The Case For Our Retrenchment

The Daily Beast published a surprisingly red pill article titled “Watch What You Say, The New Liberal Power Elite Won’t Tolerate Dissent.” I highly recommend you read the whole thing but here are a couple highlights:

As the modern clerisy has seen its own power grow, even while the middle class shrinks, it has used its influence to enforce a prescribed set of acceptable ideas. On everything from gender and sexual preference to climate change, those who dissent from the official pieties risk punishment.


The rise of today’s Clerisy stems from the growing power and influence of its three main constituent parts: the creative elite of media and entertainment, the academic community, and the high-level government bureaucracy.

The Clerisy operates on very different principles than its rival power brokers, the oligarchs of finance, technology or energy. The power of the knowledge elite does not stem primarily from money, but in persuading, instructing and regulating the rest of society. Like the British Clerisy or the old church-centered French First Estate, the contemporary Clerisy increasingly promotes a single increasingly parochial ideology and, when necessary, has the power to marginalize, or excommunicate, miscreants from the public sphere.


Today’s Clerisy attempts to distill today’s distinctly secular “truths”—on issues ranging from the nature of justice, race and gender to the environment—and decide what is acceptable and that which is not. Those who dissent from the accepted point of view can expect their work to be simply ignored, or in some cases vilified. In the Clerical bastion of San Francisco, an actress with heretical views, in this case supporting a Tea Party candidate, who was pilloried, and lost work for her offense.

The above should contain no new information for you. The continuous witch-hunts and deceit by progressives have been long known in these parts.

The article clearly highlights not only the power of the cultural elite, which I described recently on my blog, but it’s growing power. I won’t deny that more people are taking the red pill every day, but for every one man who does, we lose thousands more to blue pilldom, with no hope of their eventual enlightenment because of the extensive brainwashing they face from all corners of their existence. There are currently 22 million Americans enrolled in university, and millions more join the ranks every fall. I ask you: which ideology will quickly become their default? Not ours, for sure. Judging by the size of the manosphere, we are but a drop in the bucket, a drop that remains the same size even as the bucket increases in height every year.

It is now clear to me that squaring off with the enemy is futile. For proof take a look at what’s happening to the Men’s Issues conference. Since announcing the conference, free-speech hating feminists are doing their best to cancel the event, enlisting their usual media allies for help, which has required the organizers to raise $25,000 for insurance and security. The conference will probably go on, but for what concrete benefit? How many men will their message reach?

That money could be better spent. With $25k you could create viral videos for Youtube that have the potential to reach millions instead of a thousand or two. We can’t organize conferences like them. We can’t expect fair or positive attention in the press like them. We can’t expect support from anywhere, and while I respect the MRA attempt, I can’t help but think of it as trying to organize a Jewish Issues conference in Hitler’s Germany. Let’s not mark ourselves with an easy bulls-eye for them to shoot at.

This is what I recommend:

1. Burrow within society, Fight Club style.

This is not the time to make a stand. Conditions are not ripe for an open-air battle. Instead we must continue finding men who already lean red pill instead of trying to convert blue pillers. There are many men in gaming and bodybuilding spheres that would be open to our message. We should find them with masculinity-themed articles before we publish one similar to “The 9 Ugliest Feminists,” which surely pisses off the enemy (and makes me laugh), but only sends us garbage traffic and few conversions. All feminists know of ROK, but not every masculine man does. We must find them first.

2. Attack only when we have a clear advantage.

The recent Elliot Rodgers massacre showed that we don’t have numbers to drive the conversation or have a substantial impact altering the mainstream narrative. We can properly defend ourselves, but no matter how correct we are, the cultural elite will only broadcast ideas or quotes that are taken out-of-context and make us appear to be cannibals. We must only attack when victory is assured—when we can isolate a liberal blogger or reporter and hurt their credibility in the eyes of Google. We must pay them no mind unless we can cause definite pain, because their megaphone is more than 10,000 times larger than ours. We can not win using their tactics.

3. Align ourselves more closely with traditional conservatives.

A lot of you may find this to be unsavory, but we must find natural allies to defeat the enemy. A positive and somewhat recent development is the American Enterprise Institute, a possibly neo-conservative organization, tearing down feminism with precision. They have published many clips that overlap with our beliefs. Two examples:

While they probably won’t rush into our arms, it would be stupid to blacklist their productions when their success can only aid our cause. If we can help their videos get a larger audience, we should.

ROK took quite a beating in the wake of Elliot Rodger. We sustained heavy fire from Think Progress, The Young Turks, Raw Story, and a dozen other blogs, not to mention a constant barrage on Twitter. But we did not stand down. We did not have to change one word of an article we published. It’s this type of success that could lead to false confidence, foolishness, and overreach in attacking an enemy that is still much stronger than ourselves. We must instead be patient and bide our time to continue honing our message, searching for minor advantages here or there that provide us with openings that we can exploit. As long as we realize that we are not truly strong, and victory is not possible in the short-term, I believe we’ll be able to survive. My utmost concern is not winning, in fact, but self-preservation. We’re still not even assured of that.

Read Next: A Mainstream Journalist Takes The Red Pill

388 thoughts on “The Case For Our Retrenchment”

  1. We might take a conservative swing in the future.
    The Bible says the Gospel has to be preached ALL
    OVER THE WORLD before Christ can return.
    I can’t see this happening in a chaotic animalistic
    President Obama’s mission is to dismantle America
    as a superpower. That MIGHT not be as bad as we
    If America’s days as a world power are ending,
    America may have served it’s useful purpose and
    the rest of the world might become more
    Christianized/Westernized. But if fundamentalist
    religion might cause problems as well for ROK.
    You will be expected to marry one woman and
    remain faithful to her.

    1. Fundamentalist religion is one of the worst creations brought about by modern thought. The entire point of religion is to not take it seriously.
      By the way, there is no “returning of Christ”. The point of religion isn’t about belief; it’s about instilling a certain tradition in society. If you think religion is about belief, you’re a sucker.

      1. Religion is brought about by modern thought? By modern, do you mean written/verbal; are you referencing animal thought as comparison?

        1. I said fundamentalist religion was brought out by modern thought. By fundamentalism, I mean taking religion literally, which it’s not intended to do. It codeveloped with the creation of the printing press and the mass populace being able to read or write, if that’s what you mean. There’s a lot of things that developed with modernity.

        2. Because you see mass literacy is the problem…let me rewind here. Most of the problem with let’s say BLACKS is that they function at comically low levels of literacy. Ask any hard pressed teacher in a ghetto high school.
          LIteracy! That’s the problem, the moveable press and printing! Well fuck me problem fucking solved.
          You disqualify yourself.

        3. Uhhhh….. There were a lot of good things that came out of the printing press, including the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, and a whole host of stuff. By the way, most of the people who are religious aren’t fundamentalist today. Fundamentalist requires literacy, but that doesn’t mean literacy causes fundamentalism.
          I don’t really know what you were trying to point out in your response. I’m not saying that we need to make sure people don’t read. Quite obviously, I don’t believe that.

        4. “printing press and the mass populace being able to read or write, if that’s what you mean.”
          Above that in the thread you point out a Protocolic fit that indicates your discomfort with masses having power.

        5. Yes. I do have a major problem with the masses having power. It scares the hell out of me. That doesn’t mean I’m against literacy.

        6. The masses are quite literally our Brown and Black chums in Africa and Asia and increasingly the Mestizo horde from Central America.
          I am the 8%. As I live and breathe.

      2. casinobox
        Fundamentalism developed in response to the challenge of secularism and atheism which served to discount the imaginative myths by use of rationalism.

        1. No it didn’t. Traditionalism has always dominated the religious landscape. Otherwise, the Roman Catholic Church wouldn’t be around today. You also see traditionalism in Asia (ex. Buddhism, Hinduism). Even pre-World War II Japan was traditional. There are forms of Islam today that’re still traditional. Most religion today is still traditional; it always has been and always will be. Fundamentalism only became the norm in parts of Europe and in the Middle East.

    2. Don’t worry. Islam will defeat both feminism and Christianity, so you will get dominant men in charge again, with the added benefit of four wives. It is inevitable.

      1. No it won’t. Islam will blow itself up. Go to most of the Islamic world today. Most of those places will soon have drastic water shortages and many of those places on the verge of economic/political collapse. If you were to see a massive spike in food prices or something of the sort, the population of the Muslim world would be smashed. In today’s world, having everyone procreate like crazy is equivalent to economic suicide which drains a country’s resources and wealth. These populations that are procreating so rapidly will soon experience a sudden crash in population given time.

        1. No it will turn Europe’s lush fields into an overgrazed dustbowl.
          And you will be cheering it on.

        2. at the end of “Muhammad and Charlemagne Revisited” the author plays with the butterfly effect. Say Charlemagne was defeated by the Arabs at Tours. The West is overrun.
          1. Europe reverts back to a tribal and clannish social system, like Iraq or Saudi. Almost all civil and political reform ceases. Church and State? What’s that? Secular and Sacred? lol. University system simply never emerges. Sorbonne, Oxford Cambridge…never happened. (recall that the Muslim’s have about two Nobels) No printing press we all learn to recite in madrassas.
          2. Christianity shrinks to a rump enclave in central Italy. Vikings pillage the coast of Northern Al-Frankalus taking slaves. The Arabs enslave the Dhimmi. Europe suffers a low density population, denuded by slave raiding and razzia in areas still hanging on to Christianity. Slavery never ends.
          3. Islamic India fully conquered faces off against China in 1900. Each side uses primitive cannon and bows as a main weapon. Eventually the Chinese emperor converts.
          No America. No white man. No end to slavery. No hope.

        3. What you’re saying is retarded. You’re talking about hypotheticals that would never have happened. As empires (or whatever) gets larger, they become more fragile because of their size. When empires get too big, they fall apart. Any time empires conquer places, they turn external threats to internal ones. In many cases, it backfires. With size comes fragility (aka. the bigger they are, the harder they fall).

        4. What the hell? There’s no way that could’ve happened. If the Islamic empires did get bigger, they would’ve broken down from the inside out. If the West would’ve been “overrun”, the Islamic empire would’ve ended up breaking down, like empires that get too big too. By the way, there were many empires that beat the Islamic ones in battle, including the Mongols. The reason the Mongol empire couldn’t hold? It’s because they got way too big and fragmented. The same thing would’ve happened to the Islamic empires in time.

        5. I see nothing in Islam that encourages me to think they would have created a sustainable high civilization. They just cannibalize what they conquer and then exhaust it.

      2. Europe will turn into a dustbowl within 50 years of these savages achieving hegemony.

      3. Yeah, just don’t get out of line; lest your head be severed with a rusty knife.

  2. Which is precisely why we need to be guarded about what messages we are endorsing. Giving the enemy ammunition to use against us will crush the movement.

  3. Here’s one suggestion. I know the rule says “No Women” allowed to comment and I support that but it would be quite beneficial if RoK attracts some female authors. It would project a different image to the world. We must not be seen as angry men who think the woman is the enemy. RoK will be seen as platform which is open for dialog.
    Doctor T from shrink4men is pretty solid. Why not talk to her? She’s going to be at the conference, I think.
    p.s. keep up the good work with this blog but the forum needs cleaning up.

    1. I don’t think female authors would be a good option, and allowing them access to our forum. That would be THE WORST IDEA AND SUGGESTION.
      Women don’t understand men’s issues as much as men do, neither can they view things from a logical yet emotional perspective at the same time.
      Also, women are more united than men when it comes to protecting the interests of their ‘gender’. Some of the articles written here are in jest, but wouldn’t be taken in humor by females writing. A better option would be instead to affiliate with female blogs which promote red pill ideas. In case they start publishing anti-male articles, it’s much easier to disconnect from them, than to weed out a mole from within.Remember feminism and matriarchy took root when males allowed it. So never expect women to support our cause. The only way they could is by supporting us from outside, and publishing our articles by reprinting with RoK’s permission.
      Women are not the enemy as a gender, but a lot of women are. A staggering amount of them are. Don’t let a few exceptions among them lead to complacency, which has been the cause of destruction of many great men and civilizations throughout history, when they chose to be complacent with women. America is one example of male complacency, which birthed feminism. A case of few tortured women became a tool in the hands of many manipulative women who used to push the agenda for feminism.
      RoK rules for disallowing women should stand firm. RoK is a strictly male club, a blog where men brainstorm, learn and improve themselves and should remain exclusively for men. Let’s not corrupt it by letting women in, too. We don’t need female versions of manginas supporting our cause by writing or joining our forum here. It would only lead to commentators and forum members trying to game them, leading to the eventual corruption and complacency of the whole purpose of RoK.

      1. I always thought GirlWritesWhat had talent.
        Not so familiar with her more recent stuff but she has some good solid work that makes a unique contribution.
        I agree… The strength of this website comes in exploring male only issues without censorship and without the possibility of all the drama and confusion of having female readership/contributors. It serves its own purpose.
        Also keep in mind, many of our male readers have come from truly horrific situations and need to have their grievances understood as men. They’re taking the RedPill on their own… and finding this website helps them build something from the wreckage.

    2. ” I know the rule says “No Women” allowed to comment and I support that
      but it would be quite beneficial if RoK attracts some female authors. It
      would project a different image to the world. We must not be seen as
      angry men who think the woman is the enemy. RoK will be seen as platform
      which is open for dialog.”
      This is male space. And we intend to keep it that way. And this:

    1. And commentary this is exactly what our enemies are looking for to discredit our philosophy and message.

      1. its true though, they love beeing the hidden puppet master. We need to expose them for what they are and do

        1. There is no hidden puppet master that’s some Jewish guy. The problems are obvious and all around you. The problem is mass delusion. It becomes a problem when you give power to the masses. It’s got nothing to do with Jews.

        2. Like I said, people like you are why we are never going to unite. And then the enemy will be quoting posts like yours and challenging us to defend your baseless arguments.

        3. its not baseless, just open up your eyes and see what is there unless what you want to see

        4. You’re telling him to open his eyes? You’re clueless. What you’re suggesting is that we should blame a minor (and insignificant) portion of the population for all of the problems of society without fixing ourselves first. You don’t fix things by scapegoating people or groups of people. It’s just an easy to work solution that won’t fix a damn thing.
          The sad part is that you think Judaism even matters any more. It’s not even a major religion.

        5. The sad thing is that there are a good number of conspiracy theorists like you associated with the red-pill movement.

        6. When conservatives bitch about the MSM and Hollywood they are dog whistling to constituents about Jewish power. Your delusional if you have failed to pick up on this.

        7. I don’t think conservatives should be bitching about the MSM or Hollywood. I’m not even sure that Hollywood is something that should be scapegoated by conservatives by claiming that it emasculates men. I’ve got difficulty understanding how Clint Eastwood emasculates men.
          By the way, bitching about issues like that really gives the other guys more credibility. If you’re ideas are correct, there’s no need to bitch about the other guys. Time will prove ideas correct. Bitching allows the opponents to marginalize you and make you seem crazy.

        8. Who shoves the blue pill down the throat of the passive couch potato?
          Also Eastwood? Are you seriously suggesting that he’s representative of Hollywood? Pfft.

        9. Eastwood is certainly a part of Hollywood. Forget Eastwood, what about Charlie Sheen? Does he represent the emasculation of men? You’re just setting up scapegoats without addressing the underlying problem.

        10. What about the Producers? You are confusing ownership papers with the siren song of B-list celebrity.

        11. I’m toying with you right now, but that could be a line from the Protocols. “It becomes a problem when you give power to the masses.” That’s straight out of the military intelligence world playbook that Okrana uses.
          I’m all for chemically castrating the vast majority of my competitors and chucking em in the rubbish tip. I live for it. If you think that you can defeat feminism without getting rid of anti-racism you are deluded.

        12. Who is we? Who is the enemy? Do you even know who you are fighting? Or what you fight for?

        13. You’re still painting a lot of people with a broad brush and claiming everyone is the same. Then, you’re setting small groups of people as scapegoats and saying if we get rid of them, we fix the problem forever. Gimme a break.

        14. ‘We’ are those that wish to live authentically with the truth, regardless of how uncomfortable or inconvenient. As reality is of the upmost importance.
          The ‘enemy’ is anyone, for any reason, that opposes the reality from being exposed. It can even be extended to anyone not seeking out reality and accepting whatever reality is presented.
          So people like you are living in another illusion of ignorance. While we are aligned against the common enemy that subscribes to the mainstream illusions right now, you are still nothing more than a implement. Convenient in the moment to deploy against a common enemy, but to be marginalized the moment we have secured our common enemy.

        15. Ah see it’s not a smallish rich influential elite. One that views you as a labour unit. No not them, no! It’s the broad swathe of the male population! That’s the ticket. Just re educate 25% of the population, if they reject you do what the Students for a Democratic Society advised. Cull them?
          It’s much easier to demonize a small minority to get people mobilized. Your prescription is to broadly blame most men for their own predicament from what I can tell. You also advocate giving up territory to males from competing groups. Good luck fella.

        16. Don’t worry, your kind will be memorialized as the useful sky cranes that you are.

        17. That’s the way to respond to my comment–with no substance. You’re scapegoating a particular group and blaming them for society’s ills when the real problems go much, much deeper than that.

        18. Repeat after me:
          It’s like a revolutionary in France claiming that the Ancien Regime has nothing to do with aristocrats.

        19. “Baseless arguments.”
          I wish I could post that picture of a spreadsheet pointing out every American media company and who leads them as well as pointing out the ethniticity of them.

        20. “The sad part is that you think Judaism even matters any more. It’s not even a major religion.”
          You’re not joking, are you.
          Google “Ashkenazi Jews”. I’ll wait.
          “You’re clueless. What you’re suggesting is that we should blame a minor (and insignificant) portion of the population for all of the problems of society without fixing ourselves first.”
          You’ve got to be kidding me.
          So a group that has a median income of 100k + $ (yes, MEDIAN, not mean), a mean IQ of 110-115, wins 25% of the Nobel Prizes, virtually owns all of the media (especially Hollywood), the NBA, the music industry, is prominent in academia, FINANCE (btw, the last 3 chairmen of the FED were Jewish) and lost of other institutions that I can’t be bothered to list…..
          is insignificant?
          Did your mother drop you on your head when you were a child you retard?
          Director (and everybody else), stop expending effort trying to set these imbeciles straight. It’s impossible and, above all, pointless. These turds don’t need to know anything, much like a horse doesn’t need to know what country you’re trying to conquer riding it.

        21. So? Do you really think that the guys in charge of those agencies have any power? They’re basically puppets. If they don’t do what they’re supposed to, they get kicked out. There’s so much politics behind the scenes. Don’t kid yourself. The entire show is run by corporations, not Jewish people. The few Jews that run these organizations are puppets.
          By the way, IQ doesn’t mean jackshit.

        22. You’re awfully clever, aren’t you? You got anything better to say than personal attacks.

        23. Yes, I seem to have forgotten how the Jews have secretly concocted a scheme to manipulate a country of 300+ million despite being less than 2% of the population. Very rational argument, especially with your spreadsheet proof. The most puzzling aspect of the Jew-controlled US theory is the fact that half of the country is still Protestant and that all the traditional power brokers are WASP. It is such a clear case of confirmation bias only the most delusional could possibly support it. But, you have your false reality and they have theirs.

        24. More confirmation. There are 5 Catholics, including Chief Justice John Roberts, on the Supreme Court and only 2 Jews. Why isn’t there a Catholic conspiracy? After all, is it Catholics or Jews making their way illegally into the country? 6% of our current Congress is Jewish. No Jew has ever been President nor VP. Only two Presidents in our history have not been WASPs. These are facts that prove your moronic theory unfounded.

        25. to be fair, i’m somewhat concerned by the Catholic voting patterns in the US. Also the association with Latin American demographics too.
          A WASP is not a Catholic btw. WASPishness was founded…well i’ll rewind: Anglican-Episcopalian militancy was Anti-Roman Catholic from inception. So to a degree I do see Catholicism as a degeneration and a worry. The Presence of Scalia and that Nog plus the Hispanic Catholic on the bench are not positive things.

        26. “A WASP is not a Catholic btw”
          Thanks for that update.
          I’m not a WASP but the country was founded on those principles and we continue to deviate further and further from our founding beliefs. But that is hardly the Jews fault. Of all the demographic groups, Jewish Americans are some of the most productive and industrious this nation has to offer. The cultural emphasis on education and providence is why they have been overrepresented in most fields. It has nothing to do with a planned cultural sedition.

      2. If all of you mealy mouthed, intellectually cowardly, ignorant jackoff died tomorrow, nothing of value would be lost.
        While it is true that mentioning Jews here is a waste of time, it doesn’t matter what dipshits coming over to RoK will think. We are beyond the pale already.

        1. Right, cause we have such a stranglehold on the cultural landscape…We have a foothold and in order to gain more we need to convince more of our message. Not alienate them. Nothing significant will come from this movement being a sub-culture. It needs to receive broader exposure and support for any meaningful change to be imparted on western society.

    2. This is just racist bullshit. Get your head out of your ass. Trying to blame a specific (and small) group of people as a fault to the entire world’s problems is fucking retarded. Jewish people DO NOT MATTER. Judaism isn’t even a world’s major religion considering that <1% of the world’s population is Jewish.

      1. i can’t figure out for the life of me, whenever social issues are brought, some one always mentions Jews. It seemingly doesn’t matter what the issue is.

        1. I don’t get it either. Paranoid conspiracy theories have become so fucking popular these days though.

        2. Yeah and the entire political system is geared toward making men’s, not only a portion but in general, lives hell…
          and who is doing it? All women? half the other men?
          Casinobox spooged (or creamed) on these boards about not blaming the banksters for today’s impasse, they (s)he wanks on for the rest of the thread discussing the role of German war reparations being responsible for the ww2!
          That’s having your cake and eating it too.

      2. I just assume ALL the antisemitic shit posted in the comments is the work of liberal moby trolls trying to plant a weapon at the crime scene, so to speak.
        For one thing, these guys don’t sound like real antisemites. Real antisemites harp on Israel, rather than Jews, so they can pick up that leftist “standing up for the oppressed Palestinians” credit even as they work toward a new age of genocide.
        No, “Fredrik” is probably “Fredrica” posting from the Womyn’s Studies grad student lounge.

        1. “Real antisemitic shit” hahahaha
          You are so clueless…
          Do you agree or disagree that Jewish people are not only the richest people in America but also everywhere, from media to academia to finance? Having the SAME progressive, homophilic, feminist agenda?
          Just curious.

      3. People with an IQ of < 95 shouldn’t opine on this.
        For the record, Jews are not a religion, but a pseudo ehtnic group and pretty much 70% of all feminists, communists, anti racists, media people, academics etc are Jews.

    3. Roosh is right, but you are even more right. The root of the problem is jewish control, but here in the “manosphere” the wannabe alphas are afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes on.
      The reason is simple: they fear social ostracism, they fear the label “racist”, they fear hurt the feelings of collaborators like the half breed Jefe or niggers like Athlone.

      1. Roosh is right, but you are even more right. The root of the problem is jewish control,

        Wow, you and @fredrik_johnsen:disqus have the savoir faire of primates.
        Jewish influence ≠ all jews. Less than 0.2% of mankind is Jewish and approximately 43% of the world’s Jewish community lives in Israel. Moreover, only 1% of the aforementioned 0.2% (i.e. ≈ 0.002%) could reasonably be considered the ‘Synagogue of Satan’.

        The reason is simple: they fear social ostracism, they fear the label “racist”, they fear hurt the feelings of collaborators like the half breed Jefe or niggers like Athlone.

        The real reason: Real men have tact and indiscriminate racism is effeminate and irrational.

        1. I guess it is coincidence that jews have been chairmen of the federal reserve for 27 consecutive years.
          Jewish influence is tremendous in power circles, and they shaped the mass media. The blue pill as you call it is basically jewish culture pushed on us these last 50 years.
          This isn’t even a race question, it is an ideology and it should be condemned. Go to Makow’s site savethemales even jews know elite jews are an enemy to western civilization.
          And no I am not calling for any judgement on regular jews, what is needed is surgical condemnation of the jewish cabal for the concrete acts of aggression they have taken against our civilization through immoral media, unethical banking practices, and corrupt politicians they control with contributions that have help shape the west into the wasteland it is today.

        2. See the Supreme Court? How many Episcopalians serve on that bench? Look at the Federal Reserve Bank? Who chairs it? Who chairs the IMF? Take a look at the Film Studio CEO? BBC chairman? What do you see?
          Look at the appeals courts and campaign managers for politicians. Look at the money men donating to politicians!
          More power too me you say? You know the side your bread is buttered I guess.

        3. There is a very interesting study of the Harvard undergrad population by Ron Unz. He pointed out that according to the racial breakdown stats that blacks are over represented by a factor of two, Asians. Under represented by a 4/5 and Jews make up about 50% of the “white” student population. I’m not sure if he realized the implication of nepotism that must be at work here. The stunning part of this is that the black intake have poor SAT scores in comparison to Anglo-Irish-German students with perfect resumes. So not only do white boys get the shaft to accommodate substandard black boys, Jews are counted as white even as they operate as “other” than white in the melee of special pleas.
          Unz is a brainbox Jewish guy btw. He’s not impressed by Harvard these days and is highly critical of their anti-racist accommodation of diversity.

        4. So let’s blame all the world’s problems on the media and bankers. No one else through out this food chain deserves any blame at all and if we wipe out this small population, all of the world’s ills will be fixed all at once. Gimme a break. This is bullshit propaganda.
          The real problem is the delusional ability of the masses, which is rooted in human nature. If you can fix human nature, you can fix all of our problems today. That being said, human nature will not change.

        5. I have no problem with multi-ethnic or multi-cultural societies. The perception of race that came with modernity (think 300-400 years) is really a bullshit concept. Throughout history, multi-ethnic empires (ex. Rome) were the norm, not nation-states. We’re seeing the death of nation-states and we’re seeing the rise of the East (again). In 1750, India and China accounted for 50% of world output. In a century or two, I believe they will be back at similar numbers. Both of those countries (India and China) are extremely diverse.
          We’re just seeing a shift from nation-states to empires/republics, which is something that needs to happen. Nation-states are centralized (they’re centered around the nationality of the people). Empires/republics are inherently decentralized. Over the long haul, centralized systems eventually end up blowing up while decentralized systems are far more robust. The advantage of decentralization is that the mistakes stay small and localized, although this results in more short term volatility. In centralized systems, you see volatility being suppressed until violent blowups occur.
          It really goes deeper than geopolitics alone. It has to do with the entire thinking of the European world starting after the end of the Middle Ages. You’re seeing a Europe that no longer matters on the world stage. Europe has already self-destructed and these nationalist movements to salvage what’s left are effectively useless. The most dangerous development in modernity has been the development of nation-state democracies which allow the masses power where their power is centered around their nationality. This basically gives them whatever they want all the time, which is why Europe is really doomed.

        6. We do need to repair the world. It’s not just Judaism that says that. Every traditional religion says something similar. Religious fundamentalism, on the other hand, needs to die.

        7. Don’t even waste your time @casinobox As much as I enjoy RoK, it’s core audience are these losers. Inadequate, middle-aged white men, lacking any distinctive characteristics or discernible achievements, usually with some type of prejudice towards some minority group.
          These extraordinarily average men lead relatively sedentary lifestyles, only pursue opportunities with low risk and have a high proclivity for anti-social behavior.
          No group of men, in the world, are in more need of ‘Red Pill’ guidance, regarding women, masculinity and fellowship; than this specific subset of Anglo-men but majority of them have deluded themselves into believing they already possess it. What’s more amusing is how these habitual losers honestly believe anger, bitterness and resentment are synonymous with ‘Red Pill’
          Most of them couldn’t get laid in a brothel so they sit around surfing the internet and complaining about women, immigrants, the(ir) government(s) jews or whatever else they believe prevents them being men and grabbing life by the fucking balls.
          These men are a lost cause.

        8. you are off topic here. I’m talking about Harvard intake, you are talking about vast impersonal invisible hands. Ohhh, Let me guess? mmmmm.

        9. I’ve done the whole childrearing thing, i’ve done the entire mistress thing. i’m off right now to bang a former student. 100 lbs 5′ 7″. Life is good as long as one knocks the wog down.
          You think Matrix is real right? I am the architect.

        10. this flies in the face of everything you are saying about the financial provisions of Versailles.

      2. Nothing disapproves your just a sad, insecure racist like making insecure, racist comment!

  4. The first rule of Fight Club is, don’t talk about Fight Club. The second rule of Fight Club is , don’t talk about Fight Club.

  5. Most importantly is that we must be united. The manosphere movement is divided amongst different groups and in order for us to be victorious in the long run, we must stand united.
    Right now, each group and individual can only wage guerilla war against the feminazis and their supporters. But once we are united, we can wage open war and begin dismantling feminism brick by bloody brick.

    1. I think you hit the nail on the head unity is severely lacking in the ‘manosphere’ movement but the problem is I honestly don’t see the different groups resolving their petty differences any time soon.

      1. True. Men are independent thinkers while women are collectivists. Unfortunately in this case, collectivism is a big advantage to having a homogenous movement.

        1. Which is why I say we don’t need one. Why try to emulate herdlike behavior when decentralization and the selling of truth to individual men is so much easier?

        2. Agreed. Disenfranchised, heterosexual men make up a large portion of the population. Start with them, one by one. Make them understand that mainstream society is attacking them, and that they are not alone.
          If you build it, they will come.

    2. Male solidarity is more difficult to achieve than female solidarity.
      Females may crib and bitch about each other, but when they want to shame men, they form a more formidable line of shields than the phalanx formation of ancient Greek hoplites.
      Male solidarity on the other hand is easily destroyed, by simply putting a woman amidst them. The first murder in human history (Kane killing Abel) was motivated by the love of a woman (their sister, Abel’s intended bride to be, but Kane coveted her instead).
      Since mankind was developing at that time, brothers were marrying sisters to propagate the human race, till the law was revealed to abolish incest.
      But this example is seen through countless forms throughout the ages, and is still being repeated. Men will kill each other for a woman. Men will demean each other for a woman. Men will betray personal honor, as seen as in the case of manginas, for women.
      Men will unite with fellow men to fight against other men.
      Men will rarely unite with fellow men to fight against women, or their plans.
      Reason? Sex. Shame of being called homosexuals by manginas and women. This is why men will never achieve true solidarity.

      1. “The first murder in human history (Kane killing Abel) was motivated by
        the love of a woman (their sister, Abel’s intended bride to be, but Kane
        coveted her instead)”
        Sorry your story is not supported by either the bible or historical evidence.

      2. Reason? Sex. Shame of being called homosexuals by manginas and women. This is why men will never achieve true solidarity.
        Maybe its time we change this.

    3. Exactly left wing ideology is a binding force for many conflicting ideas. We must unite all anti left wing sentiments if we are to gain real and true power

  6. I think the idea of keeping more to ourselves and using stealth to recruit men is a sensible option. We truly are as a movement a drop in the oceans of opposition to ourselves and what we represent. Trying to convince people openly is becoming less and less effective as the years go by. I find that the problem a lot of the times are the men and not so much the women. Of course the feminist bullshit women are fed is a grave problem but the white knights that facilitate the feminist ideology is truly the biggest hurdle us masculine men face, without the sea of mangina fags propping up the feminist narrative feminism itself would be a mere shadow of what it is today.
    The way I’m going to go about it now is as Roosh has alluded to I’m going to try and reach out to my close friends who are still somewhat conservative and haven’t been polluted by the blue pill phenomena. Slowly but surely over a somewhat prolonged period our message will become stronger, better understood and finally accepted again.

    1. Manginas and white knights are absolutely the No. 1 problem.
      This is why I read ROK and not AVFM – the cure for feminism is masculinity, not some whiny male version of feminism. We’re not victims, we’re men. And masculinity is blunt, unapologetic, and has zero tolerance for mangina faggotry.
      Women have a herd instinct and ultimately fall into line with whatever their male authority figures say. The white knights need to be metaphorically kicked in the balls till they either see sense or shut up. Ridicule them till their sticky little hands quiver with doubt before they think of retweeting some feminist shit. Mock them till they’re afraid to publicly say they’re pro-feminist.
      I really hope Roosh isn’t going to tame ROK’s critique of male feminist manginas. Bodybuilding and gaming sites are ten a penny. ROK is unique.

      1. “Manginas and white knights are absolutely the No. 1 problem.”…
        100% correct.
        These are our REAL enemies…..they are the terrorists….they are the enemy within….and we must SHAME them at every opportunity.
        Dealing with females/feminists is easy enough…..
        We will NOT marry them.
        We will NOT cohabitate with them.
        We will NOT give them children.
        We will NOT give them LT commitment.
        We will use game at every opportunity.
        We will pump and dump only.
        Soon enough…..after they are splattered in the wall….with a barren womb with only cats for company and afraid of “dying alone” ….they will succumb.

        1. In the words of Darth Vader…

          “If he could be turned, he could be a powerful asset.”

          White knights should be turned. Shame the unreachables, yes, but illuminate reality to as many of them as possible.

        2. “Manginas and white knights are absolutely the No. 1 problem.”…
          100% INCORRECT
          The “problem” is the men, and women that seek profit and power from the current situation.
          Its ALWAYS about money. The psychobabble newspeak is all a cloak.
          As has been said many times before – “follow the money”.

        3. Quote: “We will NOT marry them.
          We will NOT cohabitate with them.
          We will NOT give them children.
          We will NOT give them LT commitment”
          Then they will simply make dating defacto marriage regardless if you had sex or not.

        4. The problem with trying to turn manginas, is the draw of rationed pussy they may be getting, regardless of how it happens.
          Men are willing to put up with insane amounts of abuse for the mere opportunity to stick it in a warm place. That’s how they became that way.
          Their thinking is “Stand up for myself and be shamed by women (no pussy) and society, or fall in line and have kids with a land whale who treats me like a pet.”
          They have no shame in choosing the latter.

      2. It’s seriously disgusting. Feminists, like us, want to take over the world and spin it into their favor, but white-knights deserve a nuke down their chimney. In a society where women have had suffrage since the beginning of the 20th century and equal rights since the latter half of the century, any male who is pushing a female agenda is a traitor groveling for pussy.

  7. This is why I respect you Roosh. Not trying to suck your dick, but seriously, your life would be a lot easier if you just backed down. You could be banging hot eurobabes and writing fiction or something and not have to deal with psychos thousands of miles away, but instead you stick to your guns and get the message out there. By starting this website, you have knowingly put a target on your back, but you have so far held strong by your words, and I believe this is an example for all of us to follow.

        1. >assuming I’m a feminist
          >not knowing national socialists are against feminism / multiculti / homo / communism
          shiggy diggy doo, anon

      1. Hey, guys. No need to bash the fascist, I’ve talked to many fascists to get to know what they actually think and most of it is pretty sane stuff. Check it out. Hierarchy, a freer market in the right defenition of the word and no bullshit.

        1. What I’ll never understand is how you can believe in “the virtue of democracy” and also be upset that women vote away your rights and dollars. Do these people not understand that democracy is mob rule? I would rather a benevolent dictator than an unstable mob.
          i.e. a Caesar than Social Democracy, which is the lowest form of politics

        2. Participatory democracy to be more precise.
          The parliamentary/representative democracy we experience nowadays is a scam. Power concentrates in a few hands and public information is a monopoly.

    1. Fucking hot eurobabes and writing inspiring articles are not mutually exclusive, I’m sure his division of work and fuck is fine

      Keep in mind that new technologies are constantly being developed: Such as,
      “Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!” -The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto

    3. “A lot of you may find this to be unsavory, but we must find natural allies to defeat the enemy.”
      The problem is basically this: the Democrats will have nothing to do with the men’s rights retards (obviously) and the men’s rights retards, in turn, will have nothing to do with Republicans.
      It’s about a class of men too stupid and immature to help vote in politicians that agree with women 50% of the time in order to stop women from voting in politicians that agree with women 100% of the time.
      I think if there is any real hope it lies in the east.
      One thing that hasn’t been discussed at all is perhaps establishing closer ties with Russia.

  8. Hi Roosh
    I hope you don’t stop publishing articles like The 9 Ugliest Feminists, because as well as being a good laugh, it serves other useful purposes:
    * Savage mockery is a great way of destroying your opponent’s arguments. If you render something ridiculous, you weaken its power. That’s why Jon Stewart does it. That’s why TV shows Dads as retarded doofuses led around by their smarter, stronger wives. Meanwhile, providing your own side with a laugh is a great morale booster.
    * Feminists are thin-skinned and a lot of them have emotional problems. Anything that gets their panties twisted and causes them to scream with rage is good for our side. It throws the harpies off balance and lets normal people see them for the deranged mentalists that they are.
    * Being on the offensive is a lot more fun than the alternative.
    Ridiculing social justice warriors is like shooting morbidly obese transgendered fish in a barrel. They *are* ridiculous, and so are their retarded opinions. But they aren’t going to mock themselves. It takes a man to do that for them.
    Keeping your head down won’t stop them trying to come after you, by the way. We’re way past that. Brendan Eich never thought giving an anonymous donation to a campaign to defend the normal definition of marriage would be used to kick him out of his job. Look at the AVFM guys – they’re polite. They don’t gratuitously mock feminists. Did it spare them from being protested? The SJW types are like Inquisitors trained to sniff out any trace of heresy, it’s not enough just to avoid deliberately pissing them off. If you don’t go full social justice retard, you’re their enemy.
    While it may seem like these people wield tremendous power, they are paper tigers. Their main strength is in their ability to lie and cry through the MSM and Twitter. That just makes me want to make fun of them so they cry some more, and maybe get therapy, but YMMV.
    Of the 22 million Americans going to college, how many of them do you think are fully bought in to the blue pill Marxoid shit they’ve been sold? A tiny, but loud, minority I’d guess. The Occupy movement didn’t represent the 99%. It represented the 1% who are freeloading twats. You have an enormous potential audience out there, and I’m not convinced being mild and inoffensive is as good a means of catching their interest as being exuberant and entertaining.
    I wish you all the best in whatever you choose to do, but I hope you don’t let a bunch of bedwetters convince you to nerf this fine site and turn it into a 21st century version of the Promise Keepers.

    1. Also, what Roosh shouldn’t forget, is that MSM is *dying*. Their greatest tool for influencing the masses is actually losing influence day by day.

    2. When those 22 million college students leave college and face the real world with crippling debts for worthless degrees in a junk economy, they will be forced to take the red pill. What other options will they have? Certainly, many will question the perverse ideas of the previous generation who is living high-on-the-hog off of their (the younger generation’s) backs.
      The older generation is a lost cause. They are far too set in their dysfunctional ways to change now, plus they’ve benefited so much from their nonsense; why would they change? The younger generation is in a much different boat. They are desperate for answers that the older generation simply will not provide. The younger generation also has time on their side.
      In a sense, focus on sending the message to those who will be most receptive to it. Forget the older generation. Just wait for them to die off. PLaying the long game is a much better strategy with regard to changing social attitudes.

      1. Yup. I’m honest enough to admıt I’m a former pussy-boy bıtch wıth a lıberal arts degree who hoped to get job at some ”not-for-profıt organızatıon” as a ”program manager”. But the economy went down the shıt-hole, along wıth my masters degree ın publıc (bullshıt) polıcy. Stıll ın denıal (lıke a crack addıct) I went to law school (3rd tıer) and acquıred even more debt. But whıle swırlıng ın the toılet that was my lıfe, my eyes began to open. I left the UsA, I now teach englısh overseas, fuck local pussy and treat chıcks the way they ought to be treated. I am never returnıng to the states because that would be returnıng to my mangına state of servıtude to cunt bosses and bıtch gırlfrıends who OWN you because they DO.

    3. “Savage mockery is a great way of destroying your opponent’s arguments. If you render something ridiculous, you weaken its power. That’s why Jon Stewart does it. That’s why TV shows Dads as retarded doofuses led around by their smarter, stronger wives. Meanwhile, providing your own side with a laugh is a great morale booster.”
      This is very important. A lot of people would be more effective if they reframed a little bit better.
      It is very important that we mostly follow Ghandi’s advice. “Be that change that you want to see in the world.” YOU are the entity that you can control most directly. If they know a person with your opinions and has an admirable character (i.e. strength) they will associate your thoughts with greatness.
      That means quiet alpha goes a long way.
      It isn’t the ONLY thing that you can do, but it is absolutely vital.
      I also agree with Roosh about Fight Club and Project Mayhem. If you can spot potential red pillers and quietly show contempt towards manginas, you will make them feel inferior without activating their “fight back” nodules.

  9. I think it is important to let women know that we don’t hate them. They tend to process the world in an emotional way without much control. If we join in on this game we are going to lose. Every feminist girl I’ve had a sexual relationship with knows that I am not a feminist. Obviously they all tried to argue that I actually am one because I respect women and believe they should be treated equally under the law. I always say this to them: “when men treat women correctly I see no need for feminism; therefore, my focus is on teaching men how to be men instead of little boys.” If she continues to push I say that I am done with the topic and continue with another conversation thread. We’re men… allowed our own opinions and we take control in a gentle way when necessary. These same girls love when I dominate them in the bedroom because they trust that I will beat them up in a safe and enjoyable way.
    So rid yourself of these boyish emotional outbursts, listen to women and make it clear that you’re the boss.
    Do your best brothers.

    1. I smell a rat.
      “Treating women with respect” has never helped anyone with our goal. Women will associate with strength, 9/10. Technically you are not wrong, but the way you delivered the message makes me think that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

      1. yet, you want to be treated with respect. when you discount 50% of the population as being undeserving of respect, you get NONE in return.

        1. We give respect when we get respect. Right now, we are being disrespected. We need to up the mistrust/hostility to a point where women know that it is not OK to treat men like this.

        2. Your mere existence does not entitle you to have the world handed to you on a platter.

    2. “when men treat women correctly I see no need for feminism; therefore, my focus is on teaching men how to be men instead of little boys.”
      So, modern feminism is men’s fault and women have no accountability for what it has done to our society? Just teach boys and feminism will magically go away! Get the fuck out of here with that horseshit.
      And to anyine with at least half a brain: don’t “listen” to women. Observe their behavior, deduce their true intentions, and then react accordingly.

  10. I was walking through Bucharest yesterday thinking along these lines. Changing the culture is a monumental task that’ll take a lot of time and work to do. The important thing now is self-preservation. There’s such a huge army of progressive drones that you can’t defeat or even challenge them on a large scale, but by picking your battles and not letting the nauseating attacks and groupthink wear you down and discourage you, the time will come for a larger offensive.
    The YouTube video idea is excellent. I can’t think of any specific ideas right now, but maybe other commenters will. Something combining humor, photo slideshows, animations that lampoon progressivism, man on the street interviews, etc. Even doing some interviews with attractive girls from EE and other places talking about how they crave masculinity and are revolted by feminism.

    1. Like my channel! Although I used to spend a lot of time on theredpill forums on reddit, I realized after a few months I was just reading the same thing over and over again. Why should I spend hours on the subreddit when I could easily be making content? I do comment sometimes on RoK though. Shameless shout-out to my channel.
      Channel link:

      1. Just left today! Now I’m back in Warsaw. A friend invited me so I wanted to check it out for the first time. An interesting city full of contrasts. Beautiful women and classical architecture, juxtaposed with the devastation of soul-sucking communism.

        1. Man, next time you come this way, you gotta spend time in Craiova, Brasov, Deva and Iasi. I think you’ll be quite pleased.

  11. Flying under the radar is necessary at this point for both the individual red pill man and the movement to survive. I also think we need to get more men on the inside, either by recruiting those already in academia, entertainment, etc., or perhaps by trying to infiltrate it ourselves.

  12. Here is the best take I have seen on why we are “losing”:
    “Have you ever seen a herd of bulls? Neither have I. It is the anti-thesis of all things “male” to become like a herd. Herds are the nature of females, not males. Yet, whenever talk arises of what men should do about the Gender War, the first thing everyone shrieks for is “unity.” Often we hear criticism amongst men themselves that the Men’s Movement is not a “real movement” because it does not resemble the feminist movement. “See! Men don’t have vast lobby groups, therefore they aren’t a movement. And look! Men aren’t burning their gonchies in rallies numbering in the thousands, therefore there is no ‘Men’s Movement.’” It really goes to show how feminized our entire culture has become that men, in response to women’s excesses, would actually try to emulate female behaviour in order to ameliorate their grievances.”

    1. Good perspective but its not true. Men have always worked together. Look at sports. Look at the military. Go all the way back to the tribal hunting or war party. It’s simple, men work together because groups are most times more effective than individuals. In the past you NEEDED to work in groups to survive.
      I would argue that this loner attitude is the anomaly and it is very much a function of comfortable, affluent living in industrial societies and things like social media that destroy our social skills.
      Here’s the problem with men’s rights “unity”. It’s unappealing because the idea of men having to unify against women seems weak. And men don’t group up out of weakness. When men group up they usually share respect and respect comes from natural talent or ability gained through hard work.
      In business terms, the only way to get men to “unify” around men’s rights is by rebranding it.

      1. “Men have always worked together. Look at sports. Look at the military. Go all the way back to the tribal hunting or war party.”
        In my opinion you’re both right. Men WILL get together to go out and kill or conquer an enemy. In the situations that you’re referencing however… men will be rewarded for those risks and efforts with sex, respect, and community.
        On the other hand, in the current cultural climate, every individual man risks losing out on sex, respect, and community by publicly disagreeing with the politically correct narrative. So they wont do it… Doesn’t matter who is right or wrong… its all just relations of power.

        1. Correction ~ Many men THINK (i.e. trained to think) they will lose out on those things by publicly disagreeing with the narrative.

    2. You are wrong. Men are much better at working in teams and cooperating than women are. There’s nothing better than being with men who are so in step with eachother that they can instinctively and fluidly fight and work together. Feminism is the logical conclusion of hyper individualism.

      1. Men work in teams when they work in a hierarchy – like a pack of wolves. Women work like herds – which also have a hierarchy, but not one like men’s
        Even in the army, which is done by hierarchy, a newb has to spend time in boot-camp where to an extent his individuality is stamped out and the hierarchy is brainwashed into him so he will be useful.

  13. I’m seeing tactics, but I’m not seeing goals. What exactly do you want to achieve? What are the goalposts along the way to achieving it?

  14. First off, ROK at times borders on brilliance so I would be disinclined to tinker with the current approach too much or you may lose that. Having said that, here are some observations to consider:
    1. Quality Control: Some of the articles are not well written. This may be due to the age of the writer or his lack of writing ability. It may also be due to the pressure to publish 20 some articles a week. I think you could lower the number of articles published to 15 a week and raise the overall quality of the site.
    2. Pick Your Battles Wisely: The Elliot Rodgers battle was poorly chosen. Not every attack has to be answered; or even acknowledged. Attack the enemy where they are weakest and where their defense is ridiculous and untenable. The Elliot Rodgers battle was the exact opposite of this. Think before you strike.
    3. Some of the authors on ROK clearly have an anti-white animus. This should not be tolerated for the simple reason that it will turn off many of your readers. Additionally, don’t we already get enough of that sort of bias from the cultural marxist media?
    4. Likewise, bashing women for their many foibles, while entertaining, gets tiresome after awhile.
    5.. The Neoconservatives are not conservatives. They are snakes in the grass. It would be be foolish, in my view, to align ROK with folks whose mission in life is to subvert most of what ROK stands for.
    6. I think you overestimate the power of the cultural marxist establishment. Look at the elections in Europe last week. Look at the election in Virginia last night. Look at the ever dwindling numbers of the MSM. The winds are shifting, and not in their favor. You are on the right path. You are just early; as all leaders are.

    1. I agree with you on the neo-conservatives. Paleo conservatives (close to libertarians) make good allies though although their numbers have dwindled over the last 30 years.

    2. I loathe ‘neoconservatism’, but am very grateful for Christina Hoff Sommers, who has probably been fighting ‘the war for boys’ for longer than anyone in the ‘Sphere. She is an impeccably-sourced academic who burnishes her arguments with fastidiously accurate data which cannot be refuted by the feminist left. She’s an outstanding advocate even if not entirely in-step with a couple of core ‘Sphere views.

      1. Agreed…Christina Hoff Summers is excellent. She is an ally. So is the Independent Women’s Forum of which she is a member. ROK and the manosphere needs alliances…

    3. “The Elliot Rodgers battle was the exact opposite of this.”
      I think it would’ve been stupid to not make a comment on this. It was simply too relevant.
      It is important to reframe situations. He may not have done it ideally, but such an article was necessary.

  15. Believe it or not, it may not be as hard to find open ears from men as it might seem. You have to remember, that there was something we all have in common that led us here. Share this stuff with your friends, send it on facebook or whatever you use. I personally know several men that have red pill ideals, and have never even heard of the manosphere. It might take a little bit of elbow grease on everybody’s part, but it can be done. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and it sure as hell took more than just a handful of guys to build it. Spread the word gents!

  16. Traditional “victory,” however it is defined, is not the best goal for the manosphere in general, in part because different sections of the ‘sphere has different goals in mind:
    PUA – to haxe sex with as many women as possible, by understanding the perversities of female nature.
    MRA – reform of divorce and child custody laws and preferential treatment of women by gov’t and society.
    MGTOW – To be left alone.
    All of these things fall under the rubric of the manosphere, yet of all these goals are not necessarily the same. (I lean towards the MGTOW side of things, so reform of divorce and child laws mean little to me since I have no intention of being in a situation where either will apply, and I find American women utterly repellant so PUA has little appeal.) What counts as victory would depend on who you ask, and it isn’t really victory at all.
    Moreover, why should we define victory on the same terms as our enemy? The feminists point to laws put on the books or mass marches in the street, and these days tweets from various celebrities and Uncle Tim’s as a sign of “progress.” None of this means anything in the broader scheme of things. REAL change, occurs in the day-to-day lives of individuals – how they see the world and choose to live in it, multiplied a thousandfold. A single man taking the red pill means nothing, he’s just one among many. But a million men doing the same will bring about change simply through the sheer weight of numbers. They don’t have to march in the street or lobby Congress, they just have to go about their business en masse.
    This is why feminism is doomed to fail. It is dependant on support from government, the media and the elites who control both. Outside of this echo chamber it falls apart. In the day to day world where people actually live, it doesn’t make sense. A single mother is not some hero doing it her own way, she’s a woman raising children on her own, with no support beyond the scraps Uncle Sam tosses her way. A single women “finding herself” through sex with Alpha-wannabe’s in her twenties (and aborting the unintended consequences) is not a sexually liberated female, she’s a slut who degrades herself at the time of her life when her abilities to find a husband and have children are most potent. A thirty-something career gal deciding now she is ready to find Mr. Right is not a proud independent women, she’s a desperate wretch whose biological clock is nearing its final tick.
    Feminism fails in the day to day, while the red pill thrives there. Marching in the streets is just noise for the media. The AVFM guys do sterling work and have their hearts in the right places, but all this conference of theirs will accomplish is put a target on their backs. The true revolution will take place one by one, man by man. One man, deciding that the system has failed and he wants no part of it, multiplied by a million. It’s not a movement, which can can fail all to easily, but a mindset, a way of seeing the world, which something more powerful and subtle. It will grow because it makes sense to those looking for answers in their daily lives. And one day we’ll wake up and find that it has become the majority.
    Now that will feel like victory.

    1. I agree with this….I think the overall movement in general is going in the right direction and I support it…but I often am confused as to what the overall long term desired result is. What would “victory” look like.
      I pose the question: What are we “fighting” for? Equality? an end to feminism? traditional gender roles? traditional family values? to get laid more often? Less fat chicks?
      “all of the above” isn’t a good answer, because some of these things are somewhat mutually exclusive.
      If all you want to do is get laid a lot, the current status quo (a few red-pillers/ alphas and a ton of mangina/white knights), is probably optimal.

      1. Sadly, “victory” is what?
        Whereas it was communists who said “capitalists must die”, I fear that there is no earthly cure for these unearthly ideals that rot civilization.
        However, it’s not our task to do what? Put these people in camps or something? No. That would be to become a product of their endeavors, no better than them.
        We just have to survive and let nature take its course. Save those you can save by waking them up, write off those you can’t save by realizing that they are “turned” (like zombies) and are already dead. And move on.
        Keep calm and sabotage the system.

      2. What are we fighting for? I thought that was very clear.
        For men to be respected. To not be passed over for promotions because of a corporate mandate requiring women and people of color to be the token “diverse” employee.
        For men to feel valued in life.

        1. if you don’t feel valued in life it’s your own damn fault. how long do you think women and people of color were passed over for promotions, or even employment that paid a living wage.
          why don’t you quit your whining and act like you deserve to be respected and valued. it works.

    2. Indeed. Keep this thing (the manosphere) underground. Keep it in the shadows. It will be more attractive that way. It will retain it’s mystery, therefore making it more attractive to those who find it. Don’t be like the feminists who have to take to the streets and scream as loud as they can to get their message across. Doing this cheapens the message tremendously and makes it less effective.
      Also, overt, loud messages like feminism require visible front men. Having visible front men makes a movement much easier to pick apart and hate (Hitler comes to mind) because the people who are receiving the message will either take it in or reject it based upon their perception of those putting the message out. This is a major reason why feminism is so incredibly repulsive to the masses; it’s perceived as a movement of ugly, loud-mouthed, sexually rejected women. Nobody wants to associate with that. Focus on the message, not the personalities presenting the message.
      This is not the 1960’s. “Taking it to the streets” is silly and ineffective in the modern era. Anyone remember the “occupy” movement? It was a huge disaster. The only thing people remember from it is the chaos. Also, being highly visible makes the movement an easy target for the MSM. Why give them the ammo to attack us and give them stories for the nightly news? Make them waste their time and resources finding us, rather than handing them everything on a silver platter.
      The internet has changed the game. We all know this. Use it while it’s still legal. Internet campaigns are FAR more effective than some dumb, take it to the streets, hippy throw-back bullshit protesting.

    3. Goto Thailand and there is instant victory on all of these key areas.

    4. They may fail in the way that leftism fails against reality because reality is unwavering. But the question is, how long? I don’t want them to have any modicum of success. The real challenge is how does one awaken a wealthy, comfortable society to reality without turning that society into a shithole?

      1. You can’t. There has to be a lot of “discomfort” before people will give a fuck.
        Men, especially those who feel marginalized are feeling that discomfort.

  17. Can I ask you guys?
    What is the deal with bringing up Climate Change as a Leftist ideology?
    I’m RedPill but that is an issue of scientific debate. Are you guys saying it is propaganda? A few times on RoK recently I’ve come across bashing the research on climate change and I don’t get it.
    The basic scientific principles behind it make sense to me. Is there something I’m missing? I can’t speak for ALL the research on it… And I don’t know in what ways you guys are referring to it. Perhaps it is being leveraged for unrelated victimology or money grabbing?
    I just want to understand what the predominant position is on this because I’m uncomfortable with the idea of just blindsiding legit issues because we have to agree with everything conservatives are saying. Isn’t it just as likely that high rollers profiteering off of oil don’t want to lose their source of power and income?

    1. The politicization of the climate issue has puzzled me as well. I want man to have the ability to control Earth’s climate, like an advanced civilization right out of science fiction. You’d think the Right, with its “dominator model” for getting nature to serve man’s needs, would have realized that the climate science might show that we have inadvertently stumbled across some of the planetary climate’s control knobs.

      1. If you want men in control of the earth’s climate, then you want us to kill ourselves. Every single traditional religion (fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam need not apply) teaches to live in concert with nature for a reason.
        Nature has been around much longer than we have and will continue to be around longer than us. If you screw with it too much, we will die as a species. What you’re suggesting is giving our measly little minds, as a species, control over things we don’t come close to understanding. This is equivalent to giving a 7 year old boy several sticks of dynamite.

    2. “What is the deal with bringing up Climate Change as a Leftist ideology?”
      Because it is.
      Ever wondered why all their proposed solutions involve massive increases in taxation, redistribution, and government control over people’s lives?
      Ever wondered why Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and all the other major greenie groups are full of Marxists who want to make cars and air travel and air conditioning too expensive for the average person to afford?
      It’s not a coincidence.
      “The basic scientific principles behind it make sense to me.”
      That’s part of the problem. On a simplistic High School science level, it makes sense. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Ergo, more CO2, more global warming, right? Wrong. Because the climate isn’t simple. It’s an incredibly complex system full of feedback loops and influenced geological, biological, and astronomical factors which we still barely understand.
      What we do know for sure is that every single computer model used by global warmists to predict the climate has been falsified by the data. The earth stopped warming back in 1997. Nobody can plausibly explain why, but the greenies scream “ZOMG! ITS WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT!!! SHUT DOWN TEH ECONOMY, LIKE NOW!!!”
      We also know for sure that the environmentalist agenda is to make us poorer and less free. They aren’t hiding this fact.
      “Isn’t it just as likely that high rollers profiteering off of oil don’t want to lose their source of power and income?”
      There’s a hell of a lot more money and power riding on the global warming gravy train than there is on being in the pay of evil Big Oil denialists. Governments are spending billions a year on environmental propaganda, green subsidies, green government initiatives, science jobs that wouldn’t exist without the global warming scare etc. You can see why they’re nervous about the lack of actual warming.
      The oil companies are mostly too terrified of the negative publicity to defend themselves.

      1. You answered my question.
        Its an empirical issue though and I think to take a hard-line on this is hasty.
        Destroying the environment (which essentially IS the economy) is a bigger issue than having to jerk off.
        I think you outlined the marxist political agenda really well and I agree that someone is probably trying to use the public attention for power.
        But to act like human industrial behaviour is not going to have unwanted effects on the environment… An RoK post is not going to just convince me of that.
        Anyways… we are going to run out of oil regardless and I’m all for scientific research to replace depending on it.
        One last comment.. and I know you guys will hate this… its only considered “taxes” because we don’t want to pay them… because we don’t see the benefit. If we felt an issue was worth paying taxes for, we’d call it a contribution. We shouldn’t be so arrogant as to think that we are free of bias.

        1. We’ve already invented a replacement for fossil fuel based electricity. It’s got a great safety record, produces very little pollution, and we have several centuries worth of stuff to power it with.
          It’s called nuclear. And – whaddayaknow? – the greens want to shut that down too.

        2. The taxes are meant to establish the UN as a taxing power, and thus a government. If you think the crooks in Washington don’t represent you, wait til you have the UN over you.
          If there is empirical data not compromised by the politic on global warming, I have not yet seen it. The sun is the main factor in the warming and cooling of the planet. Mars got warm too, go figure.
          That said, I am not against regulation of corporations, environment is common property and violating wontonly is an offense against man and God.

        3. Tell that to Japan. Ever heard of Fukushima.
          Any time you’re using nuclear fission (or similar methods) to create energy where <1% of the energy created can actually be absorbed and used, that’s not safe. It may appear safe for periods of time, but if something happens to the plant, you get massive disasters (ex. Fukushima). There is simply too much risk in nuclear energy.

        4. I completely agree with you. Every single traditional religion (not fundamentalist religions that disguise as traditional) say the same thing. We’re messing around with something that belongs to God.
          The climate has been around for longer than we’re even close to being and will be around long after we die. If we keep going at this rate, we will completely destroy ourselves, but nature will continue to survive.

        5. Yes, I’ve heard of Fukushima.
          You seem to be unaware that despite that 40 year old nuclear power plant being hit by a massive earthquake and a tsunami, and suffering three meltdowns, the number of people killed by radioactivity from Fukushima was:
          And nobody’s likely to ever die because of Fukushima radiation. They’ve done follow up medical tests on people in the surrounding areas. Even the workers who were there at ground zero are fine.
          Pretty fucking good safety record if you ask me. More than 15,000 Japanese were killed by the earthquake and the tsunami by the way, but all the media wanted to talk about was a nuclear power plant that caused zero deaths.

        6. The entire layout for the Fukushima plant was bullshit. It was designed to blow from the start. You can’t say that, because it was hit by an earthquake or a tsunami, that’s why it blew. It was the trigger; the cause was a miscalculation by the guys that built it. What happened was something that the builders didn’t predict. Guess how often stuff happens that’s not predicted? It happens all the time.
          You’re describing a version of the classic sucker problem. There will be stuff that’s gonna happen that we don’t know about. You’ve gotta build designs which are robust to such mechanisms. Clearly, nuclear power plants aren’t such mechanisms. An earthquake or a volcanic explosion or something crazy could hit anywhere. Shit happens. You’ve gotta be prepared for anything. The problem with nuclear power is a problem of risk. When you play around with things you don’t fully understand and rely on predicting things you can’t predict, you end up fucking yourself in the ass. That’s what nuclear power basically is. Nuclear power is not safe because of the energy levels you’re playing around with.
          Small errors can cause major, major blowups and small errors are bound to happen. You’ve got to be robust to errors and nuclear power isn’t protected against prediction error.

        7. All that will happen is stupid Bangladeshis and Nigerians will get drowned. Maybe some Chinese too. What’s not to like?

        8. Well, shit. I’m not an atomic engineer and neither are you.
          I am a fan of numbers though, and here are the relevant numbers:
          Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant: Ran from 1971 to 2011 without causing a single death due to radiation poisoning.
          Got hit by a 46 foot high tsunami and the fifth most powerful earthquake human beings have ever recorded. Fatalities due to radiation: zero. Predicted future deaths due to radiation leaks: zero.
          Seems to me the 1960’s engineers who built the thing did a pretty good job. Could they have done better? Yes. It’s always easy to do things better with the benefit of 40 years of technical progress. Engineers are always looking for ways to do things better, and that’s why modern nuclear plants are even safer.
          Name a viable form of mass electricity generation that has a better safety record than nuclear. I’ll save you some time: there isn’t one. More people get killed maintaining wind turbines every year than by nuclear plants.
          “An earthquake or a volcanic explosion or something crazy could hit anywhere.”
          No. A major earthquake or volcanic explosion or something crazy could not hit anywhere, they hit geologically active parts of the Earth, like Japan. A major earthquake or a volcano is not going to suddenly rise up under your feet unless you live on a tectonic fault line.
          “Nuclear power is not safe because of the energy levels you’re playing around with.”
          What energy levels do you think are safe? A Watt? A Megawatt? 1.21 Gigawatts?
          Let me clue you in on something: there is no life without risk. You could slip and crack your head on the toilet and die tonight (I hope you don’t though – be safe).
          Men take calculated risks to get the rewards we want. It’s why we no longer live in miserable shitting caves.
          In this case, some very clever scientists and engineers built a plant that provided reliable electricity for 40 years before shutting down due to a terrible natural disaster, and although many people were killed by the natural disaster, nobody was killed by their design.
          Let’s hear it for engineering.

        9. “There is no life without risk”
          Exactly. It depends on what kind of risk. There are some risks that aren’t worth taking. Would you play Russian Roulette if you had the opportunity to win $1 million dollars if you didn’t die? I wouldn’t. Why? The upside case is limited while the downside case is unlimited. It’s like that when it comes to nuclear power. In the case of nuclear power, we know exactly what the upside case is (you get energy); we do not know the downside case. It’s a fragile situation (a.k.a. a ticking time bomb).
          By the way, there have been zero deaths from Fukushima thus far. I’d like to see the total cost of fixing up the damage 50 years down the line. You never see the costs immediately; the costs always appear later and are much larger than anyone expects. Just because you don’t die from being near too much radiation doesn’t mean you’re not damaged by it.
          By the way, I’m an engineer by training. I don’t need you to tell me about engineering. Engineering works well in some domains, but using that mindset in other domains can blow systems up–especially if the systems exhibit chaos (almost all natural systems do). If a system exhibits chaos, trying to “optimize” a system usually causes it to blow up. By the way, blow ups don’t happen immediately. You said something about how it took 40 years for the event to happen, which isn’t a good thing. What it means is that the risks aren’t visible; in other words, there’s nothing to tell us what could go wrong. When the event does happen, it happens all at once. The less likely the event, the worse the catastrophe.

        10. Not everyone thinks in terms of what God wants.
          That isn’t something even on the radar for many people.

      2. Protecting the environment used to be something that belonged to the right, not the left. You just said why, which is that nature is incredibly complex and difficult to understand. It does have nasty feedback mechanisms, which means it also has tipping points with nonlinear payoffs. In other words, you can do something for a long time and see no effect, then, all of a sudden, the entire system blows up taking you with it. If we don’t learn to live in concert with nature, humanity will die. Don’t assume we’re the first society to have environmental degradation issues either.

        1. “Protecting the environment used to be something that belonged to the right”
          Yes, the Nazis pretty much invented environmentalism. I know. That’s not a reason to respect it.
          “If we don’t learn to live in concert with nature, humanity will die.”
          Fuck that. Nature wants to kill us, always has. Nature is disease, famine, pestilence, hurricanes, earthquakes, and pubic lice.
          We didn’t become the boss of this planet by living in concert with nature like a bunch of hippies, we did it by making nature our bitch.

        2. The Nazis didn’t invent environmentalism. It’s embedded into every single traditional religion (not fundamentalist ones). It’s an age old idea, which is thousands of years old. Actually, the Native Americans had some of the most advanced forest management systems ever created.

        3. “Actually, the Native Americans had some of the most advanced forest management systems ever created.”
          And look what happened to them.

        4. The reason they died was because 90% of their population met up with smallpox. If 90% of your people die from a disease that you’ve never seen, you won’t be able to hold off invaders.
          If you wanna talk about examples like that, then take a look at Rome. Rome had major deforestation issues. It was one of the reasons they had to keep expanding their empire, not enough firewood. There were civilizations that went down because they’d wipe out vegetation, which later created soil erosion problems as the land lost all fertility.

        5. Casinobox – excellent comments. I recommend you start your own blog.

    3. The climate debate is meant to destroy your standard of living. Specifically white people in Europe and the US.
      China and India couldn’t give a flying fuck.
      The only places that will flood are deltas in the third world. Bring on the floods I say.

      1. Have you visited India and China? I just came back from a trip where I visited both of those countries. Those countries environments are in horrible shape. Go into Chennai or Beijing and walk around for four hours and tell me how you feel. It’s obvious that the way those countries treat their environments is unsustainable. The drinking water there is contaminated and many of those types of countries are on the verge of experiencing water shortages. Please do not talk about things which you don’t know.

        1. You misread what I said.
          Every single guilt trip and proposal by the environmentalists at this point is designed to destroy standards of living here for whites.
          I never said that Europeans and Americans are bad stewards of the land. Quite the opposite. The UK is like an Eden. Carbon footprint guff is designed to hurt whites. The Chinese and Indians will plough on quick and dirty.

        2. What the hell are you talking about? The Chinese and Indians will not continue to plow on if they keep treating their environment that way; they will crash. You’re not really understanding what I’m saying.
          One of the reasons the West is so rich is because of how well they do treat their environment. In the case of the US, the conservation and environmental protection movement started in the late 19th century.

        3. Hey genius, you may wanna check this out. These are all future costs that promote economic growth today. These are very similar to the problems Brazil and the Soviet Union had in the 20th century. By the way, that’s another example of a country that did a shitty job of taking care of its environment and one of the primary reasons it crashed and burned. Trading environmental health for GDP growth is a bad, bad decision.

        4. They will and it will crash. Are you an enricher? I gotta ask. You identify with non whites in a really awkward way.

      2. The rich world treats their environments much better than the third world does. Go to a random lake in India or China and stand around there for an hour. I doubt you’d be able to hang around there for 10 minutes and bear that smell. Soil erosion is a major problem in both countries as are water issues, which is why there’s a good bit of territorial disputes between both of those countries (the areas that’re disputed hold lots of water). The water crisis in Pakistan is even worse.
        It’s countries that treat the environment better that usually end up much richer. It’s not even close. If you don’t conserve your forests or water or have proper irrigation methods, you’re much more likely of dying out. Over the long run, issues like that make countries much, much poorer and it causes the costs of infrastructure and basic public works to skyrocket in the longer terms. To a large extent, the Chinese and Indian treatment of the environment combined with the neglect of their infrastructure is why those countries are still so poor. After all, both China and India were around 50% of world output in 1700-1750.

  18. You will never get anywhere without a leader and a leading objective vision. The manosphere raises awareness in its limited way, but leads no where.
    You have to have a constructive life you teach and lead, one you hope will attract others and will build a good society as well.
    I see some good ideas but no meta that will unite.

    1. The best revolutions are decentralized, a movement of people because they all individually see the benefit.

      1. Bullshit, respectfully. Marxism had leaders, feminism has leaders, progressivism too. The continental congress led the american revolution. Cuba is the headquarters for south american marxism.
        Good or bad you know what they stand for and they had successful leaders to advocate their position and define themselves.

        1. Those leaders emerged long after their movements had begun. Leaders are an ancillary, not a requirement. It is the rarest of human behaviors for significant masses of sufficiently random experience to simply fall-in-line with a leader and believe what he says. A precondition always exists, leaders emerge when already-moving masses shove a chosen one to the front.

        2. There are always leaders every step of the way. They define and shape the vision. They weed out what they dont want.
          The msm doesnt go after you seriously because it cant define you. That is not a strength, you may “survive” but you change no minds. That is fine for mgtow but I believe people here want more than that

        3. This is entirely wrong. Individuals, given liberty in thought and deed, define their own future. Leaders are merely the people who accurately reflect the thoughts that many were already having.

        4. This is a fascinating debate.
          I think the function of leaders is to promote solidarity by embodying responsibility. But I think they can also play a role in shaping the public.
          By your theory, if Adolf Hitler did not voice his opinions like he did, Germany would have still taken up arms and promoted Nationalism. They would have still had cullings.

        5. 50+ years of people defining their own future is why we are in this mess. I am not saying you need leaders and a vision to rule you with an iron fist, but to define the paradigm that hopefully you would want to live in and to be its defenders.
          You won’t get that from “paid” leaders btw, which is why democracy doesn’t work. They are all merchants who are used to selling out their charges.
          Individualism is highly overrated and has not produced a single successful society. If you want to change the society for the better you can’t just have a bunch of individuals doing whatever. It doesn’t work for any group of people in the long run, not even a family.
          Ultimately you have to produce a vision that can win the hearts of families. Only then do you stand a chance. You have to show women a better way than feminism, and yes you need women to make the vision work. A bunch of lone men living bachelor lives may be nice for themselves, but ultimately has no staying power.
          It comes down to do you still fulfill the desires of your heart as you see fit, or do you strive towards a higher ideal. If the former don’t bother with a movement, you need only yourself. If the later, define a vision and find the men to lead it.

        6. By your theory, if Adolf Hitler did not voice his opinions like he did, Germany would have still taken up arms and promoted Nationalism. They would have still had cullings.

          That’s a terrible conflation of what I said with what the trappings of political power gave to one man. Hitler was a man squeezed to the front of a minority movement, that then adopted its own message for the masses with the expressed intent of attaining political power. German nationalism was a direct result of the punishing sanctions and humiliation of WWI, and the weimar republic destroying the German economy. It was a movement of Germans attempting to not feel like their country was poop. Hitler manipulated that movement, by pretending that his smaller movement was part-and-parcel of German nationalism.
          German nationalism, post WWI, had absolutely nothing to do with the racism of the Nazi’s. The Nazi’s simply convinced the masses of Germans otherwise. Again, precursors led to leaders. Leaders did not simply create a message and convince everyone of their message.

        7. There are always leaders every step of the way. They define and shape the vision. They weed out what they dont want.


          I am not saying you need leaders and a vision to rule you with an iron fist, but to define the paradigm that hopefully you would want to live in and to be its defenders.

          Sounds like a total contradiction to me.

          Individualism is highly overrated and has not produced a single successful society….

          …except, of course, the United States, Canada, Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome and other democracies throughout time that didn’t *immediately* go the way of marxism…

        8. It is not. We aren’t talking about a government or a cult. They just simply define what the movement is. If you aren’t in line with it, then you aren’t in it by default. You can then go start your own or whatever.
          Manosphere has too many competing ideas to be effective as a movement.

        9. I would argue precisely the opposite. The strength of the manosphere’s argument is strengthed by the fact that while all of the people within it hold with very different ideas about how to live, all agree that feminism has gone too far. You can’t attack when you’re being attacked from all sides. Feminism is cornered by the manosphere BECAUSE it is such a diverse group, and they know it.

        10. The sanctions were never seriously enforced. Only the French really bothered to collect. The “harsh” terms of Versailles were more for public consumption among angry French and English looking to ameliorate the bloody cost of the defence of Flanders, champagne and Artois.
          If you look at the books the Germans didn’t pay up and the French rarely bothered to collect.
          The Nazis capitalized on two things: the Great Depression and the rural German farming population. They also traded on widespread knowledge of communist massacre of Kulak (family farmers) in Ukraine. It’s very hard to imagine the Nazis gaining power without the depression combined with seeing a few million butchered family farmers in the Soviet Union.

        11. A leading objective vision might not be enough, but I agree with Jeremy and endwatcher.
          A country that is deeply polarized politically, such as the USA, is ensconced in infighting with no real clear vision. Most of the Western world is.
          Nature abhors a vacuum, and Cultural Marxism, Post Modernism, the Sanction of the Victim, and other philosophies of feces (read: nihilism and anti-life) have been allowed to fester because there’s not enough competition to jam a 98 MPH fastball up there asses. And do so, with
          clear alignment to the Founding father’s moral beacon that [life (as a standard), Liberty (our right as a sovereign) and the Pursuit of Happiness (as an end in itself)] is our proper human estate.
          Of course, central bankers and monetary policy are but one other force wrecking great havoc and assault against our ability to secure our happiness. But that’s a different tract.
          The Red Pill is only but one matrix-busting paradigm (metaphor) carrying ideas forward. It celebrates un-politically correct reality. It’s not for those who can’t rebel against the machine.
          Blogs, self-publishing is at least a new paradigm that threatens the establishment (Cathedral). As more
          people just simply ignore the lies.
          I hope to submit an article on ROK soon. The title of my topic: The Sovereign Man — Towards an Aesthetic Revolution. It’s another matrix-busting paradigm. For
          individuals to grasp a new vision. 1st it must align with human naturebiology, 2nd it must defend on moral grounds and 3rd an appeal to the heart vs. the mind will most likely sway the massive middle ground.

        12. Feminism in the broadest sense is not the slightest bit cornered by the manosphere. They have armies of lawyers, the government, funding, and popular culture backing them. The spearhead did an article a couple months ago detailing this.
          Sure the manosphere represents that men do not benefit from feminism, and no one cares, nor does it make a true dent in the society beyond individuals loosely connected by the internet.
          Already we have seen that when someone is cornered they typically fold because the manosphere cannot provide concrete support. It can’t even agree on what it considers right and wrong. Half the time you get the stand on your own as a man argument, which is lunacy. You are faced with forces far greater than a single man.
          Diversity and multiculturalism of ideas or peoples is destructive when in close proximity and causes infighting. That is why it is promoted in our culture, those who control us know it is effective in dividing us. You have to come up with one united face to stand up to the forces opposed to your very existence. Knowing this, why continue with the farce that a divided house somehow has strength?
          It does not.

        13. …except, of course, the United States, Canada, Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome and other democracies throughout time that didn’t *immediately* go the way of marxism…
          But they did……and that is the final judgement on them all. The ancient examples never recovered from it, which is discouraging to say the least.
          People don’t remember the republic days of rome, they think of the caesars and their perversions.
          I wonder if we were set up from the beginning, the founding fathers knew the historical record of republics and their instability.

        14. “Philosophies of Feces”
          HAHA! Fucking brilliant! Couldn’t have said it better myself.
          This is why I read ROK. Regular guys telling it how it is.

        15. Like you said, the leader grows out of the movement. But he develops influence, and he might become corrupt.
          Eventually people will listen to him. He will embody everything they are feeling and believing.
          If he becomes corrupt, he may lead a corrupt movement.
          Its like the body and the brain. The body tells the brain something is up. The brain interprets it and reacts. The brain can react in a stupid way or an enlightened way.
          A decentralized mental shift is simply going to happen.
          A leader (or leaders) may grow out of that though. Who would be that leader? Would that leader be a Philosopher King? Or would he be someone who knows how to seduce?

        16. This is completely false. The problem with the world situation after World War I was that there was way too much debt and everyone needed their debt payments to pay each other. The Americans were to fault as much as the French and the British. All that was needed was for all of the debts to be written down and reset. Instead, they decided to have Germany bear most of the heat.
          The reason the French didn’t collect any of it is because the Germans didn’t pay much of it. The Germans only made their first couple payments before the Mark started to collapse. It’s an important lesson: debts that cannot be repaid will not be repaid.

        17. Let’s talk about the Cathedral because a lot of it goes back to Keynes analysis of Versailles. Territorially the treaty set up Danzig as a trip wire designed to favour Jews and damage Germany. There’s the great flaw it left too many Germans outside the New Germany. However the tarry was fine as far as economics. The Germans paid for ww1 with loans not taxes. This bit em later. The reparations argument is a red herring. Germany paid virtually none of it before WWII. Keynes predictions of the economic consequences for Germany were almost all incorrect. He was right that it was destablising but for the reason that though they could have paid it they didn’t think they should pay it and didn’t want to pay it. It (along with the “War Guilt” clauses) remained a thorn between France, Germany, Britain and America. The WWI German government paid for its war by taking out loans (instead of taxation) which once it had achieved victory it would have paid off through massive reparations imposed upon the Allies (how ironic). Things didn’t work out as they expected and the post war German government had to cope with the consequences. German never came to terms with its loss in WWI or with the idea that it had precipitated the conflict by providing Austria with a blank cheque over Serbia. A good book to write would be the “Political Consequences of Mr. Keynes Imagination”. Keynes set up a German whine factory.

        18. The reason Germany paid none of the reparations is because they couldn’t pay the reparations. Forget about what Keynes said and didn’t say.
          ” He was right that it was destablising but for the reason that though they could have paid it they didn’t think they should pay it and didn’t want to pay it.”
          Debt in high levels is always destabilizing. When debt/income ratios get high, the debt servicing costs take up a larger and larger share of the income. Inflating the debts away pushes up rates, which causes debt servicing costs to soar much faster since debt/income ratios are high. This forces the currency to collapse and forces a default. That was Keynes’ argument, which happens all the time (especially after war).
          Another point with regards to German reparations is that they weren’t in Marks, they were in gold. When you have debts in an external currency you can’t control, it makes currency collapses very likely. This happened to many countries over the past 30 years during the various Latin American debt crises and the Asian financial crisis as well. This is a rather common phenomenon. It’s not that complicated either.
          With all that being said, you clearly don’t understand what Keynes said. On top of this, you don’t seem to understand basic accounting and even your mathematical understanding seems limited. You’re talking about economics, but you don’t know very much economics. You clearly lack understanding about economic history and know virtually nothing about financial crises.
          “The WWI German government paid for its war by taking out loans (instead of taxation) which once it had achieved victory it would have paid off through massive reparations imposed upon the Allies (how ironic). Things didn’t work out as they expected and the post war German government had to cope with the consequences.”
          Hey Sherlock, things never work out as you expect. If you’re not prepared for the unexpected, you’re gonna end up fucked in the ass. That’s the reality.
          Keynes didn’t set up a “Germany whine factory”. He was actually dead on. Just look at every example throughout history where the debts denominated in a hard currency are >75% of GDP and tell me how every single one of those situations ends. This was one of Keynes’ central points. You’re clearly not very familiar with the history.

        19. Thank you casino box.
          Another avenue to power is adopting Keyne’s ideas wholesale. These Austrian goldbuggers just don’t have a clue. So they spin their wheels, spouting off all kinds of nonsense that has nothing to do with any human society that has ever existed.

        20. You are a damned fool and just proved it. Keynes set up the mechanism for our current decline. He set up a whine factory that validated German psychopathology in the interwar period and validated Nazi belligerence and victimology.

        21. The main problem with 1918 is that Germany was not actually defeated and conquered. The second issue was that the US introduced the concept of national self determination without asserting the hegemony it had already established.
          Strangely enough money wasn’t that important in the 20s. The Krauts made bank in the 20s and the Nazis were not popular. That required Stalin murdering farmers and the Great Depression.

        22. Let’s rewind here. We can blame bankers for the monetary flaws of Versailles because that is safely in the past…
          But if anyone points out the role of the largely Jewish Bankster today, that’s scapegoating? Irrational scapegoating? It’s okay when Keynes and you do it? But it’s illegitimate when the problem of today is laid at their door?

        23. I’m not blaming bankers of Versailles, but the monetary flaws are the most important part. Monetary systems and financial systems are like other systems. They need to adapt. If that requires war (in many cases, it does), so be it. It’s that simple. I don’t know why you don’t wanna believe that when it’s so damn obvious. Whether there were Jews or not, these adjustments must happen. If you try to push off these adjustments for long periods of time and suppress volatility, you get violent blowups. Pretty straightforward stuff if you ask me.

        24. This wasn’t the issue at all. The primary problem was that the world’s financial system needed to be reset. That didn’t happen, which led to the Great Depression and then World War II. If these things aren’t allowed to fix themselves, they will be fixed by war.

        25. He didn’t set up a whine factory at all. You’re just too dumb to realize that he was the only one addressing the real problems. The real problems were structural economic/financial problems.

        26. are you actually admitting that bankers are responsible for wars now? You’ve spent the whole time on here deflecting blame from bankers (ahem) to some great big invisible force. Now you reverse yourself?

  19. I don’t see what risks this community is facing exactly.
    Sure, there’s a culture war out there, but it’s all talk. What is ROK afraid of specifically? Censorship?
    You may somehow still not be aware of this, but there’s a large corner of the Internet called the ‘Dark Web’ which, thanks to the anonymizing technology of the TOR network, permits its users to sell drugs, weapons, and virtually anything else you can imagine freely and anonymously.
    In the event of a worse case censorship scenario (which won’t happen), all you’d have to do is a bit of virtual relocating to Onion Land.
    Authorities of course know this all too well, which is they won’t bother with online censorship. They know that it is an exercise in futility.
    So relax with the hyperbolic doom ‘n gloom stuff. You’ll be alright.

      1. And a blessing it would be if, by force or by circumstance, more people were made aware of it.
        Alternatively, Roosh could simply choose to host ROK on servers in Russia or somewhere.
        As I said, these guys will be alright. There’s no danger here.

  20. The fact that “red pill” men still exist at all is a victory in itself.

    1. hrm… that could be reworded to say…
      “The fact that lizards still exist, even after the demise of the dinosaurs, is a victory in itself.”

      1. That’s actually exactly what he’s saying, which is something very important.

  21. Ironically the Clerisy, which seems to overlap with Mencius Moldbug’s Cathedral, faces an uprising in the market based on the public’s growing fascination with genetic genealogy, served by the 23andMe company, and the National Geographic Society. The paleo diet subculture contributes to this cultural insurrection as well by exploring how your ancestry bears on what kinds of foods you should eat for optimal health. Basically this movement has embraced the science of human biodiversity and the idea that humans just don’t come out of the womb as fungible and “equal” units, but instead our characteristics group into distinct clusters based on which extended families (races) we come from.
    This contradicts the liberal-progressive denialism of human biodiversity I grew up with starting in the 1960’s. (I can see now why I had teachers in elementary school who wanted me to write about American black notables. My mother, quite reluctantly, had to drive me to a branch of the Tulsa public library in the black part of town to find that information. I noticed that the materials in that library, even the newspapers, look unhandled, and that gave me my first inkling about black people’s cognitive abilities and interests. My childhood thoughtcrime of Noticing conflicted with these assignments’ propaganda intentions about black people’s allegedly great potentials and accomplishments.)
    So, when will the Southern Poverty Law Center denounce, say, 23andMe, as a “hate group” for drawing attention to the scientific facts about human differences?

  22. Points taken. But I still believe that every day there are boys in high school and guys in college fed up and using Google to find an alternative to what they’re taught in school or to learn why their love lives went wrong. There needs to be as many Red Pill articles as possible so they can find them. Change will not happen overnight, but over decades, as it did with feminism. It takes time for people to find this, absorb it, then work it into their lives.

  23. It would be better if RoK came up with a “Mangina Shaming Week”.
    Seriously. A week where RoK bashes manginas left, right and center.
    Heavy duty articles destroying manginas. Because the problem is that manginas are the ‘men’ who betray fellow men, and support feminism.
    Let each of our readers tweet and spread those articles around fellow men. Men need to be logically educated about the dangers of female pedestalization, and a week full of mangina shaming is enough for men to learn from real life experiences.
    If RoK has to survive, it will only survive through men. Not women.
    We must educate men on the errors of their ways. A Mangina/Pussy pedestalizer shaming week should be run through.

    1. Week? Make it month. Or make it a monthly recurring event.
      Absolutely spot on though. If anything, it’s time ROK takes this war to the manginas/manboobz of the world. They must be mocked and shamed mercilessly.

    2. To add, the gyno-centric culture of the modern world trains boys to raise them as manginas, while shaming them for being men. Why not train these manginas to understand they were right as boys to be acting as men? Why not retrain these manginas that the feminist culture that shamed them for being men, IS THE ENEMY? Why not shame these manginas and expose them to fellow men (especially boys) to avoid these manginas who will injure the masculinity of the new breed of men? Expose these manginas who are working to destroy the manosphere, and detail out their propaganda and actions to the world. We as readers will support RoK, by sharing those articles among ignorant fellow men. JUST DESTROY MANGINAS. Take on Manboobz headlong. Rip their articles to shreds. Take it to a personal level, the way these manginas have taken it to RoK. Fight tooth and nail. Offense is the best form of defense.

    3. This sounds like a good idea. The weak spot in the feminist ideology is the mangina supporter. If we strike viciously and mercilessly at them, feminism will definitely feel the blow. It will be equivalent to attacking the rear supply lines of an enemy force.

    4. I’ve been reading the comments and I like where everyone’s head is at but let’s be honest with ourselves: We’re no movement. RoK is an amalgamation of several groups of loosely associated men; Disenfranchised with no goals, direction, or cohesive purpose. Even lululemon has a manifesto. What’s the endgame? Because survival isn’t much of an endgame. Until the aforementioned issues are addressed, we’re only prolonging the inevitable and outsiders will always view us delusional losers in NO MA’AM shirts hosting a harmlss Men’s Book club; to wit, nothing formidable or to be taken seriously.

      1. Yes, but having ROK is what gets the message out. Our movement is definitely in the minority but I wonder how many men would be receptive? I’m thinking many would and they already somewhat recognize things aren’t okay in Western society. At this point the more websites and articles against feminism the better.

      2. This is war and we have fewer militants than the enemy. What do we do? We go guerrilla style.
        We attack and retreat, firing bulletts of truth, we hide, spread information and demoralize the enemy. We free our fellow men from the brainwash chambers and their false ideals.
        Why the fuck do we need a manifesto?

        1. Exposing the truth for it’s sake is fine, but to effect change? Not going to happen, but I’d still participate.
          You’ve seen how politicians deal with the truth, they simply deny it or change the subject. Just like women.
          It’s really hard for me to hold back sometimes, but I’ve had to discipline myself and keep in mind that I need to make sure I’m not creating trouble where I don’t want it.

        2. Exposing the truth brings about change. We both want to participate. You see?
          Please create as much trouble as you want but find ways to remain anonymous.
          And don’t worry about numbers.
          Politicians and corporations control more minds than us militants?
          And who said we have to control other people’s minds?
          We gotta free our minds first. Political power is for monkeys. For fuckin’ monkeys.
          We preach by example, my friend. Armed revolutions are a thing of the past. We need awareness and peaceful disobedience. We attack when we expose the truth and teach our fellow men how to live freer and healthier lives.
          We learn how to defend freedom, not seize power. We pass that knowledge down to the new generations and life blesses us with everything we have always wanted: courage, strength and dignity.

        3. and why do you suppose there are so few of you? maybe you really are just a bunch of fucking assholes.

        4. And this is the example you give to your daughters… Lol…
          You are an angry person, Dody Stark. You need to quit drinking and processed foods.

        5. why do you suppose there are so few of you?
          Not true there are plenty of us just not in the west.

  24. What Roosh does with this article is playing the victims card. Today being a victim is the most profitable tactic. He basically tries to prompt up his revenue. Business as usual.
    Victimhood is a feminine trait and rather yin. A real alpha would just not give a fuck. Enemies are good (if you have them) it means you’re doing something right.

    1. That is shitty bitch ass comment. It reeks of the feminist “suck it up to man up” vibe.
      And what does it mean ‘victims’ card? And where the fuck is it said that victimhood is only a feminine trait? Have men never been victims, ever in human history? Fuck off you cunt troll.
      If you’re a man, I’d wish to see you suffer and rot for the injustice of society towards you. Men have been victimized in history, but they can’t show their ‘victimhood’ due to fucking double-standards.
      Dumb ass bitch comments like yours prove that fucking manginas troll this site. You can eat own shit and roll in it.

    2. No – it is just straight from the Art of War. If you are armed with a knife you don’t fight against a tank, no matter how much Alpha you are – that is just butt-stupid.
      Roosh states the truth and just suggests to focus the energy on venues which make an impact.

        1. I was rather thinking of choosing the battles wisely and fighting when you are certain of victory, but of course we cannot use the same tactics, since the money power, corporations, media and academia are against us.
          The truth is on our side and more women are joining, but so what?

    3. “A real alpha would just not give a fuck.”
      – Did you watch any of the Rambo movies before typing your retarded comment?

  25. After the publicity gained from the Elliot Rogers case RoK has been under constant monitoring from the aforementioned groups published in Roosh’s article. I think I can see what he means about choosing who you speak to about this wisely. What is being preached here can easily be seen as activism. You speak out and do something rash, you may get a misguided result as seen by the recent Las Vegas shootings.
    Unfortunately there are still alot of people out there who obey the TV without question. They will look for signs that the TV says and incorporate it into unconscious real life screening making us even more distrusting of one another. In the case of Donald sterling, some things you just have to keep to your chest for a while.

    1. What did that white trash guy in Vegas think would happen through his totally unnecessary murders of two cops, a bystander, and the murder/suicide pact he had with his wife? Did he expect that he would start a “revolution” where other Alex Jones fans would take to the streets dressed up as superheroes and shooting guns in the air, or something?

  26. Red Pill = Realism….
    We have to be satisfied with being a “guerrilla “movement for now.

  27. We are like the Spartans against enormous odds. Meeting them in the open field is suicide.

    1. this is gratuitous, but, was Xerxes tight with the tribe? I think he was. No love lost between Greek and jew in the ensuing Hellenistic period.

  28. Join traditional conservatives . . . no wonder MRA are getting an ass kicking.
    Gay rights has nothing to do with MRA, yet homophobia is a recurrent theme here.
    “Liberals” are bashed on a daily basis, but the concept of banging as many women as you wish is not even remotely in step with “traditional conservatives” in the slightest.
    The marriage or right wingery with MRA has been toxic to the point where it is the single biggest obstacle to broader, more successful movement.
    No, MRA need to modernize in the “now” time frame – too much damage has been incurred, not from feminism, but by right wingery.

    1. Christian PUA’s like Vox Day argue that game works because it exploits the fallen nature of men and women. He thinks that after PUA’s deplete themselves with all the relatively easy sex they can get, they will see the wisdom of becoming conservative christians, or something like that.

    2. Um, what the fuck is homophobia? Lets set the record straight…I don’t know a single person, especially conservatives, who are afraid of homosexuals, which is the literal interpretation of that non-word. And it is a non-word since its creation was entirely political, not only that, its design to stifle constructive debate, so, we’re better off without it. In the broader context of both the Men’s Movement and our (conservative and the like) struggle against progressivism what does homosexual rights or marriage or whatever get us? Its a huge waste of time and it placates a very small minority, 1-2% of the population. That doesn’t mean we should acquiesce to just their demands, because, after all, homosexualism is undeniably tied to progressivism. That said, if us (men) don’t get anything from all the wasted time and resources over fetish rights, which is really what it truly is, then this whole charade needs to go away. Perhaps its a distraction, perhaps its this or that, but frankly, empowering 1-2% of the population has caused a great deal of harm, after all, what about the other 99-98%? And if you don’t think homosexualism is closely linked to feminism then I have several bridges for sale. So, not only do we get nothing from homosexualism it actually works against us. What am I missing here? This is a “phobia” or is this just practical?
      And, as expected, you think its better for us men to “modernize”, oh, you mean be just like the progressives? Hey dumbass, those are the people oppressing us. Look, go away, do some research grow the fuck up and come back when you’re ready to accept that 2+2=4.

  29. This reminds me of the conspiracy theory websites who regularly take their sites down pretending they are under attack.
    What you do not realise is the elite indirectly support infosites like this one and the conspiracy theory ones. They both cater for people who see themselves as victims and look for a shoulder to cry on.
    Unless you have representatives in Parliament who can actively lobby for your interests, you are not a threat to us, you’re just another dog barking.
    Keep barking. We love it!

  30. Quote: ” My utmost concern is not winning, in fact, but self-preservation. We’re still not even assured of that.”
    This is most disconcerting.

  31. The issue is that men are already in charge. This entire site is based on the premise that women lack agency. Thus, the only avenue is the one that leads through men with power.
    I am such a man. I already avoid hiring leftist idiots whenever possible, as well as punish them in the workplace. Steady slow strangulation at the source is the way to go.
    I restrict my financial support to appropriate causes. I hire good people to minimize my taxes by arranging the lifestyle appropriately. I publicly support their causes and privately oppose them.
    And I bring other powerful men further toward the truth, carefully, slowly, and surely.
    I can assure you, employers already know that the best worker is a young, white, straight male.

    1. Smaller employers might have this luxury. Large ones do not. Public opinion can have a great bearing on a companies bottom line. Again, money always dictates how “politically correct” a corporation must be today.
      The manosphere will rise once the Black Swan arrives.
      There will be then the return of Kings.

  32. great article and a classic quote…. ” I can’t help but think of it as trying to organize a Jewish Issues conference in Hitler’s Germany”
    The MRA also come across as whiny men, building a male version of feminism… to use your example, like jewish, trying to form their own brown shirts gestapo….
    One thing we could do is encourage men to focus on building cash, capital, real estate, hard asset and personnel… a battle can be won Lawrence of Arabia style with nothing more than a few camel herders, but generally speaking, especially in this day and age, where even water and clean air are starting to cost money….. every penny counts….

    1. What’s funny about that is the fact that there were Jewish funded fascist outfits in Poland Austria and Czech. They were designed to take the sting out of the appeal of the NSDAP among the hoi poloi.

    2. The Jewish Supremacists (aka Zionists) and their cohorts are behind the downfall of the west. Control the media, banking, education system and government, encourage mass immigration and demonize any and all forms of masculinity (except killing innocent Muslims at Mossad’s behest).
      this is where you start – the identification of the enemy. And no this doesn’t include Bob Dylan, Lou Reed, Seinfeld or guys like Soup from RVF. Lol.

  33. Cathedral? Clerisy?
    Dude, it’s Temple and it’s Rabbiniate.
    Moldbug is such a disingenuous bastard with the Cathedral meme. To some degree the Cathedral building era is the golden era of the West. The first time the west really built an identity free of orientalism and kow tow to Classical authority.

  34. @Roosh_V:disqus Similar styles of warfare were always used since the idea of war was invented and studied as a science. Sun Tzu Art of War taught us that even if your enemy outnumbers you greatly, you can still use tactics that yield very effective results. We saw how a small band of rag tag farmers beat the mighty English empire during the American Revolution and how the viet con systematically dispatched the mighty US Army in the Vietnam war through guerrilla warfare tactics. Of course these are battles fought in reality and our struggle only pales in comparison to the actual life and death struggle these people faced. BUT. Warfare is warfare nevertheless. Our battle is fought on a different plane of existence. One can even argue that our struggle is even more difficult because we can’t simply physically eliminate our enemy. Our enemy is that of an idea deeply rooted within the hearts and minds of the people that create the fabric of our society. It is a long standing idea that covertly and subtly dispatched previously great ideas and foundations built upon masculinity and the overall better advancement of the human race. When we allowed the women to take our power it created a dystopia, an Orwellian nightmare if you will that has since been growing stronger and slowly destroying the actual advancement of man kind. It probably sounds corny or even crazy to many people reading but I’m dead serious about this. Like many readers on here I sympathize with your cause. I have neither the ability, skills nor resources to aide you in your cause at the moment. But if there were ever a cause that was worthy of supporting it would be yours and when I do reach a more ideal position I will find a way to advance our great cause. The struggle to be a man this day and age is even greater. Tread lightly, because bitches emotions be sensitive, like children that have been given the nuclear football launch codes. We definitely will require shall we say some finesse? Fuck the one time.

    1. The combined weight of the French, Spanish and Dutch were a factor in 1776. Ragtag my arse. That was a just a theater in a global war.
      Arguably the Americans also had a slightly better firearm with the widespread use of rifles instead of muskets.

    2. A good book on unconventional warfare is “Commando” by Deneys Reitz. Autobiography of a Boer War soldier (on the Boer side)

  35. Would it be gay to say I love Roush? I mean it’s not like a sexual thing. I don’t even know the fellow personally. I would not even go the “uncomfortable man hug” route but perhaps I seek better words to explain how much I like this article and how spot-on I think it is. I may be older than most of you here and have seen much of what the article touches on in action and have drawn similar conclusions. It’s nice to see someone with better communications skills convey these viewpoints.

    “Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!” -The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto

  37. Subverting the system will happen much more readily from within than from the outside. While laying low is certainly necessary at this point, we also need red pill men to begin establishing themselves within the institutions of our enemies.
    I actually started out in academia, pursuing a PhD in a very liberal field. Of course, I also identified strongly as a liberal and went through the motions of being one. Nevertheless, until discovering the manosphere and immersing myself in its truth, I had been leaning red pill for years without realizing it or having a clear understanding of why I felt so much discontent. I’m sure there are others like me out there: men who have been inculcated in the blue pill/liberal dogma who simply need a push in the right direction in order to validate the inner voice telling them its all bullshit.

  38. As a traditional conservative I can say that the American Enterprise Institute is a great organization. We don’t have to agree with every jot and tittle put out there by one another, but there is a lot of common ground between AEI and us. After all, our enemies are the same people and there’s a reason for that.

    1. The Spartans had around 2,000-3,000 other troops from other city states at the Hot Gates. They were outflanked more than outnumbered in that specific combat.
      The frontage at the pass could have been hèld with a frontage of around 600 men indefinitely had the Persians not sneaked around the mountain passes unnoticed. Give em credit there for a flanking and infiltration move. Worthy of the best Alpine troops.

  39. That Daily beast article could have been written by Mencius Moldbug, great stuff.
    Check him out if you haven’t heard about him…

  40. Solid article. My only reservation– one you anticipate in the article– is allying with political groups. I agree that similar messages ought to be amplified, but always beware of being used, diverted, distracted, etc. As a monarchist, I find political groups all the more distasteful, but your point on this matter is valid.

  41. Kudos to Roosh for his perceptiveness here. Sometimes you have to check your pride and realize when the odds are stacked against you. When you find yourself in that position, you have to engage in guerrilla tactics.

  42. I think ROK happens to be Anti-Fragile and encouraging all of us to be the same. It/we will thrive, not survive.

  43. A little bit off, Roosh.
    We can’t bide our time since the agenda to disarm is increasingly being rushed.
    A Jewish conference in Hitler’s Germany? The Weimar Republic, which was the German gov’t before Hitler’s rise, *was* a Jewish conference. They ran the show to the detriment of the German people, creating widespread animosity.
    The endgame here is a Soviet America, as the people who were Bolsheviks are currently in charge of the USA. Hint – they also ran the Weimar Germany.

    1. I can always tell when these antisemitic comments are a feminist troll trying to discredit the manosphere. The give away is that real internet antisemites always harp on “Zionists” instead of or in addition to Jews, in order to piggy back on both the inane misplaced lefty and/or hardcore Muslim affiliation with the so-called Palestinian Arabs.
      On the other hand, troll antisemites trying to discredit a website post like a parody of early 20th century ignorance.

    1. You may lose interest in politicians, but politicians will never lose interest in you.

      1. Are you making the case for the abolishment of politicians? Anyone that can’t mind there own business isn’t worthy of living in a free society.

  44. Enemy advances, we retreat.
    Enemy halts, we harass.
    Enemy tires, we attack.
    Enemy retreats, we pursue.
    We grow stronger, they grow weaker.
    Time is on our side,
    As truth guideth our progress

  45. The internet amplifies a lot of this to bullshit levels. Live your life the way you want to, in the real world, forgot about living your life on the internet, or through the lens of the internet. What can these social justice tumblr warriors do to you? Write some crap on a blog no one but other mentally deranged idiots will read? And then what? So some chick says she’s a feminist, you chuckle and say, “that’s cute” and you move on. Again what can they do to you? Get off the internet, get your life off of the internet, and things are not so bad.
    There is a zen expression, heijoshin, which translates to “always keep a calm spirit”. Like most zen sayings there are always deeper meaning than what is on the surface. So, at once it means, don’t get angry keep your mental state calm. But it also means don’t show your true self to your opponents. Traditional teachers put great emphasis on cultivating this sense, heijoshin, when your mental state is steady, there will be no doubt, no hesitation, no lingering, you will simply do.

  46. 1 day “the repubs must go”, the next day “align ourselves w/ conservatives”, which is it?

    1. republicans, at present, aren’t conservatives. They’re socialist lite and therefore part of the problem as it relates to feminism.

  47. Men shouldn’t have to live in fear of having their telephone conversations secretly recorded, their livelihoods taken as a result of their political donations, their freedom and education crushed because of a sexual assault allegation. Notice that each of the three things I mentioned are happening through objectionable means–illegal recording, public lists of donors, and lack of due process. Our ideological enemies believe that the ends justify their means.
    Andrew Breitbart, a man who changed the world, said “Politics is downstream from culture.” Therefore, if you want to change politics, change culture. However, the article you linked to correctly notes that our enemies have a strangle-hold on culture.
    That is from lack of competition, and that is our failure. However, there is nothing stopping us from beating them on the artistic battlefield. We can make movies, write books, and sing songs too.
    The key is that we must mock their ideas, not the people themselves.
    If you practice game, the feminist girls will still want you, despite their cognitive dissonance. If you practice game, guys will want to learn from you, despite their jealousy of your success. This will be enough to guarantee our existence.
    Winning the war is not possible under current circumstances.

  48. Fellas, Fellas, Fellas…
    you are forgetting one thing:
    This blue-pill shit is only a phenomena of The West.
    In other parts of the world, our brethren is having the time of their life.
    Take a look at this dude for instance!
    Watch and learn, Fellas!
    Watch and learn.

    (Do not post any disrespectful comments about the looks of his wives, this man is our friend and brother and he deserves our respect for teaching other dudes how to do stuff)

    1. And by the way, muslim girls comes in all shapes and sizes.
      Picture if you had 4 x of this girl featured below, competing to make you happy, like in the video above, – and you`re pretty much set.
      Take a look a this beautiful documentary.
      The girl is a Virgin until her wedding night AND the bridegroom actually buys her AND he probably gets a receipt.
      That means he OWNS her, fair and square and can thus look forward to a happy and fulfilling life with her – and 3 more like her.
      Take a look!
      Gentlemen of ROK, I hereby present

      1. if he owns them then they are slaves. Way to play into the progressives hands

        1. So what?
          Then we simply need to change the judicial system so that men CAN own women.
          Fuck the “progressives”.

        2. what idiots are voting this up. What planet are you living on. The whole point of this article is a fucking reality check

  49. Many good points above, but disagree on the conference. The blowback against it is a feature, not a bug.

  50. Its a lot of fun shouting at things you don’t like, but by and large it achieves nothing. In fact if in any way the point is to be persuasive it is often counter-productive. This is not merely a function of rhetoric or psychology, but of the nature of the beast before us. The best articles or arguments in the world can when combined by a slurry of a undisciplined comments be use to show that a particular kind of speech, or online community or whatever is purveying hate. When this happens it is not just an attack. It is the method whereby that particular aforementioned beast maintains power.
    As such web sites that can targeted by social justice warriors and other policemen are not in my opinion exactly insignificant: rather to the extent that they can be portrayed as a thing called hate, they can be used as a source of energy. That is to say that there is a paradox here: the thing attacked is also necessary to do the thing doing the attacking. That is the nature of the machine. Without fuel for the anti-hate furnace the engine would not run.
    This makes strategy and discipline kind of important. I think Roosh is absolutely right in principle, including about trends, and the ratio of the drop to the water in the bucket, but as long as we can avoid underestimating the enemy, it also makes sense not to overestimate that enemy. The key strength does appear to be organisation and numbers. A third thing is ideas.
    Personally I believe once you get the ideas right, which is to say once you can punch a hole right through the centre of your opponents argument in such a way that they stammer for a response, then part of the infrastructure is already gone.
    There are huge contradictions, paradoxes, absurdities in the leftist progressive ideological house of cards. Feminist equality for one thing does not add up? Huge numbers do not believe feminism to be somehow the same as equality. The idea of equality is increasingly degenerating into inter-group politics, where important groups, and neglected marginal groups are overlooked (use their own methods of critique and deconstruction to destroy them). But if we identify the right weakness and press on it like a sadist would a wound, then some part of the infrastructure will start to crack.
    As for organisation and numbers, this requires some kind of legitimacy. Anti-hate is designed to prevent the possibility of anything but so-called ‘progressive’
    ideas being taken seriously. If you consider the case of UKIP in the UK nearly all the media attacked the party and refused to grant them legitimacy or a mouthpiece on that basis. That is no longer the case because ultimately the anti-machine could not contain what for many people were legitimate (rather than racist) concerns about uncontrolled immigration. If the issue is real, and can be presented as real then eventually it will make its way into the public discourse.
    Progressivism and feminism cannot control the public discourse for ever.

  51. Now that the blue pill life has become so thoroughly and conspicuously insane, it is itself responsible for creating many red pill converts. I’m one. Many males will already be fed up with blue pill BS in Middle School, and many more in HS. They may take advantage of a bit for feckless sexual hookups in college, but it doesn’t take very long after that for men to want nothing to do with it. Especially now that many of them are being raised by single whores, their loathing for women and the equalitarian ways is intense. I say encourage the Blue Pill lifestyle, and even encourage them to run further to their logical conclusions. We should finally get them to come out in favor of transexual child rape. We need them to argue forcefully for the castration of men who have looked at porn. We want them to picket local campus bars waving signs that say “Ladies’ Night is Rape Night!” The more we let the Blue Pill be itself, the more people will flock to Red Pill. By fighting Blue Pill, we give it more time to become the new normal. If we just push it to boldly go, their “new normal” will be too much freak show, too fast. The Blue Pill is loathsome. Let it do its work.

  52. Fellas. If history have taught us anything, it is this.
    If you want something, simply invent a new “right” and collect as many followers as you can. It really is that simple.
    For instance:
    “All Godfearing men have the right to 10 Virgin wives. If he cannot get them himself, the state shall provide them for him.”
    “A woman is the property of her husband and must obey him in every way”
    “Women do not have the right to vote”.
    Have those 3 written into law, and you`re all pretty much set.
    Politics is not rocket science.
    It is about getting elected and then simply write what laws you fancy.
    It really isn`t more complicated than that.

  53. Thank you, Roosh. I think you are right with your recommendations. There are a lot of men in all sorts of spheres who would be open to the red pill message if they heard it.
    WRT your first recommendation, being an older man, I don’t know much about the gaming community, apart from what I’ve seen when my sons played. And while my gym is not a hard core bodybuilding gym, the men there who are dedicated, both young and old, really are striving to better themselves in a way that touches something deep inside them. They appreciate being pushed to excel, and their quiet admiration of another man handling more weight than they can translates into real respect; I know, I’ve both given and received it. I think some red pill theory, a little moral support or affirmation for what they’re trying to attain, would go a long way to winning a hearing for other red pill ideas.
    I’d suggest other spheres/communities that would resonate with red pill thought would include active military personnel, veterans, and the NRA.
    WRT your third recommendation, I’ve been reading manosphere sites for only a few months but I’ve seen clear commonalities with traditional, paleo-conservative, libertarian, and (dare I say it?) religously conservative thought. Arthur Brooks and the AEI are excellent; there are many more. One needn’t hitch onto a political agenda to acknowlege when somebody else “over there” is saying the same thing that we’re saying “over here” and providing a link and the occasional kudo. That’s how ideas spread and coalitions are formed. And maybe it’s true that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I suppose the problem within the manosphere would be that the Enjoy The Decline school of thought probably wouldn’t support this recommendation, leading, as it must, to fighting the decline and uncomfortable questions about authority.
    Lastly, I do share your pessimism about the direction of the world and our potential to change it. As Russell Kirk said, “Just because we are borne away by the flood doesn’t mean we have to sing ‘hallelujah’ to the river god.” Still, we aren’t beaten until we give up. And I, for one, am still kicking.

  54. Living in the real world is a choice. I’ve chosen to reside here. You have chosen to live in the real world. Others not so much. I’ve come to realize when dealing with the rest of the cheesy-cornballs that live in fairytale village is to be the man. What would a man do? He would lead his children to prosperity and fortune. Treat everyone in fairytale village as a child and they will follow you too. If they kick you out of the village build your own city. Choose and act accordingly. For me, I’m the man and the leader.

  55. Fellas!
    Whats up with this “a womans no is a no”-crap?
    It most certainly is not.
    I`ve had girls start off by saying:
    “No, no, no! No, no, no!.. it`s too big for my asshole!! Au, au, au, no, no, no!”
    And then a little bit later: “Uh, uh, uh, uh. Oh. oh oh..”
    Before they finish off with “Yes, yes, yes, ah ah ah, fuck me, fuck me, fuck me harder!!!…”
    So, to conclude.
    These claims that “No means no” – are just pure and utter bullshit.
    I know from personal experience that a womans “No, no, no” can change into a “Yes, yes. yes, fuck me harder!”
    And that you can take to the bank.

      1. “Who do you think you are dealing with here?”
        How the fuck should I know?
        You signed off as “guest”, so I guess I`m dealing with..
        …”guest” ???

    1. And that you can take to the bank.
      Either there or to your local penetentiary, so you can save the Police the effort of having to take you there themselves. This seems like a Feminist sock puppet to me.

      1. Taken together with his advocating ownership and therefore slavery of women i would consider that a given

        1. Here is what I advocate.
          This is how a man should live his life.
          Each man King of his household, with 3 wives/concubines, who refer to their husband as “Your Highness”.
          Like this:

      2. @ Apollo, Michale Mobius1 and Guest:
        What`s with the Goddamned attitude?
        Don`t call me a “feminist”.
        I`m a radical Anti-feminist. And I`m not joking.
        The story above is a true story. I wanted to fuck her up the ass, and she was complaining that my dick was too big for her asshole.
        But instead of giving up, I kept at it until the whole thing was in.
        And then she actually started to enjoy it.
        So she went from “No, no, no, it`s too big..”
        to “Yes, yes, yes fuck me harder”
        Thus proving that the old “A womans no is a no” is just pure bullshit, because many times a “no” can turn into a “yes” if you persist.
        Now to Michael Mobius1, regarding ownership of women.
        I am a firm beliver in owning women.
        I think women should be the actual property of first their fathers and then their husbands. And my point was to show that there are places around the world were that is the case.
        And if you disagree with me – and if you do not think men should have the right to own women, – then you are the feminist. Not me.
        And in that case you can go fuck yourself with a chainsaw, because I hate all feminists, always.
        But if you`re not a feminist, then here is the thing:
        You fellas need to stop thinking about The West as “The World”. Because it is not.
        There`s a big world out there where dudes are having a great time.
        Like the Egyptian dude, who has his wifes compete to please him.
        So my point is this: Look outside the narrow boundries of The West. Plenty of guys move to other countries.
        And in many countries a man can still be truly happy and still be King of his castle. Now personally, I have things that keep me in my country which I will not and cannot leave.
        But for you fellas, if you don`t have any ties that keep you in your countries, you should seriously think about relocating to places where you can live the dream.
        I for one, would have no trouble in, for instance, moving to Africa and buying my girls from Boko Haram at 12 dollars each, because I truly don`t give a fuck about what they say on CNN.
        But speaking of Africa, just to give you an impression of what I`m talking about, take a look at the video below:
        This is the Royal Reed Zulu dance. Each year, thousands of Zulu Virgins gather to dance for the King. Bare chested and bare butts.
        Now imagine bying 20 – 30 of those and keep them as your wifes and concubines.
        Make them them sing and dance for you, and then line them up for some carnal knowledge.
        After that, have them cook for you and then stand in a semi circle around your throne (sofa) and waive palm-branches to make you a soothing wind .
        That`s what I`m talking about, fellas.
        True life-quality. And that means having your own hareem of wives to please you, cook for you, sing and dance for you.
        And if you disagree, then I suggest taking the ACTUAL red pill. Not the one with a blueish sort of hue to it, but THE ACTUAL RED PILL.
        Here`s the Royal Reed Zulu dance:

        1. “And if you disagree with me – and if you do not think men should have the right to own women, – then you are the feminist. Not me.”
          It doesn’t really matter whether you’re a sock-puppet feminist (I will give you the benefit of the doubt) or some variety of orientalist with upbeat views on human slavery. Either way your views can do nothing but harm in the context in which you express them, except for progressives who will meet your comments with glee….it will confirm their world-view, and fortify them in the power that they wield.

        2. Stop being such a drama-queen, Michael.
          I consider owning women, perfectly natural.
          Men has owned women for thousands of years and that is good, right and just.
          When men stopped owning women, look what you got Michael:
          And the more we loosen our grip on women, the worse it becomes.
          So, I advocate ownership of women.
          Which is a real simple consept and it goes like this:
          Your women are your property. My women are mine.
          You do to your women what is good in your eyes and what you see fit. And I`ll do the same to mine.
          If your women are cheeky and rude towards you, then you punish them in any way you see fit.
          And then you simply give other men that same respect in return, and encourage them to treat their women as they see fit.
          And that`s the way it goes, in sweet harmony.
          You see, Feminism cannot exist if men stop to interfere with how other dudes treat their women.
          If men stand together and say
          “No, you bitches, there will be no laws against domestic violence because each man is The King of his household and he can do whatever he wants to his own women…”
          Then that`ll be the end of it.
          Furthermore, Michael, this site is called Return of KINGS” and not “Return of Whining Faggots”.
          So think “Henry the 8th”, instead of “Liberace.”
          And furthermore The Lion does not care what the snake thinks of him.
          Now here`s coool little video-clip to cheer you up.
          I wish you well as King of your castle, and you wish other fellas well, as King of theirs. Simple as that:

        3. You are deep in character.
          “Men has owned women for thousands of years and that is good, right and just.” The first part is exactly what a feminist militating against patriarchy might say. The second part is what a feminist trolling against patriarchy might hope nasty misogynists would vote up.
          The kinds of ownership rights you describe are alien to the west and the east alike: right back to the code of hammurabi women have had rights, including ownership rights themselves. Slaves were slaves, but women have never been slaves by virtue of their gender. They have never been owned.
          As for kingship this does not imply ownership. In today’s context it implies leadership. You can argue that it should mean more but that’s neither here nor there. You can assert your divine right, but for good or bad there will be rather more appealing to their vindicaie contra tyrannos. To argue what you argue is absurd. I believe that is why you argue it.
          It is true male leadership is natural. Some women are leaders, but far, far more men are leaders than women. There are no structural inequalities that account for this . Yet at present they are hamstrung by a society intent upon unseating them at any cost mainly because there are people like you who say that “men have owned women for thousands of years “. That analysis is what leads to socialists to say lets redistribute more and more power to women.
          You describe oppression and pretend to celebrate it in the hope that people will fall into your little spider trap

        4. No Michael, I do not.
          What I argue is a Brotherhood of Men, where you treat your women as you want, and I treat my women as I want.
          Simple as that.
          Each man under his olive tree surrounded by his females and ruling them after his own heart.
          That is what I argue.
          A no-interference deal between Men, that will lead to peace on earth.
          Do you remember Suzanne Vega? And her hit song “My name is Luca” ? Well I argue the exact oposite of that.
          “If you hear something strange a night, some kind of trouble somekind of fight… ” then just mind your own fucking business.
          If a guy beats his wife, chances are she`s earned it. And it`s none of your fucking business anyway, because she`s his property and your interference is thus a breaking of the Divinely given Commandment that says:
          “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
          — Exodus 20:17 (NIV)
          In other words “Don`t let the bitches divide and conquer us.”
          That`s the principle. And if that means that some bitch must suffer terribly at the hands of her tyrant-husband, then so be it.
          At least you`ll be free to treat your women as you see fit. And so will I.
          Now regarding your claims about feminist trolling, they are just bullshit. This is a site for Men, and I argue my sollution to the feminist-plague.
          Your claim that I cannot argue those “because some feminist-whore might say “”see! Men are awful” “, is just ridiculous.
          My sollution irradicates that problem altogether, by removing womens rights altogether, and thus leaving them no room to create divisions among men.
          “You`re husband beats you you say? Well, that`s tough luck, but I`m not going to do anything about it, BECAUSE when the day comes I might have to give my own wife(s) a good and proper spanking, if she/they step out of line, so suck it! And fuck off! And do what your husband tells you, and he might go easier on you!”
          Do you understand now, Michael?
          Now if you`re going to persist in your claims, then I must conclude that you are the feminist-troll, seaking to divide men instead of uniting them.
          Otherwise, enjoy these pictures of feminist-whores being arrested by the cops. They are truly sweet to behold:


        5. You need to stop trying to appeal and reason with feminists and socialists. Feminists exist to push their agenda for women, while we push the opposite. They are our primary enemy. We need to focus on being reasonable towards men who are screaming out for help.
          We are all here because we know that the dating marketplace/society is skewed greatly towards women. Firewing is showing an example of a culture, on planet earth, where it is the opposite. Whether we believe in men “owning” women or not, we certainly believe in men controlling their household and making decisions for their families without third party interference.

        6. A declarative statement has its own purpose which is not always easy to divine. I wonder what argument it advances? But I’ll leave you to your vision – perhaps you are in a land where it has some meaning
          Meanwhile I will focus on the moral case for male leadership.

        7. Fair argument but which is it? A feminist troll or oriental despot? Both maybe? Neither? Either way a specific argument was made that feeds into the progressive analysis. As for men screaming out for help that’s true, but they don’t need fantasies, they need to be reality oriented.

        8. You can do better than just the “moral” case for male leadership, Michael.
          Here is the DIVINE case for male leadership:
          “And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.”
          Genesis 2:18 King James Bible
          So God created Eve as a “help” for Adam:
          Thus, women were created to serve their men.
          And if she rebells against her role as a “help”, then she rebells against her Creator.
          And rebellion against God is Satanic.
          Thus women were created by God to serve their men – as a “help” – and not an “equal”.
          And all attemps at skewing that hierarchy, is Satanic.
          It is that simple, Michael.
          Have a nice day.

        9. You make your argument clearly, at last.
          But why do you distinguish between the moral case for male leadership and the divine. If scripture says so and men neglect to demonstrate their leadership because they simply fall back upon the ‘law’ as though it were a crutch then who does that serve?
          Men have become weak. A man who ‘rules’ without
          demonstrating this ‘right’ to lead will make a fool of himself.
          If men should lead women, or anybody, then they must demonstrate their fitness. That means “arguing your case that you may be proved right”, including to those who may not believe in the terms of reference of your belief system.
          The onus is not only upon the evangelist to evangelise but to evangelise well. By that I mean without reference or recourse to scripture. Necessarily.

        10. Well, you could put it this way:
          Many men have turned from God and do no longer adhere to Scripture.
          Satan and his minions, aka the feminist, have used that to create divisions among men, and they have wedged in feminism between the cracks, so to speak.
          They have done that by using the code of Chivalery “against itself”.
          By that I mean the old code of Chivalery that prescribed that you should protect “widows and virgins”.
          Now, “widows and virgins” were women of virtue, and hence worthy of protection. The assumption being that the widow had served her husband and God all her life, and that the virgin saved herself for marriage as God has prescribed.
          But when men turned from God, “widows and virgins” were expanded by the feminists to include “all women”.
          The worthy and the unworthy alike.
          Which is a mockery of morality.
          A knight should defend the worthy, and not fight the case of the unworthy. So through the heresy of feminsm and sexual liberation, the old code of chivalery has been expanded from protecting “widows and virgins” to protecting “Godless feminist whores and harlots who`s had 12 dicks up her asshole in the past 3 months”.
          Which ofcourse is a perversion of justice.
          This is why I argue against interfering in other mens treatment of their women. Under the old code of chivalery, you were supposed to defend Godfearing women who had no-one else to defend them.
          But a married woman, is not amongst those.
          A married woman is supposed to be defended by her husband, if she deserves protection at all.
          She is not supposed to be defended by random strangers AGAINST her husband, in order to provide her with power and dominance over him and his children.
          And that is crack in the fortress that the feminists have exploited. And what we call “White Knighting”.
          Therefore, as a fix to that, men should cease to interfere in other dudes marriages.
          So if a Virgin saves herself for marriage and chooses a Godfearing man, then naturally, he will treat her according to scripture – IF SHE behaves according to scripture. That is “submissive to her husband as unto God Himself”.
          If she on the other hand chooses a Godless man, there is no telling what he`ll do and she`ll have no defense from neither her husband – nor anyone else, if he decides to chain her to the radiator in the basement.
          Then she can simply blame herself for choosing a Godless man to begin with.
          And in addition, I argue that as a collective punishment for the heresies and evil deeds of the Feminists, men should now have more than 1 wife.
          Each man should have his own hareem of concubines/wifes, that he owns and can do with as he sees fit.
          That will put women back in their place. And if they`re unhappy with being wife number 17, then well, shit happens and they can blame the feminists who made this re-action necessary.

        11. An interesting if eccentric analysis. I think this could go on a long time and I’d prefer not to spend any more time on what amounts now to a debate about religion, however there is something in the idea that what you call the chivalry of men has been used against us, although I would describe this much more broadly as a question of noble ideas, generosity of spirit and the natural protective instinct that you seem to equate with chivalry (a medieval concept with somewhat complex origins).
          You are right to say the state is now at war with the male headed household and again that feminism / progressivism exploits this, but your schematisation is too neat and unrealistic, like some ideal republic or utopia of old. The fact that you envision Godly Rule of the family by the male head doesn’t change this. People are flawed, both men and women, even when they aim to be God-fearing, and where such flaws arise there must be recourse to justice.

        12. Hello Michael.
          Funny you should mention “some ideal republic or utopia of old.”
          First of all, that is exactly it.
          I`m not into “Game” like these other guys speak of, but I am looking for a new societal model of how the world is supposed to work.
          Society has reached it`s bottom and a new system must replace it. So you are absolutely right about that.
          I used to fuck bitches en-masse, but not any more, because I`ve decided I`m not going to fornicate with whores who`s had other dudes dicks inside them, as a mattter of principle.
          That means that in my view, the first guy who fucks a girl, owns her.
          If I`m going to bang chicks, they must be Virgins and pure as the driven snow.
          Secondly, a society that is not based on The Will of God, has, OFCOURSE, no interest for me.
          I do not bother with secular ideas at all – and find them a complete waste of time. .
          I am an Old School Guy of the Old Testament.
          Kings 11:3 states that Solomon “had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines.” and to my knowledge, King Solommon was content with that.
          I`ve just finished watching the film-version of “The Handmaid`s tale” from 1990.
          A sort of science-fiction movie that probably aimed to be some sort of feminist-propaganda showing how supposedly “horrible” a Theocratic Patriarchy is supposed to be.
          Needless to say, I took the movie the exact oposite way and thought
          (with a couple of modifications, such as that The handmaidens should be Virgins)
          Now If you can see past the all the pathetic attempts at making you “feel” for the female character, and instead identify with “The Commander” then this is a great film and a marvelous vision of how the world is supposed to be.
          So watch the movie in the exact oposite way of how the author intended it to be seen, and see what you think:
          At this link below, you can watch it for free:

          Take care and Long live The Republic of Gilead!

        13. He he, the funny thing is that I didn`t even know this book or movie existed, until last night.
          The only reason I discovered it, was due to another article here on ROK called “On the importance of fiction writing” published here on ROK on June the 15th.
          The article said
          “Margaret Atwood’s execrable The Handmaiden’s Tale explores the modern woman’s sheer terror of family life, sex and religion. In it, a totalitarian Christian sect takes over America, resulting in the collapse of gender equality and the creation of a world based on violent hierarchy.”

          On The Importance Of Fiction Writing

          So naturally I thought, “Hmm, that sounds very interesting” and went to search for a movie version of it.
          And as it happened, it pretty much summed up all the things you and I have talked about over these last few days, – before I saw the movie, and it even provided technical sollutions as to how such a society that we`ve talked about, could work in real life.
          So, he he, miracles do happen. 🙂
          It would be very funny indeed, to take the worst fears of the Godless feminists and use their worst nightmare, as template to create the exact society they fear the most.
          Like they used the code of Chivalery against us.
          He he he.
          All we need to do, is to remove all the anti-semetic and racist parts, were people were treated differently due to skin colour- and also remove the just plain evil parts, such as the shredding of babies with birth defects. And in addition ofcourse, the nuns shall never be harmed, but instead serve as rolemodels for women, in their service and dedication to God.
          I am a proud Sexist, but I`m not a racist in any way, whatsoever. And all babies must be allowed to live too, ofcourse, regardless of their birth defects.
          And then we`re left with a pretty good society!
          Because in a good Theocratic Fundamentalist Christian Totalitarian Patriachy, there is no place for evil of any kind.

        14. “in a good Theocratic Fundamentalist Christian Totalitarian Patriachy , there is no place for evil of any kind.”
          I did enjoy that sentence. That should be on a T-shirt

        15. “What daring, what outrageousness, what insolence, what arrogance!! … I salute you.” Do not listen to the bleating of the sheep Firewing! You are a REAL Man not a weak kneed egalitarian socialist like 99% of the other fawning sheeple. Today Conan would be called a Redneck not a Barbarian so keep conquering, dominating and being strong because Barbarians/Rednecks kick Asss!

        16. The opinions of Lesser Men, a shudra such as yourself, mean nothing. You are an egalitarian socialist. Most Americans are socialist and do not know it. Believe in womens rights? Women should have the same rights as a man? If you do then you are a liberal socialist. Believe in one man one vote? Believe that all races are equal? Believe that there is only one race, the human race? Believe in world peace? Believe everyone can be an American regardless of race, creed, color, religion or national origin? Believe women should work and wear pants instead of raising a family and wearing feminine clothes? Believe abortion to be acceptable? Believe divorce is acceptable? Believe homosexuality is acceptable? Believe race mixing is acceptable? Believe America should support Israel? Believe that one of the most horrendous crimes imaginable is anti-Semitiism and racism? Believe in Going to War to Spread Democracy? Believe in a strong military to fight non-existent terroriists? If you do then you are a liberal socialist.

        17. The world does not operate on the basis of reality but on the perception of reality. You are an egalitarian socialist, a liberal, and you like society for the most part the way it is but just like the disillusioned Left who broke from their brethren back in the 1970’s and became the Neo-Conservatives or NeoCons there is nothing conservative about them, or you, except your personal preference, predilection, taste for socialism.
          Neo-conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer drew the line between “paleo-conservatives,” and neo-cons like himself by stating that, as former liberals, they have “staked their ground for decades on colorblindness and a reverence for the civil rights movement as originally defined.” [Lott and the Right, By Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post, December 20, 2002]

        18. you get all that from a position criticising the legal ownership of women?
          And you don’t see anything troll-some about the sentence “in a good Theocratic Fundamentalist Christian Totalitarian Patriachy there is no place for evil of any kind”?

        19. “paleo-conservatives,” and neo-cons like himself by stating that, as former liberals, they have “staked their ground for decades on colorblindness and a reverence for the civil rights movement as originally defined.”
          interesting. could be something in that, but a speculative characterisation nonetheless. Throughout history converts, apostates, etc have been the most zealous, and motivated, often the most vicious. Re. conservatism, is ex-trotskyite peter hitchens no different from his dead liberal brother?

        20. I would argue that Krauthammer never changed his politics. He was and is a liberal. Your argument about converts is absolutely 100% correct but I fear that Leo Strauss got into his head a long time ago and he is still in residence. Just my 2 cents worth.

        21. strauss is slippery, but many think he’s the opposite of a liberal (together with the neo-cons). He seems to have been a zionist of some sort, and some kind of proto-neo-con, but not obviously a liberal – you might find this interesting I would also recommend the 4 part documentary Century of the Self which treats of mid to late 20th century political manipulation, with Strauss in a starring role at least as a sort of eminence grise figure

  56. See, a long time ago, when Paul elam, myself and others began exploring an idea called ‘Zeta Masculinity’, the nucleus was existing outside the box of traditional thinking (‘gender roles’ if you prefer). Where Paul (and others) disagreed with me was the subject of Game. Or more truthfully the utility, nay wisdom, of learning what makes women tick in the sex department. To this day, many mras echo radfems in their demands that women change who they find attractive, or their demands that men eschew women altogether, failing that, not to change one iota to impress, or ‘pussy beg’. Myself, I believed Game was an important component in activism, especially when activising against feminists. Understanding female psychology better could only be positive, in my view.
    Others disagreed, saying men should feel positive self worth based on themselves, not their success with women. And I see their point, as many puas are completely consumed with the drive to game women as much as possible…these men truly do measure self worth via attractiveness to women. Many of us who have traveled the path have met these guys, and the vacuum where their depth should be is palpable, and frankly in that aspect, mras are correct.
    Too much of anything is ungood.
    I started two attempts at webzine to address this belief, to foster the cross pollination I hoped to see, one called MRM! And the other called menZ magazine. In it, I featured Paul Elam, roissy, obsidian, fidelbogen, typhonblue, and many others of varying manospherean beliefs. In the course of that magazine, Red Pill became the symbolic heart of the manosphere ( ht/ keoni Galt), and the term ‘manosphere’ came into being (ht/obsidian)…that’s how long ago it was.
    Imagine my gratification at seeing the Red Pill subreddit, especially after the travesty mensrights became.
    One of the things the MRM tried marketing-wise (at least, when I had any influence) was narrow, or niche, marketing. No need to convert people, simply speaking to those who already feel that way is more than enough growth to manage. Political Correctness ( the ‘pretty lies’ in Roissy’s ‘Where pretty lies perish’ slogan) has infested most of the online manosphere, however, and so has ‘fear of looking bad’ (the impetus Behring PC itself) now goads many ‘activists’ into neutering themselves.
    The MRM, as you state, has no chance of toppling the power structure. It should be obvious that insanely well connected forces are arrayed at all turns, itching to thwart the progress of the MRM. Of course, they simply bring more eyeballs by doing so, butthe larger point is, they are creating a public narrative. Repetition of a lie eventually drowns out the truth. Basic propaganda. This is why the mMRM fucked up so badly by choosing to dissociate with puas over the Eliot Rodger thing, rather than point out he was an anti-manosphere white knight narcissist…not MRA OR pua. Instead, they allowed the wedge to be driven deeper. Its as if they never heard of divide and conquer before….
    Good news though. I have decided to put together a new Red Pill publication. Only this time I’m thinking an app, not a PDF. I would be honored if I could get permission to reprint a few articles from here, at first, and when the app goes pay, draw on some talent as well as make a few bucks for some folks.

    1. Those “insanely well connected forces” is generally of Jewish Elitist origin. Name it, expose it, knock the legs out from under its table.

      1. Follow the money.
        Its never been about “equality”.
        Its about Money and Power.

  57. It took generations to get into this mess, it will take generations to get out of it. For those who opt out of having kids, be a mentor, that the word may spread beyond your lifetime.

  58. And always remember to reframe, reframe, reframe. The world “equality” and “equalist” should carry negative connotations. Do not speak like hate or intolerance is a bad thing. Always define things in hierarchies.
    And most importantly, never treat a white liberal with empathy or respect.

    1. Thank you Conquerer Xu! Plain speech is not encouraged and you have laconically laid down the foundational rules of Greater Men. Egalitarianism should be slayed for the vile beast it truly is. But it is not only white liberals who are worthy of disrespect, all of them are equally deserving of the hangman’s noose! “What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women! That is good! That is good.”

  59. Christina H. Sommers rocks.
    She produces The Factual Feminist. She constantly debunks feminists and their made up bunk “statistics.”
    SHE is someone to align with. Also, the Independent Women Forum.

  60. Brothers,
    The movement has been disappointing thus far. A couple thoughts:
    1. We are far too radical for mainstream American media. Fuck them. The media is a gigantic conglomerate of liberals who pander to women’s emotions and push their ultra-feminized interpretation of society. Our existence appeals to intelligent masculine, hardworking men who have been persecuted by an overbearing nanny-state and seen their values bastardized in mainstream media. Our movement needs to grow through alternate, anonymous channels where we are heard, but not seen. I agree with point #1.
    2. I believe the most effective way to spread the word is by utilizing women. We should be encouraged by the amount of public hate that is being thrown in our direction. Of course women are going to hate us. Getting them to mention us in MSM is the ticket to the ever growing population of disillusioned males. The manosphere’s troll tactics work like a charm. I was brought to the Red Pill by the eating disorder article which blew up virally like no other troll article. At the time, I wondered why “educated” women would congregate over, share, publicly shame, even sign petitions over this article on a website which hadn’t even gained popularity. Once men are directed to the site by women, the logical, potential Red-Pills will interpret troll article as a sarcastic joke, move on to other content, and become enlightened. As we all know, women are not creatures of reason. They point and scream at us publicly, overestimating our current influence and underestimating our future influence.
    3. We are our own worst enemy. The manosphere points out women’s flaws very well, but our fatal flaw must be recognized and dealt with: our competitive nature. Instead of uniting throughout society, the workplace, and the web, we turn everything into a cock-measuring contest. I understand that one of our main ideals is individualism, but the way feminazis and women have united against us is clearly superior to our method of always trying to out-alpha each other. Have more respect for the men you pass by daily: there is a very high likelyhood that they are going through the same struggle as us
    4. Referring to point #3 in the article: yes, yes, and yes! Rush Limbaugh is a known hater of feminism, consistently brags about making the word dirty. Bill O’reilly recently got shafted in a divorce, wrote a book about it, and has questioned the capabilities of a female president…on national tv. Conservatives in the media cannot get away with saying the truth, but you can bet that their Red-Pill values are screaming to be hear. The anti-Republican article is disturbing. As horrible as modern-day politics are, the Republican party is pushing masculine agenda as much as they possibly can. Christianity has also gotten unfair hatred among the manosphere. Women are herd-creatures who naturally follow alpha leadership. They have one of three choices: Hollywood culture, Big Brother Government, or the Bible. Which one would you rather have your women follow?

    1. Really good comment. Briefly on point 1, specifically, “Our movement needs to grow through alternate, anonymous channels where we are heard, but not seen.”
      Consider this – there has never been an easier and better time to do this. In fact, the real conservatives are already doing this. We have all the capabilities, right now, to custom design our own cultural experience, which also means the Men’s Movement can create their own media content be it news or entertainment. Its at our finger tips. You don’t need a million dollar media production suite or recording studio…you can make excellent quality via digital technology. The challenge is this – things developed in reverse, the infrastructure to shed the MSM and feminized culture to include the narrative/agenda is all there, that’s not the issue. The issue is that we desperately need content! We need a MM’s news source, commentary, music and entertainment. It can and is already happening. David Aurini is making his own movie. We can shed this stupid dysfunctional culture like a animal molts it skin.
      What do you think?

      1. I agree that there has never been an easier time for an underground movement. I also agree that we can create the content ourselves. The problem with going mainstream is that the infrastructure is not all there: we still will never get access to the major media outlets unless we are being vilified.
        We can go on satellite radio similar to Howard Stern’s route. If you read his history, he was a trailblazer in pushing non-traditional Red Pill media and objectification of women into the mainstream.
        While I appreciate what Roosh has done for the movement, by observing his youtube videos it is clear that we need a better orator for television or radio. We need a brilliant speaker, with enough passion and conviction to ignite the masses and cause hysteria. Roosh’s calm and laid back demeanor is more suited for game, while Al Sharpton, MLK, Limbaugh, etc create movements by tapping into the emotions of their listeners.
        I look forward to the day when I can contribute articles to ROK. I have already written articles to release myself if I can’t communicate them through here. The movement is not dying. It has just begun, and gaining new allies every day.

  61. The problem IS the solution. With a surplus of lemons make lemonaide. Jews thrive on a surplus of Goyem (Jacob on Esau). PUAs on a surplus of scandalous skanks. The end game is to survive until the sheeple largely cull themselves by collapsing the welfare state. The contest will be in what replaces the current system. If ‘they’ can make a seemless transition by evolutionary degrees, they have won a second Middle Ages. I just hope that when the corruption has exhausted its means of subsistence the genes and memes responsible for all this are ditched for good. That which does not kill something makes it stronger. Survival is indeed victory for an ilk, even though most of its individuals are eliminated, in fact because natural selection is at work. We must endeavor to not make the mistake of sharpening those who are antithetical to our welfare if we get the upper hand, to not make a mortal enemy stronger by times that are not quite tough enough and pave the way for a more potent recrudence.

  62. A quote from cocksure is compelling. (Andrew Breitbart, a man who changed the world, said “Politics is downstream from culture.” Therefore, if you want to change politics, change culture.)
    Culture changes occur slowly and eventually reach a tipping point. Influencing culture is the key for a return to “red pill” ideas to come to the forefront again, and the tipping point may be the eventual financial collapse of the western world. Just as popular culture evolves over the decades, this ROK influence will evolve with it as a more significant voice of reason among the madness we currently experience.
    Patience and the use of reason is the best approach to accomplish this cultural shift.
    Attempting to persuade men to take the “red pill” is a waste of time and energy. This website seems to be searching for a place of its own in the growing popular culture of the new media. Roosh and other writers here, I would propose that you not view this website’s influence with each small battle, but remind yourselves to take the perspective of how will ROK impact western culture over the next two or three decades. Do not seek to remain in the trenches of this struggle, but maintain your position in the tower shining the light of truth for all to see.

    1. The ability to make significant cultural changes has never been easier. Indeed, I agree that culture changes slowly, but consider that feminism changed culture relatively quickly, namely, because it’s top-down and a function of government largess. That said, we have all the capabilities right here and now to start building our own culture. All we need is the content. So, if there are any aspiring film directors here start making stuff and put it on the internet. You can do this with a shoestring budget, existing and accessible technology and a little creativity. In many ways all we have to do is ignore the MSM, its a dying dinosaur anyway, rather, we create our own and “molt” the other. When men are being portrayed the way they are today an alternative WILL be embraced. We just need to step up and create the alternative. Of course, women follow men, so, as our culture rises (as a decent culture/male-centric), guess what, women will follow (they always do), but this time it will be on our terms and territory. The MSM is one the primary reasons why we have feminism; if you can undermine their usage of the MSM you’ll deal a near fatal if not fatal blow to the entire ideology.

  63. Great article. This is definitely a trying era for men. The most important thing however is to not indulge in petty fights with the new intelligentsia and there foot soldiers. I think that this is a perfect time for men to grow in consciousness and awareness and align themselves with principles rather than seeking to change people’s minds via public discourse and politics.
    Regarding political parties. I do believe that the left in this country is entirely out of control (the right is actually no better). The far-left’s most viable outlet for the use of governmental violence (litigation, taxation, imprisonment, banning “litigation” tactics) is the use of the current Democratic party. I would suggest men start supporting 3rd parties such as the libertarian party. The libertarian party is the only real supporter of freedom and of the Constitution. The democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin and both have a vested interest in the perpetual conflict of the “war of the sexes.”
    Align yourself with universal principles and you are invincible.

  64. Also, Leo Tolstoy was quoted as saying
    “There can be only one permanent revolution — a moral one; the regeneration of the inner man.How is this revolution to take place? Nobody knows how it will take place in humanity, but every man feels it clearly in himself. And yet in our world everybody thinks of changing humanity, and nobody thinks of changing himself.”
    This is the perfect opportunity for men to change themselves rather than indulge in the conflict. When one person changes themselves, their world changes. When everyone changes themselves, everyone’s world changes for the better.

  65. The trick is to become like a chameleon while playing the actual role of “agent infiltrateur” – stone-faced yet smiling, pleasant though calm and reserved – yet never off-putting or unnerving so as not to be thought of as someone who ought not be there. If truly done properly, no one can touch you no matter what you real convictions might be. This type of “social camouflage” has actually been a long-standing requirement for a great deal of mankind’s tumultuous history – and its perfection considered an art – as opposed to one reserved only for “creeps” and “weirdos”. Today’s ideologically-inclined social justice warriors have no clue what they are up against, though they themselves are the catalyst for bringing this necessity about in modern-day redpillers.

  66. Well-put, Roosh. I do think, however, that there is a deep discontent bubbling beneath the surface. The failure of liberal progressivism is being increasingly recognized by those on both the left and the right, and it in part explains the rapid advance of populist movements on either side of the spectrum in the past decade.
    But as of now, the Cathedral is still strong. Use cat’s paws and rot the foundations in stealthy ways. We are still in an age of guerrilla warfare, at least until the volcano really erupts.
    Libertarians are probably the most receptive group to us as a whole. Many red pillers are either former or current libertarians.

    1. Yep, liberal progressivism’s failure is and will have far reaching ramifications. Despite their indoctrination, I think the M’s and younger generations will turn viciously on the progs, after all, they’re bearing the full weight of the failures.

  67. Articles like this is why I love ROK. I’ve spread its word around and have turned quite a few friends on to it.

  68. The Left’s weakness is the its holier-than-thou Leftist Singularity, where leftists try to out-left other leftists for the sake of social status signaling. 4chan has successfully exploited this with their troll attacks (the 4chan trolls pretending to be black feminists and “Women of Color”) on feminism (example, #EndFathersDay). The leftists started to hunt down these trolls only to end purging actual feminists. Now feminists from different factions as well as young new feminists are now suspect. Fun times.

  69. Just a question inspired by this article and others regarding the Matrix metaphor.
    O.K., everyone who’s swallowed the red pill sees the Matrix for what it is. My question, following that metaphor and seeing ourselves as Zion fighting a war against an overwhelming enemy, is, what superpowers do we gain from our insight and exit from the Matrix?
    Just thinking about it now I realize, Absolutely, we do! Most importantly, the power we gain with the women in our lives could be considered a superpower (and I do) when compared to the completely useless tools manginas use to try to satisfy their libidos.
    And that is a LOT!
    But is it enough?
    I’m not sure, but right off the bat, I doubt it. Not if we’re talking about eventually taking on/back the culture. Accepting that you as a man have a primary drive to get laid (libido) is the first step to focusing and maximizing this power. But I’m not satisfied with that. To me it seems great, powerful, masculine men have always used this energy to fuel their dreams of social success, conquest, and prestige. I know the difference between having a woman in my life who ties knots around my nuts and one who wants me to TAKE sexual pleasure in her and from her and I can tell you the difference is night and day. After telling my wife to just “get in the bed” and letting myself enjoy all her ministrations I am much more energized and focused when I then leave her to go slay my dragons.
    So are there any other superpowers we gain by seeing the Matrix for what it is? Maybe, maybe not. But as I think about it more, the power of a focused libido may really be all we need to eventually win this war (think of Genghis Khan). After all, human nature is on our side.
    Let me think about it a bit more. I’ll get back to you.

Comments are closed.