This topic is a spin-off from my previous topic on anti-feminism (thread-69521.html). I have to say I was also inspired by this podcast:
I arrived at the conclusion that creating an anti-feminist ideology/manifesto is both useless and dangerous. This idea could easily backfire in many ways, for several reasons we discussed there. That doesn’t mean we should be conformists and turn the other cheek when attacked, since this is consenting to give the other side a supreme victory. As Sun Tsu said, "Supreme excellence in warfare lies in the destruction of your enemy's will to resist in advance of perceptible hostilities."
What we need to do is, for our own security, to have an exaggerated consciousness of our historical circumstances in order to make less mistakes as possible and seize all the opportunities presented by our age. I think the following excerpt from Ortega y Gasset’s The Revolt of the Masses summarizes the attitude we should adopt regarding feminism:
Have you ever wonder why feminism is always returning more and more powerful? Remember that we are in the third wave of feminism. That is because common men have always adopted a reactive attitude towards feminism. This way, we not only don’t kill feminism, but also paves the way for its triumphal return in the future.
Feminism is horrendous, but it won’t disappear with a simple, empty No. Therefore, we need to live "at the height of our time”, and this demands the study of history. Since things are chaotic now, we need to study history in order to investigate why we arrived at this point in the present. This way, men don’t fall back in the same mistakes of the past, we escape from history.
But our history is not the history of feminism. Our history is the history of men entering the Brave New World. It is the history of pioneers who started to play a game before knowing how it worked. It is the history of explorers who risked go hunting exactly when the rules of hunting started to change at a tremendously fast pace and always in favor of the prey. It is the history of martyrs who abandoned peace and comfort provided by technology to challenge the unknown.
This history is very alive in our heads, what makes me wonder: why is this history not documented yet? A book about the history of game would be both elucidative of our present and a good source of discussion about our future. And we, my friends, we are the only ones capable of doing it.
Why don’t we start producing a collaborative book on the history of game? This book may only include topics related to game, or maybe cover modern masculinity in general. Roosh can be the organizer, and we can be the collaborators. This way, Roosh takes all the profits, and I think this is fair, since he did a lot for us, not only through his books, but also uniting us in this forum. There can be collaborators from many parts of the world telling how the neomasculinity community developed in their countries. In the end, we may have the most elaborate book on the topic.
What do you think?
I arrived at the conclusion that creating an anti-feminist ideology/manifesto is both useless and dangerous. This idea could easily backfire in many ways, for several reasons we discussed there. That doesn’t mean we should be conformists and turn the other cheek when attacked, since this is consenting to give the other side a supreme victory. As Sun Tsu said, "Supreme excellence in warfare lies in the destruction of your enemy's will to resist in advance of perceptible hostilities."
What we need to do is, for our own security, to have an exaggerated consciousness of our historical circumstances in order to make less mistakes as possible and seize all the opportunities presented by our age. I think the following excerpt from Ortega y Gasset’s The Revolt of the Masses summarizes the attitude we should adopt regarding feminism:
Quote:Ortega y Gasset - The Revolt of the Masses Wrote:
At first sight, an attitude "anti-anything" seems posterior to this thing, inasmuch as it signifies a reaction against it and supposes its previous existence. But the innovation which the anti represents fades away into an empty negative attitude, leaving as its only positive content an "antique." When his attitude is translated into positive language, the man who declares himself anti-Peter does nothing more than declare himself the upholder of a world where Peter is non-existent. But that is exactly what happened to the world before Peter was born. The anti-Peterite, instead of placing himself after Peter, makes himself previous to him and reverses the whole film to the situation of the past, at the end of which the re-apparition of Peter is inevitable.
(…) Every anti is nothing more than a simple, empty No. This would be all very nice and fine if with a good, round No we could annihilate the past. But the past is of its essence a revenant. If put out, it comes back, inevitably. Hence, the only way to separate from it is not to put it out, but to accept its existence, and so to behave in regard to it as to dodge it, to avoid it. In a word, to live "at the height of our time," with an exaggerated consciousness of the historical circumstances.
(…) There is no hope for Europe unless its destiny is placed in the hands of men really "contemporaneous," men who feel palpitating beneath them the whole subsoil of history, who realise the present level of existence, and abhor every archaic and primitive attitude. We have need of history in its entirety, not to fall back into it, but to see if we can escape from it.
Have you ever wonder why feminism is always returning more and more powerful? Remember that we are in the third wave of feminism. That is because common men have always adopted a reactive attitude towards feminism. This way, we not only don’t kill feminism, but also paves the way for its triumphal return in the future.
Feminism is horrendous, but it won’t disappear with a simple, empty No. Therefore, we need to live "at the height of our time”, and this demands the study of history. Since things are chaotic now, we need to study history in order to investigate why we arrived at this point in the present. This way, men don’t fall back in the same mistakes of the past, we escape from history.
But our history is not the history of feminism. Our history is the history of men entering the Brave New World. It is the history of pioneers who started to play a game before knowing how it worked. It is the history of explorers who risked go hunting exactly when the rules of hunting started to change at a tremendously fast pace and always in favor of the prey. It is the history of martyrs who abandoned peace and comfort provided by technology to challenge the unknown.
This history is very alive in our heads, what makes me wonder: why is this history not documented yet? A book about the history of game would be both elucidative of our present and a good source of discussion about our future. And we, my friends, we are the only ones capable of doing it.
Why don’t we start producing a collaborative book on the history of game? This book may only include topics related to game, or maybe cover modern masculinity in general. Roosh can be the organizer, and we can be the collaborators. This way, Roosh takes all the profits, and I think this is fair, since he did a lot for us, not only through his books, but also uniting us in this forum. There can be collaborators from many parts of the world telling how the neomasculinity community developed in their countries. In the end, we may have the most elaborate book on the topic.
What do you think?