews the fear.
So bitter it is, death is little more;
But of the good to treat, which there I found,
Speak will I of other things I saw there.
I cannot well repeat how there I entered,
So full was I of slumber at that moment
In which I had abandoned the true way.
(trans. Longfellow; Canto I, lines i-xii.)
Yet I am here to be your personal fucking Virgil.
To overcome the Age of Onanism, one must tackle the big questions: what is man? why is man? et al. The history of Western Culture is an attempt to understand Man outside of any individual. The trap of Onanism is to existentially gratify man as any individual. The latter is inherently self-centered, the former intrinsically self-searching.
Bill, at Apocalypse Cometh, today wrote about the state of education in the US, his was the article that finally brought me to commit to publishing this first article. The history of how one’s intellectual heritage could be swept away is worth consideration. If one could take even the most optimistic view of his article it would still spell a dismal outcome for modern men: you should know, you’re living it. Do the overlords still desire to make men into docile automatons?
Next up, I’ll discuss the merits of autodidacticism.
* Culture and humane civility
**Most far removed