When one writes such a word as “victimhood,” what do you think about? If you are red-pilled enough, you must already be aware that it means something overused and stemming from hostile intentions. We are all too familiar with the muh-past-sufferings and muh-present-sufferings narratives pushed down by these organized groups the mainstream dignifies under the name of “minorities.”
Victimhood in general means having part of one’s identity, through one’s real or purported history, tied to past or present undeserved sufferings. We should distinguish between felt victimhood, which pretty much everyone can harbor, and acknowledged or institutionalized victimhood which carries a variety of benefits, such as public commemorations, homage paid by other groups or people, funding, a place in the media and most institutions, moral authority and public empathy.
Such advantages flow from what we can call a victimhood economy, where the group whose sufferings are the most dignified or acknowledged enjoys the greatest share of the market and consequent advantages—exactly as the bigger shareholders of a company will enjoy the biggest dividends.
An intermediary form of victimhood would be one that exists inside a specific group, but has a hard time to get recognition outside. Such a form of victimhood can be kind of frustrating, as the unrecognized will perceive it as a lack of empathy whereas the other will likely mock it, but it also carries on various advantages, be it only the motivation that can flow from anger and quitting a dangerous state of naiveté to a fitter state of, at least, vigilance.
Here I would like to advocate for the idea that, yes, there can be a healthy and a fit victimhood. There are pitfalls to avoid, such as tying too much of one’s identity to past sufferings and living in a state of perpetual trauma, or complaining instead of taking action. Yet, victimhood can also be an asset, especially if it is dominated by a higher awareness instead of dominating said awareness.
Just look at the Jews, who are well-represented at the Ivy League universities, in Hollywood, or almost everywhere there is money to be taken, have politicians kowtowing to them in most Western countries, yet still maintain a fierce communautarian attitude—not to say tribalistic—at the same time than they enjoy a moral authority thanks to what Norman Finkelstein called the Holocaust Industry. Their example shows that enjoying the greater share of the victimhood market can be paired with being, not losers, but the most powerful tribe on Earth.
As I am typing these lines down, I am intimately conscious of the bad reputation victimhood has among our circles. This is normal and natural, for it has been constantly used as a ploy against the dispossessed majority a lot of us hail from. But look at it from another angle: the left does not want us to have any victimhood. There is a big victimhood marketplace out there, and every group or identity acknowledged by the Liberal hegemony has an implicit right to present itself there as having (undeservedly) suffered a lot and still suffering.
The left helped such groups to constitute, i.e. led individuals of particular categories to identify their category as a class and their class as a community of interest competing with others. This has been true with so-called Black identity and with feminism. Both movements are identitarianisms in the sense that they are a separatism based on a feeling of group identity where there was none before, and both have been heavily funded and led by Jews.
On the opposite side, the same left that has been so busy crafting and grievance-mongering so-called “minority” groups has also been very active to deny us any right to victimhood, let alone a dignified identity. We are supposed to be responsible of everything and just exist so we can pay for everyone else. In The Current Year, we can’t have the least piece of the victimhood cake, which is not so incidentally all funded by the Evil White Male through taxes and “redistribution.” This makes sense, given that the victimhood market does not create any wealth per se but piggybacks on those who create it.
Feminists have notoriously killed the nice guy by denying him any right to victimhood, that is, by denying that he had suffered unfairly and consequently had a right to acknowledgement and empathy as a nice guy. In the same way, the left has been busy to paint our identities on a very negative light, insisting that our ancestors had been exploiting everyone else without actually producing anything themselves, and thus making our very identities void of dignity, undeserving, tainted by the “privilege” of having had virtuous and able ancestors.
If we succeed at life, we have no merit because it’s all “white privilege,” and if we fail, we are “failures” and “losers” who cannot even succeed even whereas “privileged.” In said case, it goes evidently—and implicitly—that we should await death in silence, given that we have purportedly no right to public acknowledgement and empathy. In both cases, the idea that we have a “privilege” is a powerful mean to always cast us negatively, no matter what we actually do.
This is how the same left that rants about “white privilege” can also admit that the white working class is actually disenfranchised and even rejoice about its planned death: though these positions are inconsistent logically, they are consistent emotionally as they maintain a negative and stained view of whites in general, no matter our actual situation, no matter what we do.
Facing the giant dishonesty of the giant left, its perpetual narrative-spinning, emotional drama and attention-whoring, it is tempting for us to dig any victimhood at all and take the Stoic pose of the self-minded entrepreneur or of the dispassionate, cynical witness. But digging all victimhood as bad and neurotic lets us powerless in front of the motivated, organized, funded professional victims. Instead, I am strongly inclined to think we should accept some victimhood in our identities. For we have a right to it, and we can grow up more mastery—not less—if we do it right. Here come some arguments to support this idea.
1. The problem with the “I am responsible for everything in my life” attitude
Some years ago, a widespread message on the personal improvement circles was the following: if you take charge of your life, you should consider yourself as responsible for everything that happens to you. At first glance, this looks like rehabilitating merit, and this can be a motivating stance. But if we look deeper, we find that message to be the exact reverse of the “I am responsible for nothing, the majority owes me everything” stance one finds into the acknowledged “minorities” and especially womyn. Here we have an unholy complementarity between the personal improvement guy who takes responsibility for everything and the spoiled brat who rejects all responsibility on him. This is a parody of a true and healthy complementarity between the sexes.
The better way to avoid this pitfall is having a proper notion of the woman’s role. And in order to entertain a right notion, we must also remember how men can be manipulated and tricked. This is something we have been doing more or less implicitly for years on ROK. Now, it is time to do it explicitly when we have to, so that no one else can deny our past hardships nor their responsibility into said hardships. Everyone with a skin in the game must be accountable, no matter what—and this means part of our identity can be connected to the misdeeds of other agents.
2. Their victimhood is exaggerated whereas ours is undervalued
Compare the left’s narrative with reality. The narrative says that every social category now acknowledged and singularized as a “minority” has been “oppressed” by the Evil White Male and Evil White Race. It adds that whites have always been “privileged” and carry a perpetual guilt for being responsible of the undeserved sufferings of groups that are as innocent as angels and can do no wrong. It is historically true that, say, some women have been seduced through trickery or that some whites (actually a very, very few) possessed slaves. But saying that all X have been “oppressed” or exploited is an exaggeration of gigantic proportions.
In reality, so-called white males have been pioneers, land clearers and cultivators, builders, providing husbands, law-abiding workers and honourable soldiers, while women took their fair share of necessary work. Today, most whites in the West are disenfranchised, struggle to find even a basic job, are almost forbidden to talk about a variety of topics and get scolded every day for simply existing on the lands where their ancestors lived for centuries and built everything. We have way more suffered than they acknowledge, and what we went through should give us a right to moral authority and acknowledgement.
3. We are not responsible for the environment we were born into
As a generation, the Millenials were born much after the leftist cultural upheaval had taken place, and thus we were born as frail creatures inside a world they had taken control of. As individuals born earlier than that, we endured history instead of making it as we should have done and as our ancestors have always done, thanks to the left hydra that hijacked it.
Waving the institutional power and being the continuation of the former left, current leftists have at least some moral responsibility for what the West has turned into. The more they participated and benefited from militant cultural Marxism, the more they are responsible in practice for our plight, whereas we the disenfranchised are not responsible for, say, having lived without a father and having underwent pussylessness or huge betaness. We have been unable and suffering nice guys or beta males because of the left. What we did to extract ourselves from that dreadful condition is our responsibility, but the fact that we found ourselves there in the first place is due to them and to their cultural power, not to a defect in ourselves.
4. Bonding through past sufferings
This point closely follows point six from a previous article of mine. We are not alone to have suffered. A lot of us went through the same hardships. Yet, if we do not give dignity to said hardships, we will easily hide them as if they were shameful and shame other men if they speak their mind. Without victimhood, a self-identified nice guy may be accused of being “whiny,” “immature” or a “big baby” by other males, i.e. there will be no masculine solidarity, whereas victimhood allows for bonding through common hardships, solidarity and intracommunitarian help. Having been a nice guy should be a source of dignity, deepness and pride, not something one should constantly hide because of the lack of solidarity between men. Pride can and must flow from both past hardships and accomplishments.
Une précision importante
Once again, when I say we should accept some victimhood as part of our identity, I am definitely not encouraging perpetual whining and refusals to act. Neither am I advocating for a “meninism” that would be a feminism in reverse, thus aggravating the crumbling of society into various competing groups. The victimhood I see as desirable to us is a means to block and even cancel the abusive victimhood of powerful yet unproductive and destructive groups. It is not a way to merely exist inside the victimhood economy, where we have no place (yet?), but a way to find back the way to the true inclusiveness of complementary relationships between men and women and perhaps also between the classes and social functions.
Thus, if neomasculinity wins, we won’t win as the biggest losers but as pillars of society that won’t be tricked again through self-doubt, emotional blackmailing and accusations of “privilege.” Said victory will be easier if we unite through the souvenirs of shared sufferings and strengthened by the memory of negative episodes where other agents played a crucial role.
Of course, victimhood should never be given too important a role, and it should always be annexed to accomplishments, virtues and the ability to lead. Neither whiny MGTOWs, nor jaded witnesses powerlessly talking about mere facts, but true men riding the tigers of their own dark episodes as not to be taken down by the darkness of others.
Read Next: A Greatest Hits Collection Of Millenial Women, Internet Shaming, And Professional Victimhood
Man I think this is one if the best pieces I’ve read here in a while. Well done.
I know it’s just a tiny epigraph and essentially meaningless, but it should be seriously and repeatedly stressed that real men can indeed be victims of people or circumstances beyond our control. After all, shit does happen. The important thing is and forever will be the decision to take personal action to end one’s victimhood; and ideally, to do so without making someone else into a victim in your stead. When faced with the decision to either roll the dice or keep allowing bad things to happen to you, a man should always roll the dice.
Again though, thanks for writing this very good piece, keep em coming.
No. The term red pill is from the matrix. It is a way of seeing the world. It is the OPPOSITE of victimhood.
Not sure if you were trying to reply to the next comment down, or maybe my words (or the piece) was a little unclear or what. But I can’t completely agree – taking the pill isn’t a vaccine against cruel or unjust twists of fate. I’m saying that shit can and will happen to all of us, sooner or later. Your house gets robbed, you get struck by lightning, your mother (Gid forbid) is killed in a car accident, let’s say. If you want something less fate-related and random, say you get a new boss at work and the guy is just completely unreasonable and out to fuck you over, no matter how well you do your job. The red pill just reminds us of the proper way to take action and deal with unfortunate circumstances, rather than just roll over and continue to get shit on as if we’re powerless to change things.
Sure there’s also a big part of red pill that’s about spotting bad outcomes before they happen, getting the hell out of the way — don’t wife up a green haired, tattoo covered theater major, for instance — but I think this article is kinda talking more about the former.
Cheers to you regardless mang. Keep living the example for everybody else to see.
Ive been thinking about your words over dinner tonight, 303summerwalk. Maybe it’s the term “accept” that you disagree with. Like as in, post red pill, a man should never ACCEPT victimhood. Id really like to hear more from you on that. Not luring you into a trap to attack you with some other-level-shit, I swear. I just want a better understanding of what another brother in this movement feels about this stuff. So…hope you get some time I’m the future to come back and elaborate, man. Thats how we build our platforms, I guess. P3AC3!
I disagree with the idea of the ‘nobility of the oppressed.’
As a non-white individual adopted by whites, I heavily embrace my British heritage over my non-white heritage.
Mostly because Britain built the greatest empire in history, and stood alone against Napoleon and Hitler and won.
All my non-white country did was get its ass kicked by almost all of its neighbors.
There is a certain futility in trying to morally calculate who fucked over who the most.
“and stood alone against Napoleon and Hitler and won”
Except that in both cases Russia helped a lot.
The delusional greedy madness of both helped even more.
If both had acted in a more sensible way, they would have kept their empires, and even make them stronger.
More than their possible (or not) victories, we should regret the millions of European lives they carelessly harvested.
Food for thought: they were acclaimed/elected as saviours by their respective nations. Democracy proved to be more deadly than aristocracy, as utopias/ideologies revealed their nightmarish modus operandi.
We know nothing about our destiny. Individuals or nations, families or empires, parties or armies… we’re only the blind leading the blind.
Meanwhile, the hubris grows, as technology progresses.
Exactly. All these idiots repeating shit they read in books and attributing modern day conditions to historical interpretation. Why don’t they focus on the wars of the german confederation and the fact that white germans were spread all over the west afterwards? Why don’t they talk about how the royal proclamation of 1763 directly influenced the declaration of independence in 1776 which was only accepted in 1783. Why doesn’t anyone focus on the scientific fact that brown and white people are the exact same race? Because then they would have to revise history and paint those Vikings with brown skin. Then the cornrows would make more sense, but sensibility is lacking in academia. Fucking retards, the whole lot of them.
During the Battle of Britain Russia was neutral, and the Russian Navy wasn’t very involved in the sea war or the events leading up to Trafalgar. Both were the turning points in their respective conflicts after which an invasion of the British Isles was basically impossible.
To clarify: “The British Empire stood alone against Napoleon and Hitler and won key battles that made Napoleon’s and Hitler’s ambitions to invade the British Isles unfeasible.”
I am not discounting Survorov, von Blucher or even Bernadette in defeating Napoleon, or Zhukov and the Americans in defeating Hitler. As I’ve written before, the key battle of the Napoleonic Wars before Waterloo was really the Battle of the Five Nations, and only a single company sized element of British soldiers were present: a rocket troop seconder-ed to the Swedes. And Survorov was probably the best general of the Napoleonic Wars (Including Napoleon, Ney and Wellesley) before 1809, at which point Wellesley’s achievements outstripped Survorov’s (although Suvorov had the disadvantage of dying in 1800, and may have outstripped Wellesley as a General).
Britain shines as the only nation not to suffer a major setback against Napoleon and for awhile was the only power in Europe standing against Hitler.
Unlike many of the Russo and German-philes in the manosphere, my nationalism for the Empire before 1957 isn’t based on taking down the achievements of other nations, especially in earth-shatter conflicts such as the Napoleonic Wars.
Bottom line, it was impossible for Napoleon to win…Fighting for 15 years against all major European powers, from Portugal to Russia, was just to much. He dad to try and have a great ally and he did try it with Spain and Russia, even Austria…but things got terrible wrong. The Napoleonic wars are a incredible time in History.
Dying sure is a disadvantage.
…and the stupid brits fucked themselves and every other white person over by helping the commies ruin Germany like they ruined the rest of eastern europe earlier.
At least you realize you are just a dumb nigger who would be starving to death if not for a “Brangelina” couple of virtue signalling, liberal, race traitors with inverted morality who could have adopted a white orphan instead.
Touché 😉
You’re just an Uncle Tom then. British colonialism reached as far as it did via divide and conquer, breaking down of certain traditional values (depending on the culture), and use of extremes, such as drugs to destroy society. Other societies at least had honor and did not resort to such things in warfare. Even here on ROK, some whites advocate the “do-anything/burn/rape/etc.”. This is why Western culture was, and is still being spread all over the world. It wasn’t because they were inherently better; in fact, it was because they were willing to be worse, that it spread. It is because many whites are ignorant of these facts and do not acknowledge that there is such hatred against them by minorities. Do you know what the US soldiers do in other countries? In Japan, in Iraq, proxying with ISIS in Syria, etc. All over the world, the US is hated by many for similar reasons that people hated the British. And the world sees the ignorant masses electing trash into power over and over. Yes, there is a power structure and complexities that they do not understand, but to be arrogant and say that we are better than them would be to simplify their complexities too and divide them up into an us-them mentality.
Most whites today are ok, as are most people from their respective races. However, the prevalent ideologies that are held by those races are spread, and benefit, those in power. The problem is not whites, but white supremacy, which is an ideology held my a minority of white people, most of who are in power to benefit their own (mainly Jews), and not the majority of whites. Yes, there is a recent change that help minorities. The help, unfortunately, should focus on the root (for example, for BLM: focus on police accountability, not racism. Focus on education spending, not welfare spending) rather than giving another ‘not my fault’ card to play, which help no one. Even so, whites have an easier time getting a job, getting a woman, etc. The help minorities get helps i certain situations, not all.
There was a white guy who literally (Mein Fuhrer) said to my father “kiss my ass, I’m white” and those black guys we all know who act like as though you owe them something. The point is that there are certainly people that fit the stereotype, and they are the minority, but at the same time, stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason.
He’s an uncle Tom for not staying on the plantation, and Western culture isn’t “inherently better”.
Um…yeah. Thanks for your contributions.
No, but you took the plantation’s strawman.
I’m just not into your cultural relativism, guy.
I don’t adopt cultural relativism, I simply pointed out the ridiculousness of adopting the conqueror’s culture simply because they’re stronger. By the OP’s reasoning, societies subjugated by the US should adopt US’s heritage simply because they have more power. Sounds like how government backed feminism works.
Britain is a island country relatively void of natural resources that managed to exert control over 25% of the world’s population and land mass for roughly 3 centuries.
Africa is a massive continent blessed in natural resources and is marked by famine, disease, and desperate poverty.
If you don’t attribute this difference in outcome to ideology, what do you attribute it to?
They simply manipulated the local populations to work against each other (as the west does now- Starbucks does this with some coffee, where the locals compete against each other and make nothing while Starbucks sells it in the US for huge profit). They have also used drugs against Turks. Divide and conquer is one of the oldest tricks in the book.
Superior work ethic. Superior grasp of science and economies of scale. Superior delay of gratification.
Well, that’s your opinion. They simply work together to take what isn’t theirs by any means necessary. Sounds like Jews of today; morally bankrupt. But they call that progress these days.
Organization, logistics, innovation, on, and on and on..
More books are penned and printed in Spain in one year than all the books translated into Arabic.
exactly. England and the jews have been behind every degenerate culture that has infected the west. they are morally corrupt and extreme perverts. and if the only reason someone likes england is that they had the biggest empire, then it proves that person is a coward and a mentally weak homosexual, who will not resist and will accept the rape of his own culture, just so that he can be on the winning team. a little faggot, son of a bitch, and a weasel is what that filthy animal is.
Yeah, because in all the centuries before Whites or even Arabs made contact with them, they had a great civilization. Right?
Mansa Musa
I see your point however the cause of its underdevelopment is due to environmental (didn’t need much forethought in that zone, a territory so big and population so widespread that competition was almost never an issue unlike Europe or Asia) and spiritual (didn’t develop or were reached by great religious traditions able to provide men with a purpose beyond the flesh), not the whites or any conspiracy to keep the black folks down (beyond the typical corporate meddling). The greatest proof is that despite the variety of black ethnicities (far greater than that found in Whites no more than a handful civilized peoples could emerge.
At this point in time your only hope is to assimilate the best of the Western tradition and knowledge. And survive a few centuries more. However the prospects are not that good.
Jews used England as a vehicle. Think of a germ or virus that needs the host to survive.
Jews = virus
England = Host
Today, it’s America being the host with Jews being the mosquito or E Coli virus.
And that’s where the replies end, because it takes a level of morality that these clowns don’t have.
Britain didn’t do any of that nonsense. The Spanish and the French did that. The british literally held onto the top spot for a fucking century and that’s because they are the babies of the French and the Spanish. Stop lying to yourself bro it isn’t healthy.
And how they used opium to crush Indo-china.
define jew.
Explain the white population of South Africa then bro. Did they go on boat to the end of Africa to just chill there?
what is your point?
So when the Mongols flung plague infested corpses over city walls to capture Crimea, ultimately starting the Black Death in Europe, was that civilized?
No, of course not. All races have dirtied their hands at various periods and have been hated at certain periods. It is just the white man’s turn.
You enjoy the standard of living western civilization has built, but trash the race that built it.
I enjoy the standard of living western civilization has built, but trash the actions they took to build it. Fixed it.
Of course you do. Anywhere outside of western investment or influence is an unbearable third world dive.
Thanks to the wars in the Middle East, power vacuums, exploitation and division among natives for gains in resources, etc. it happens. Typical western arrogance and hero complex.
The Islamic Golden age, for example, was not western, but it was much greater than the western world at the time, or any other civilization. Seeing as the west destroyed to-be colonized cultures through the introduction of drugs, liberalism, and anything goes mentality, it of course makes sense that in this particular age, it is the west’s turn to reign (except in China, but that’s because they didn’t fall for it-and had had harsh law).
The west essentially traded traditionalism for the Internet and sluts. What an achievement.
Yet, here you are, enjoying life in the West. Btw, do you mean the same Muslims that crushed Persia and forcefully invaded 1/2 of Europe before being turned back?
I can’t do anything about the past, so why would I live somewhere else? Being stubborn? I’m certainly not paying all my taxes, certainly. But, there is no good country in this world anymore.
I was simply using the Muslim example to refute the “Anywhere outside of western investment or influence is an unbearable third world dive.” Although history is subjective, it can also be said that Muslims simply were gaining traction in spreading their ideas (peacefully) before the Persians saw their culture changing and so sought to use violence in response, and they were met with violence.
It was obvious when you called someone an Uncle Tom and spoke kindly of BLM where your beliefs lay. Let’s be gentlemen and agree to disagree-on just about everything.
Ok, fair enough.
Pure fabrications.
Your envy will eat you alive.
The Brits were drug dealers. Look up “Opium Wars”.
The Islamic golden age was fabrication of self hating western scholars starting around the turn of the 20th century. Read the actual source material…not postmodern frankfurt and feminist scholars waxing poetically over something they wished would have happened. There was plenty of head chopping and crucifixion going on in Al-Andalus…
Wow…you are really really really….really ignorant of Islamic history.
Anyone can pick and choose. That’s what history is. At least, the Rashidun Caliphate was fair.
The Clintons are drug dealers. Look up “Mena airport”. One of Bill’s first foreign visits in 93′ was Columbia and shortly after he pulled the US Coast Guard out of the Gulf of Mexico.
All of them are animalistic scum masquerading as human beings.
BLM is actually based on lies. And they only come out when thugs are shot and killed.
Blm is too general. In itself, of course black lives matter. However, the problem isn’t racism, but lack of accountability by those in authority.
Most of the deaths is due to thugs from single-mother homes.
Yes. But as far as blm is concerned, when it comes to police, they mistake racism as the problem when the problem is accountability. Family structure is the #1 black problem
This we can agree.
Wow. You mixed a lot of misconceptions into that and you want to be taken seriously?
” it was because they were willing to be worse, that it spread.” ->of course. Let’s all just sacrifice a person a day in an Aztec pyramid, or eat a fellow human. It’s better.
“white supremacy, which is an ideology held my a minority of white
people, most of who are in power to benefit their own (mainly Jews)” -> OH-MY-GOD. Oh my f*cking God.
“whites have an easier time getting a job, getting a woman, etc.”
https://i.imgflip.com/rqjqy.jpg
In between, you’ve got some valid points, but logic requires coherence.
“willing to be worse” I should have clarified. I meant in warfare against their enemies. This includes destroying social fabric.
“Soros (immigration), Bill Gates (vaccines), Wall Street (financial markets) and countless others have very much damaged white and nonwhite people and cultures. Most are white.
“White people have an easier time getting a job, getting a woman, etc.” It is easier for a white generally because they start out higher in life financially than minorities in general, particularly a black dude out of the ghetto. This makes it easier in almost all areas of life. In dating, whites are at the top, as women most often prefer white men. Many minority women prefer white men as well.
Absentee fathers, low SAT scores, lack of STEM presence, glorification of thug values are major source of black man’s plight. All are by choice.
1st paragraph- it’s how things have worked since the dawn of times, and how Humanity renews itself, at a collective level. Examples: Gengis Khan vs. the Tangut Empire; the Islamic conquest of Buddhist territories.
2nd: I don’t want to go back to this. If you think vaccines are bad, please, migrate this instant to where they are unavailable, and watch. Soros has an agenda, but not of “white supremacism” for sure. Wall Street… come on! Just come on…
3rd paragraph: it’s ridiculous what you see here in the EU. I don’t know where you’re making your observations, but miscegenation enthusiasts are a considerable part of the “dating population”. It’s “fashionable”, these days. In Europe, natives don’t make children. Imported minorities reproduce almost every year, and you can simply research the stats.
The problem is not choice, but the difficulty in making the right choice. With the government as a replacement father via welfare, low SAT scores as a result of lower education spending and coming from a broken family, etc. it should be obvious what the root of the problem is.
All by choice. Since “No Child Left Behind” was instituted in ’02, Title I grants more money to underprivileged schools that perform well. To ensure this flow of money, schools give massive grade curves to inflate SAT scores. Meaning, it is easier than ever to score high on a dumbed down SAT test. Yet…
1. Then we agree. It isn’t right, it is simply the way things are. The west is doing it to other countries while the masses remain ignorant of their evil.
2. I have seen the effect of lack of vaccines and it is detrimental. Even so, giving a starving man poisoned food does not an angel make. The players may not directly affect each other, but the global elite do work together. The media generally upholds the white race as the standard in looks. In the movies, the white guy gets the girl (often the foreign girl aka white hero complex) while the black guy is sure to die. In Soros’s case, immigration will cause the
immigrants to be reviled. When you let in a flood of random people, many will avoid accountability and commit crimes. But most people think that it happens because they are inherently savages of the ‘other’ race. Although, that could be one of many side effects, so you could be right there.
3. Dating=/=reproduction. Native populations just want to slut around without having babies while imported minorities reproduce because they get some kind of benefit as a result (at least, here in the US.). Based on Tinder, the white guy gets the most in comparison to minorities. And seeing as most women are sluts and Tinder is a facilitator of such behavior, I would say it has at least some correlation. But not just that; many minorities consider having a white partner as a status symbol. My observations are based on the US, so I can’t say how it holds across the pond.
That simply proves my point. Money needs to be given to the ones that do worse, because they are the ones that need help. And funding is given to the states, which is then allocated to cities. I grew up in both a poor black majority area and then a white middle class place. The white schools had swimming pools, tennis courts, the works. The black ones had none of that. Anecdotal evidence, so you could say it doesn’t count though.
Re-read what I wrote. The underprivileged schools inflate the exams, making it easier to pass a dumbed down SAT. The low SAT scores come from a lack of study habit.
The “I’m from the ghetto” doesn’t work on me; I’m from LA Bro. No one is keeping the ghetto down, except the ghetto.
“The low SAT scores come from a lack of study habit” which is caused by broken homes, which is caused by absentee fathers, which is caused by a combination of government welfare to single moms (meaning that girls can slut it out while having no provider because the gov will take care of it) and slut culture, both of which come from…the government. Additionally, in such a competitive workplace where uni degrees are what most look for, why would a ghetto boy even try to complete with someone who has a better school, better environment, better family, more money, and hope he eventually gets a job years down the road, when he can be a gangster and make money and support himself immediately?
“why would a ghetto boy even try to complete with someone who has a better school,…”
Affirmative action. All black colleges. Pell grants that favor minorities. HR racially based hiring quotas. Lower GPA requirements for minorities to get into Law and Medical schools.
Which isn’t a replacement for an absentee father or a good family. And quota means limit. It isn’t open to all blacks, certainly. And it still isn’t enough to land a guy a job or support himself in the meantime. Even the ones that do make it, move out of the ghetto. The inhabitants don’t fix it, they escape from it.
I hope you know the West helps run the drug trade, in the US, in Afghanistan, and other areas, particularly ghettos. If the ghetto is suffering, and has a lot of drugs, adding affirmative action won’t help the ones already in the pit. The war on drugs is a sham, it doesn’t address the root of the problem. More liquor stores per population allowed as well per city rules.
“It is easier for a white generally because they start out higher in life financially than minorities in general..”
You should get out more. Lot of poor white people out there, but that conflicts with your personal bias.
The biggest factor of being “poor” in the US these days is being born into a one parent household. Considering the majority of minority children are born into them, thanks to the US federal govt. subsituting as “dad”, they are fucked. Only those men themselves can change that, but that is probably to long a row to hoe for most in the current culture.
“Money needs to be given to the ones that do worse, because they are the ones that need help.”
Throw money at the problem is your solution? Doesn’t work. Do you have any other solutions that do not involved deflecting?
“And quota means Limit”
Correct. To meet that quota better qualified men, usually whites and asians, are actively discrimanted against by the government to “help” blacks meet that fucking quota. Affirmative action should be dismantled finally. It is a lie.
Those (absent fathers, low test scores, etc) are all modern results of the welfare state the ruling class created to “help” them.
Yes. I only said those things because it would acceptable. The real solution I would implement would be to ban welfare except for the bare essentials; food, water, and a tent. This would stop women from having kids with randoms and give them a reason to want to have a stable relationship. Kill druggies Duterte style. Or perhaps not that harsh. Drugs are a big problem. Have Sharia style punishments as the norm; cut the guys hand off if he steals (not if it is something low value as a result of poverty, obviously. Stealing, say, a car would be worthy of punishment). Prisons would only be temporary housing units for criminals awaiting punishment. This would save huge amounts of tax dollars and have criminals back in the labor force much quicker. Ban lawyers; have judges only. Having a much worse lawyer gives a worse chance of innocence; the rich mans game. Ban personal loans for any above entry-level cars, houses, etc. This will let prices plummet closer to their true value and actually let people have affordable houses. Let ‘minors’ get married. Have spartan apartment-cubicle styled housing units government subsidized for said young married people, or if they want to live with their parents, give them an equivalent amount of money instead. Putin has child incentives, seems to work. Implement a strict meritocracy for schools. Perhaps MOOCS with best rated teachers in the country and have assistants take care of their grunt work.
I should have been more specific in metrics. But yes, you are correct in the calculations of majority of minorities, which happens to equal out to the same thing, which is what I meant.
You know that may well be…I do think blacks would be better off without the welfare state…but there are liberals everywhere. Wherever there is power there are people there to exploit it expand it an perpetuate it. With that in mind why isn’t Seattle like Detroit? I am done with the tropes all these blm people want to resegregate society…they dwell on the differences between us…maybe they are right.
I didn’t have a swimming pool…guess I will knock up a hood rat at 16 and do a stint in the joint for knocking off a convenience store….I am sorry but I can’t relate to or sympathize with that.
So who is going to administer this pogrom against the blacks? What politician in their right mind would even suggest this? No…you are pretty much stuck with what you got…wallow or escape…
“Against the blacks” it isnt against them, it is for them. And as I said in the beginning, the real solution is not acceptable to people. This is because will not go of their dirty ego. They will not accept the truth.
That is exactly the point…such a draconian system would be about as popular a apartheid with gas chambers. You forget the 90s and welfare reform? I didn’t. “Dey gonna be crime in da streets!!!!”
^I 100% agree.
Cardtheorist would say something sensible along those lines, then out of nowhere, go off on a tangent about muslims, Uncle Toms, white savagery, and god knows what else.
Not draconian, is normal. Welfare reform need to be followed by sticks and carrots. Either you go all in or all out. Halfheartedness doesnt work.
It won’t happen the black community can no longer tolerate the disease but it can’t endure the cure.
In Pakistan, zia ul haqq was hated because he was strict and he killed a lot of people. A case of a child’s murder was brought to him. Several people claimed to be the killer. He killed them all, that was his style. However, possibly because of the religious background, it was tolerable, and corruption and crime drastically fell within months of his reign. Similar cases can be fou d in other countries and times. There is always a cure, but a strictness is needed that US leaders do not have.
Zia ul haqq needed to worry about being elected by people who hated him….who wouldn’t give him the time of day unless he wandered to them and stroked their egos? You advocate for a dictator that’s fine…but that is what it will take . And it won’t be a black one doing the whipping. You think any of the black poverty pimps currently in power have any desire to reign in the black community?
I believe that out of the masses of blacks, there are a few who want to be leader, fewer who have what it takes to get there, fewer who could stay there, fewer who knows what it takes to bring the black community out of the state it is in. Even a look at historic black leaders shows Uncle Toms; MLK was. Someone like a Malcolm X (in the late stage, after he made Hajj and stopped being racist) who was willing to change continually and leave his ego could. I don’t know who could do it, but if anyone in the black community with the smarts, insight, dedication and intent could do it, I think they are currently unknown.
“Many minority women prefer white men as well.”
The colonialism mentality affects women the most. So they see stronger conquerors like white Europeans and automatically see “Status” and get their panties wet from that.
Non-whites can learn from this and find ways to out manuever them.
I think colonialism is a big factor, but I also think that, even before colonialism, lighter skinned mates were preferred (regardless of race) in many cultures and white people being lighter is an extension of that. Media is also a factor, but that’s subjective.
Every race has certain instinct to self preserve.
Europeans wanted access to natural resources and wealth so they plundered and exploited the natives. That’s history man.
Non-Europeans would have done the same thing but they were just way behind Europeans in warfare.
If whites disappeared completely today, maybe Asians will fill in the power vacuum and will do things that the whites have done in the past.
Power structure doesn’t disappear completely.
With whites doing that, it comes with “prestige”.
White American going to Asia and having over-inflated ego for example. Think about this. Put yourself in white man’s shoes.
If you know that you came from a race who enslaved blacks, and defeated other race in war, wouldn’t you feel pompous?
Instead of rejecting and resenting whites, you can learn from them and also learn their mistakes too.
Good example: JAPAN
Japan basically copied the West after Meiji revolution. Ever since then Japan conquered Asia and even beat Russia in Russo-Japanese war.
If it wasn’t for the West, Japan wouldn’t be where they are today.
There are good values from Europe/America but also not good values. Only take the good values and learn from them, master them and use them.
You can maintain your own cultural practices of wherever non-white race you belong to but there are certain achievements of whites you can’t just ignore. Just use and apply what is useful. Don’t think in boxed in dogmatic thinking.
Agreed
There is nothing noble about being oppressed. Neither is it ‘bad’. I think it just is.
“and stood alone against Napoleon and Hitler and won”
The first troops who defeated Napoleon’s army in an open field were spanish (Battle of Bailén).
Why did you do that with hitler? What a mess
“I heavily embrace my British heritage over my non-white heritage.”
Why can’t you do both? All recent immigrants, first generation or otherwise, will both belong and not belong. With subsequent generations this is likely to become less an issue, but it seems premature to seek to resolve this finally. Better to exploit the tension of an identity that may pull in more than one direction. Half the countries on earth are pretty meh. If you hail from one of them you should still seek to relate positively to them.
bro its a giant jungle with lines drawn on a map.
Britain? Sweden? Further afield? Which one we talking about
Good on you Fitz. Humans vote with their feet, and your parents emigrated to Britain because it gave them opportunities the native country couldn’t. I’d much rather be in the company of migrants that assimilate and respect their new land than be surrounded by self-loathing natives who have no clue how much the West has blessed them.
Or because they were too fucking stupid to make their own country prosper and too fucking cowardly too stick around to force it.
Grow a brain why don’t you. It’s called logic for fuck sakes.
Hadn’t the British (and others) signed the Treaty of Versailles, there would have not been any WWII at all. You would also probably be speaking of British Empire using present tense.
STFU jackass. The world wars are an occult practice. The 3 in 1, as in is-ra-el. Smarten the fuck up kid you’re like a squirrel claiming king of the jungle.
“As a non-white individual adopted by whites, I heavily embrace my British heritage over my non-white heritage.”
You can respect both.
“Mostly because Britain built the greatest empire in history, and stood alone against Napoleon and Hitler and won.”
“alone”
Not really
“All my non-white country did was get its ass kicked by almost all of its neighbors.’
Which non white country is this? And there’s most certainly someone who’s ass they kicked.
I agree That you can respect your heritage, but why not try to find positives and great achievements done by the other side of you’re heritage as well.
this is seriously underrated
Forgot pic related
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6c800ff30b7113b04b68b284eb2da9ac282d0c192f093931db4fa7c89cf02b3a.png
True. Just because a person is weak doesn’t mean he is necessarily righteous.
Rather one should side with the righteous regardless of strength. Whether they are strong or weak.
If you look at yourself in the mirror, you will always be reminded of your non-white genetic phenotype.
Since you recognized the superior value that European culture brought in the late 1800s and early 1900s with scientific revolution and other achievements, you can take the things you learned from whites and try to endorse that with your non-white culture and try to improve your own people.
I don’t have a non-white culture. I hope it dies out and the world returns to a British Victorian-Era worldview. Englishmen and Americans are my people, not the degenerate losers of where I was born.
In fact, British culture is more mine than most Britons: something insane like 70% of British high-school students didn’t know basic facts about British history such as:
-Who commanded the Anglo-Dutch forces and was the overall commander of the Seventh Coalition at Waterloo?
-What was the significance of the Battle of Blemheim in the War of Spanish Succession?
-What was the name of the last king from the House of York?
An equally appalling amount in the U.S. can’t answer basic U.S. history questions regarding the American Revolution or the First World War. Great Britain and America belong to me more than they belong to the insta-gratification SJW millennials, liberals or progressives. No matter how white they are.
You be on the first front line as a cannon fodder.
Britain conquered the worlds greatest empire which was the Spanish Habsburgs. They are literally planet of the apes in real life. They have no clue of how the world functions and that’s why they let the French push their bougie bullshit all over Europe.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cc9400674f2c9ae81c0cf650033b2328278387f3a300020cbbb4056f8cadf82b.jpg
lol
How old was Helga when she started her job as Austin’s nanny? Since she “stayed on until you were 25!”, that’s an important question.
I really tend to hate the idea of being a victim of a circumstance caused by others. I tend to think that I am alive in a time and place with its multitudes of ups and downs with a set of tools and a set of flaws and now it is up to me to make something for myself.
“As a generation, the Millenials were born much after the leftist cultural upheaval had taken place, and thus we were born as frail creatures inside a world they had taken control of.”
This is the kind of stuff I immediately react negatively towards. This strikes me as the whole “if the world were more aligned with the way I wish it were that would be so much better” I mean yeah, if all people named lolknee were given 1 trillion dollars and a blowjob from a young Sophia Loren that would be really fucking terrific. But that isn’t the way the world is. Throughout history there have been people who jumped into their world head first and made the most of it and people who dreamt and wished things were different. Guess which one of those groups have come out on top…..every single time.
“The more they participated and benefited from militant cultural Marxism, the more they are responsible in practice for our plight”
Again, more excuse making. I tend to feel this is all backwards. It is the militant cultural Marxism that allows men to say that “this isn’t the way the world should be and I am given circumstances unfair to me.”
I don’t know the personal circumstances of most of the people here, but I would bet dollars to doughnuts I had just as rough a go if not worse than most. The very word “unfair” always sickens me. In life there is one thing and one thing only that is in your total control….whether or not you kill yourself. If you decide not to kill yourself, if you decide to live, you have been given a world and an opportunity. Now go, make the most of it.
Mind if I ask how old u were when u transitioned out of academia?
I began transitioning out at 34 and was totally through by 37.
Did the govt help pay for your transition?
the govt didn’t help pay for dick. Basically when I saw which way things were turning I got a side job and moved to adjunct teaching. I worked my way up in the side job until I was making enough money to just forget teaching altogether. I am now the COO of that side job with teaching in my past and pretty happy with the way life has panned out. I wish I would have made some different moves earlier…but that’s ok…my knowledge came from experience and that takes longer than having someone explain it to you.,
I think he was making a Bruce Jenner joke.
Damn it!
Damn you!
“I wish I would have made some different moves earlier…”
We all do. That is a middle age man affliction that there is no cure for.
Of course.
That explains a lot…a fucking academic.
No better time in human history to be alive than now. Medical, scientific, and political issues that once plagued our ancestors can be fixed by taking a pill, clicking a button, or purchasing a one way airline ticket out.
seriously….
Nihilism vs Defeatism:
Defeatism: “I’m beat, poor me life sucks – trigger – give me some disability”
Nihilism: “As soon as the sperm hit the egg, Life starts but so does dying. Better make the most of it.”
Better
Nihilism: there is nothing outside yourself that will give you meaning so you better do it for yourself
Ex-philosophy professors can be such a gas, when they got their shit together.
Best compliment ever
It’s a Truth, brother, I could tell you stories…
I’d say ‘YES” because that’s the prevailing culture. It makes no sense to not use the tools at your disposal just because you’re a man, even if you disagree with them. It’s about winning. So if feminists killed the nice guy, I’ll be the jerk victim and I’ll win on that basis. For many years (decades), criminals are considered victims. The situation worsened with BLM.
And ok, so if the prevailing culture starts endorsing that you must by needs be and demonstrate bisexuality in order to get a girl into the sack, are you going to take it up the pooper, Greigio? I mean, hey, that’s the tools at your disposal, right?
Why do you need to demonstrate it if saying so is enough via the prevailing culture? People will take you for your word even if you’re lying.
Even if your assertion is correct, I have dignity and I’m not going to toss it aside simply to appease the masses.
No matter how many bridges you build you may never be called the bridge builder….but suck one cock and you are a cocksucker.
Ass-ertation. HAR!
M-ASS-es
Double Har!
Sigh…..we’ve really been slacking off on our Friday tradition. I’m afraid we’ve all gotten rusty.
Reminds me of one kid from summer camp that got labeled “butter balls”…
are you saying your ass is rusty
Stop…..just stop…..
The “why” is irrelevant. It’s just what the culture now demands. Society has conditioned women in this scenario to only date men who are confirmed bi-sexual. Do you start puffing on cocks, because “prevailing culture” and “tools at your disposal even if you disagree with them”?
I reject your example. I wouldn’t be bedding women under those circumstances, but PUA always requires lying to get what you want.
If I was a true victim, I would say so and do what’s required using the tools that society values. From my own experience, holding back means your grievances won’t be appreciated and you wouldn’t know how to act or seek recompense without taking the initial step.
you mentioned having too much dignity to lie to people about being a fag in a sentence with the words “ascertain” (which you spelt incorrectly so you went out of your way to use the word “ass”, “toss” and “masses.” Unabashed, I would love to let you off the hook for old time sakes, but you are just going to have to eat this one…like a big bag of dicks…so at least enjoy the privilege it brings. Sorry bud, those are the rules.
By rejecting my scenario, you reject the premise of your own assertion. I get why you wouldn’t do that, I do. I wouldn’t either. Know why? Because sometimes you don’t use the tools of the enemy against them if it makes YOU one of them in the process.
Absolutely not because not all circumstances are treated the same way. You also reject lying as a possible tool. Why would you not lie? Men lie all the time for sex. You say it can’t be done. So men must be honorable cads?
Just because I stand for myself using the available tools does not make me them. As a man who complains,. Do I become a woman?
Because assuming a victimhood mantel is dangerous. It’s one thing to say “Yeah baby, you’re my kind of girl, I wish I’d found you earlier in life” and get a lay. It’s another to bring in enough believability to a victimhood story to pass the smell test. You have to internalize it at least to some degree or you’re not congruent. Internalizing victimhood status, even a little bit, will, and I say this with 100% certainty, create a framework in your mind where you actually do start believing you’re a victim.
No. I will not be a victim of your word game. You eat the bag of dicks, good sir.
Actually, I find that being bluntly honest is a far quicker way to cuntville than lying. In fact, lying is pretty much the absolute worst possible way to get in a gals skirts
Honey, when I was younger I saw a young boy in a Russian grocery store. I told that young boy that he should follow his dreams no matter what. That young boy grew up to be Betsy Ross.
You are not my victim good sir, you are the guy who set a bear trap and got your foot caught in it while sneaking away.
Then I shall cut off my foot and carry on instead of wallowing in my misery.
….and by misery, I mean a bag of dicks.
Amazing that you finally distinguish a difference between lying about sex and claiming a victimhood. And about victimhood, you’re wrong. It’s about using the tools to correct a wrong. It’s not about living your life as a victim. Once things are fixed, you can continue your life as you wish. We came so far from that reality. Divorce rape, declining jobs market, declining graduation rates. The list goes on and on.
Ok, believe whatever you want. I’m not here to save the world, nor you.
Didn’t you post a Pulp Fiction clip a while back about a boxer being told to take a bribe and take a dive?
I did indeed. Different situations
“prevailing culture” doesn’t mean ubiquitous. For instance, I live in an ultra left wing city of nanny state faggots, freaks and hipsters. However, I can actually, at times, totally forget that because of the people I chose to associate with, the career path I took and the places I like going to. If you don’t like prevailing culture what is the benefit of success within that prevailing culture?
Archimedes, the guy who invented the lever, had an interesting thing to say. He said “give me a place to stand and I will lift the world”
This is the kind of attitude that is sadly missing from so many people. people have so many places to stand, so much access, so much information, so many tools and so many options and still they look for excuses where as ole Archie basically said that with a big enough stick and 2 feet to stand on he would love the whole damn world. The difference in attitude is important.
where as ole Archie basically said that with a big enough stick and 2 feet to stand on he would love the whole damn world.
Sounds like that could end up with him having quite a few STD’s if he tried it.
But why does be need a 2 foot…you know what, never mind. I don’t wanna know.
There may be situations over which you have no control which place you in dire straights. Your goal should not be to assign a status to yourself, but rather, sally forth to find a way out of the situation, or make the best of it while continuing to search for a path outward. Action, not introspection and accepting defeat, are what prevents one from becoming a lifelong victim.
You can be a victim of an actual crime, yes, but that’s a once per action thing, not a lifelong label with a “struggle” attached to it. It’s like saying you flew on an aircraft. For the duration that you were on the flight, you were an aircraft passenger, but once you exited the aircraft, that status, that label, ceased to hold any applicability to your real life. Same with the true victim status I note (of a crime, or of some kind of violence against you, or of fraud). You can only maintain an association with that label by a *willful desire to not improve beyond the action*, that is, to get on with life and change the “am” to “was” in regards to “victim”.
In short you have two options.
Good: “I was a victim of an armed robbery last Tuesday. I bought a gun on Wednesday and now carry it, and thus, I will not become a helpless victim again if I can help it”
Bad: “I am a victim of an armed robbery last Tuesday. It felt really bad and I wake up at night worrying about crime and my being a victim. I started a support group for other victims, where we sit around and discuss our victimhood and dwell on it and cry on each other’s shoulders. We also challenge society to stop ignoring our suffering and creating a secondary layer of victimhood, we have a struggle…blah blah blah”
An interesting analogy is being a war prisoner. While you are in the internment camp, you are indeed a war prisoner. It sucks. You hate it. You might receive daily beatings, or food deprivation, or whatever. You are a war prisoner. But the moment you start working to escape that prison, you stop being a war prisoner, and become a warrior again. So your choices there are do nothing, “accept your lot in life” and remain a prisoner, or do everything in your power to escape even if it means that you die in the end, which transforms you back into a warrior.
TL;DR – you suffer a real wrong, but how you allow yourself to be labeled is determined by your reaction to that wrong.
A parallel to your analogy is the difference between being broke and being poor.
To borrow from Al Pacino in the Devil’s advocate: “[victimhood] is like a bag of fuckin’ bricks. All ya gotta do is set it down.”
Tell that to the college athlete who just got drafted into pro sports but got shot while being mugged and is now in a wheel chair shitting in a bag instead
Personally, I’m opposed to even a whiff of male victimology. Shit happens. Life is unfair. The deck is stacked, and then you die. In the emasculated climate today it is too easy for even the proposed legitimate male victim to fall into unhealthy and unproductive thinking. Better to take a flamethrower to that kind of thinking.
“A” to the “men”, brother.
The phrase “Who told you that life was fair?” needs to come back in vogue when encountering people wallowing in victimhood or self pity.
This kind of braggadocios bullshit is why there is no solidarity among white men. Always using another’s problems to make ourselves look good to the cuntocracy.
That is not going to work. The author suggests to be a little bit of victim. You either embrace your identity as the full-blown and eternal victim as the Jews have done or you don’t. A little bit of victim is like being a little bit of pregnant.
Playing a victim has commonalities with having a parasitical nature. Which explain its popularity among groups like the Jews, the gypsies, women, some black communities, etc.
Never in my life have I seen myself as a victim although I have been through many ordeals caused to me by other people. But I always saw them as my own misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Lesson learned, ignore them, move on.
For example, there’s a small group of people here on this site that can not help but hate me. Instead of playing a victim, I just block them and avoid any engagement with them. In the end, their hatred becomes their own problem only – ignorance is indeed a bliss.
It applies to game too. If some women ignore you and reject you, feeling a little bit of victim is only going to demoralize you from trying again.
” If some women ignore you and reject you, feeling a little bit of victim is only going to demoralize you from trying again.”
This is good advice to avoid the pain and misery of having to have sex with them. HAR!
http://mugstoria.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/HungerGamesThreeFingerSalute.jpg
This is KC Mitchell. He is a professional powerlifter who goes by the name “That 1 legged Monster” He was a combat soldier who lost a leg in some god forsaken desert shit hole.
Watch this short video about him and, if you are so inclined, look him up. When you feel you can tell this guy, with a straight face, that you have had such an unfair run of things that you are a total victim to circumstances beyond control and that is the root of your excuses I will personally track him down as he tours the country inspiring young children and doing powerlifting competitions and tell him to listen to your sob story. Until then, grow the fuck up
Much respect.
yup. I just saw some video oh him deadlifting 700 pounds
If you haven’t already, read the short poem “Invictus”. The author wrote it after having his limb amputated. He stated “I am the master of my fate, the captain of my soul”. Real men shape their destiny.
That poem got me through OCS.
Food for the soul, Sir.
Steroids are a hell of a drug
Typical wuss comment
Outstanding!
Is it safe to lift like that? A while back I saw a video going around of a one-armed woman who was bent on performing olympic lifts (ugh) and it was pretty clear that it was not a good idea long-term.
Different opinions. What is most important is that he has created meaning in his life. This is something that matters to him and he has surpassed quite quite innumerable odds to do something that seems to fulfill him.
Is it dangerous? I don’t know. But I know that there is nothing more dangerous than wallowing, meaninglessly, in self pity for the rest of your life because something outside of your control happened to you
I take it this is your response to muh holocaust victim mongering as well?
All your bullshit is just shallow preening at best. This article is long overdue.
I get it. You’re a closet fag. Cool dude. Enjoy. I understand that you don’t have brains, heart, ,courage, talent or value. Instead of taking it out on your betters you should just go jerk off to gay porn…or maybe it makes you feel good to be an internet tough guy. Glad I could help Mary.
I’m sorry for hurting your feelings, I know you ivory tower types are kind of thin skinned. I guess I was kind of mean, but…and don’t take this the wrong way…nobody likes a victim.
Ok fairy
It’s difficult to compare suffering. Some people have serious physical injuries, but they get through it with support and an unbroken will. Others may grow up and have their will broken at a young age already. They may be physically fine, but their lives are miserable nonetheless. And besides, what does ‘being able to lift despite just one leg’ have to do with anything but narcissism? Do we know whether this guy is happy? Maybe he is, but so what. Can anyone become happy by becoming a great lifter?
Exactly. His post reads as a parody of what a fucking shallow contrarian faggot lolknee is. Some idiot weight lifter. Jesus Christ.
Hey, I respect what the guy did. I just don’t think that these popular “hero” figures can be used to argue that “everyone can be a superhero and whoever doesn’t do it is just weak/weak-willed/whatever”. I don’t think it’s that simple.
It’s that guy’s life. And that’s cool. But life is different for everybody. You can’t make this popular “If I can do it, everyone can” statement.
Ha! You are such a fucking fairy.
How’s your self pity game working for you?
We have been put into this position – out numbered by inferiors who live off of us and want us dead – through victim mongering. Nothing but the most un-manly, pathetic, passive-aggressive “self pity” ever seen – and it has worked. Muh holocaust. Muh slavery. Muh patriarchy.
Yet, when the reality of our current situation is pointed out to people like you, your knee-jerk reaction is to go into this preening “your just acting like a victim” bullshit. It’s really just a status advertisement, and most people are stupid enough to fall for that. “Im about to be ruled over by a fucking evil psychotic hag for a president, and cant do jack shit about it, but in no way am I not COMPLETELY IN CHARGE”. Idiot.
When someone is attacking you repeatedly, you don’t accept their frame out of fear that it might make you a “victim”.
Of course its admirable to rise above one’s limitations and misfortunes.
This weight lifter doesn’t go through life pretending he has both legs in tact.
The prosthetic maker should have just told him to quit being such a self pitying pussy, amirite?
God damn tom. Can you not be a depressed motherfuckrr for even one day.
….
Its obvious you are talking about yourself. You think yiur life is miserable.
……
….
Stop whining! Ahnold tone*
Hey, I can be whoever I want to be.
If by “lifting” you mean stealing, then yes
Good shit. Or as another vet would put it, “fuck your trauma”:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/26/facebook-doesnt-want-you-to-read-this-article/
Amen… we’re the last people who should be pulling the “not as bad as” crap.
And then you got dem SJW phiggits…
Right. But hey are what they are. The ones who make me mad are the ones on our side that don’t realize they are doing the same thing
Monster? He doesn’t even look like he lifts bro
Nah, because to be a victim in the sense of this article is to be a whiny bitchboy that cries in public. I can’t stand the thought of personal “victim hood”. Tough it out, it’s what men do.
An old black man told me one time,”Son,sometimes, it just be like that”. Meaning, sometimes there’s nothing you can do about it so make the best of it.
I believe the perception exists that one of the underpinnings of masculinity is rejecting victim-hood. What the article suggests is then not a winning position, since accepting any victim-hood can and would be used to discredit masculinity.
It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not, because your enemies aren’t “fighting fair”.
But Porcer, in the end it is not about winning or losing, being rich or being broke, getting laid or having a dry spell…in the end it is about what kind of man you chose to be….so far we still have that ability.
Oh, I agree with you. I don’t really ever try to quantify myself, and I don’t find anything in this article to be particularly actionable. Just thought I saw an oversight in the analysis.
real men fight fair.
Although most probably they leave fighting dirty to the depths of their unconscious.
Plausible deniability
I think this red pill thing is all about victimhood. To me it is exactly asbad as feminism, only its for men.
Hungarys and estonias divorce rate is higher than in US?
But back to the topic…
I agree on a lot of things on here. Many women tries to be like men forgetting feminine values and look down on the other half. I am often surprised when i hear young people talk, it sounds like to them(men or women) that sex is just like a handshake and they are not embaressed to talk so loud that strangers can hear about what they did last night on the dancefloor. Of course the obesity is also a problem in the western world and people are becoming more narccisistic(social media, faking mental problems and other things and serious things for attention) and people are less family orientated the richer we get.
too me many things on this site is just absurd.
All it does is talk about slutty women, how its too bad for the men and how to fuck more women and that you never should marry. How can you say you will never marry or be in a relationship, wants to learn how to fuck women and then whine abput that all women are bitches?? I mean you don’t find wife material on tagged or in the nightclub on the pole. I mean, you attract what you put out.
Also you talk so much about how women should be controlled, their clothes, when they go out, what they do, etc etc.. Well first of all, welcome to a doomed abusive relationship. Second, men are not God that have the all the answers, and modern men are not responsible enough the lift the task at all and you know it. There are many classy women that isnt dicateted by men that do just fine, and all these women in these countries where men dictates are not always better. Only if they are discorved they are swept under the carpet.
I dont see why religion is important. the books is for mankind written by mankind but not divine. you can be a good humanbeing without, even babies look at their mothers and at one they already dont like if other fo bad to others, give things and can take care and try to stop others from crying be padding their back or so.
I dont see why we should dictate 100% the life of others. Life is constantly evolving, changing. We dont live like we did 3000 years ago, it is meant to be like that. We have a need to move foreward, to what we dont know but we cant stop and if we could life would finish and be worth nothing. If women always were so happy hundred years ago, then why things have changed? We dont need 10 children each, we are already many people on earth, child mortality is low and we get older and we get healthier happier children if we have time for each and one of them and get a secure attachment to them, we cant get that if we have 10 children. A family life is ideal, marriage, children, basic education or more but i aldo think the mother should spend minimum the first year of the child at home. Divorce is sad situation, that is maybe a little overused today. But i dont see any shame in women having education or worling or any shame in being a stay at home mum. They are not inferior to men nor the same, they have different qualities and we need both. Day cant be without night and right and be without left. Fx women are more empathic and better at communication and men are more logical. Thereis positive feminity and negative feminity, the negative feminity could be passive aggresiveness, nagging, manipulation. So is there positive masculinity and negative, the negative could be violence and agresiveness.
Life isnt so black and white like this site.
I think this red pill thing is all about victimhood.
Doubtful you’re thinking at all if this is your conclusion.
MRA and the incel MGTOW can be considered a victimhood type, but general red pill is about throwing pretty illusions out the window and learning to deal with reality as it exists. That is the OPPOSITE of a victimhood creed.
you are, of course, correct. I can see, however, how if stumbling across a bad patch a person new to this site could read some things and interpret them as total victim hood. I don’t think that bitching and moaning make up a significant percentage of this site at all, but when you walk head first into it…if it is the first thing you see….it is a first impression that may turn you sour.
If you could do me a favor. You say ” They are not inferior to men nor the same, they have different qualities and we need both. Day cant be without night and right and be without left. ”
Now, if possible, go explain this to every single woman.
The fact that more women do not understand this is the basic problem with the world
Same thing applies to races, nations, religions and human difference in general. Egalitarianism made “difference” a stance perceived as aggression. Since then, they tried to erase them all as “social constructs”
excited to see where this one goes.
We have a need to move foreward, to what we dont know but we cant stop and if we could life would finish and be worth nothing.
You say so much that is so laughably naive, untrue or just simply stupid, but this one takes the cake.
We need to move forward – why?
If we don’t know where we’re going (and we don’t) then by what means can you proclaim a need to continue moving in that direction? Isn’t that like blindfolding a car driver in the grand canyon and wishing him good luck and telling him never to take his foot off the gas pedal? Why yes, yes it is.
People have lived for thousand year stretches with no appreciable change in their standards or social status or conditions of life, and were content. In what world does life not become living if you’re not continually hurtling forward without any idea of where you’re going? Talk about a fucked up life view, hon. No wonder so many women are on depression meds, if your mindset is the one they too have.
So is there positive masculinity and negative, the negative could be violence and agresiveness.
You don’t get to define what is masculine for me. Violence can be good and just, and aggressiveness is what has helped protect women like you for tens of thousands of years.
Just goes to show the shallow level of thinking being employed here. “Violence and aggressiveness is bad.”
I shouldn’t violently protect my wife and children?
I shouldn’t aggressively pursue an entrepreneurial venture?
These kinds of platitudes do nothing for individuals or society. It’s all sentimental fluff that shields the ignorant from the cold realities of the world.
Violence and aggression simply are. Just like guns or money, they are amoral and are defined by the wielder.
She’s the typical one post wonder. Comes in, waving her dildo around saying “Look at me!” then runs away to not answer any questions put to her, or respond to challenges to her post. She said maybe one actual good thing, in one sentence, but it is surrounded by so much spew and silliness that it wasn’t worth the read to get to.
And besides, they are quite aggressive in their attempts to ‘dampen aggressiveness’ too.
And sometimes violent even.
I have never understood the quote “violence never solved anything.” What a croc of shit.
From my experience it solved quite alot in an expedient and honest manner.
would you say you are solution focused?
Or: “War is never the answer.”
In human history it appears war was the answer to pretty much every question. And it seems it still is today! Even if the question is stupid! 🙂
I would say most men are. There are simply principles and moral boundaries, once crossed, an uncompromised violent reaction is the correct answer. You have a choice in all this. Be a victim or refuse to be one. Most choose the former, but I understand why.
I was joshing. You said violence has solved quite a lot, so I asked if you were solution focused.
Sure, men are solution focused generally and that’s as it should e
Violence is the only thing that really solves anything permanently
Ask the Armenians and Greeks in Turkey or the Christians in the Middle East.
You bring up a lot of good points. For me, as someone with the fortune to find a good wife on the first try, the takeaway is that men need to learn to overcome adversity and lead, while women are to be led and demand success and effort from men.
For all its faults, ROK is one of the only communities that sees social issues through this basic metric, and recognizes that it isn’t outdated, even in our industrialized world.
No. The term red pill is from the matrix. It is a way of seeing the world. It is the OPPOSITE of victimhood.
It should be, but some posts doesnt show it.
“too me many things on this site is just absurd”
But yet, here you are with a lengthy post to boot. See yourself out stage right.
There is many good things on the site, it is just about picking them out. I read it almost everyday, sometimes i think what did i just read but other times it is well written with many great points.
I am of the belief you fight P.C. with P.C. To that end, rather than disparage the SJW agenda, troll them by forcing them to play by their own rules. If someone demands the use of non-gendered pronouns (xey, xem, zir) reply that to do so is racist against those speaking English as a second language. If some one screams in your face you are a “White Cisgendered Male”, point out that you are 5% Ashkenazi Jew, or Cherokee (or both!). If someone says something incendiary like “All men perpetrate rape culture”, call them out on it by saying you are recording their Hate Speech to report to the police. The point is to adopt their shit tactics against them to keep them off balance.
It’s not possible to fight cultural marxism with cultural marxism.
In particular, it’s not possible to use identity politics against lefties as they’ll invalidate it by saying you’ve forsaken whatever protected identity you’re claiming, like how Milo’s flaming gayness doesn’t spare him or how RINO Clarence Thomas’ blackness doesn’t spare him.
It’s like playing a game against someone who changes the rules of the game whenever they start to lose.
I am a lesbian in a man’s body.
That sounds like something I always say. I finallygot in touch with my feminine side only to find out she was a lesbian
All the negative privilege points without any of the negatives.
you two rug munchers should get a room
Fuck, I didnt think of that. Let’s say I’m a lesbian in a man’s body who is only attracted to females in female bodies. Bam, problem spolved.
no such discrimination allowed. You either accept the implication of identity politics or you don’t. Remember it’s all about the person inside. Not the clam, but the inner clam
Naaah. That would mean that a gay man has to sleep with a girl if she identifies as a man…
I just don’t see any circumstances where you’d find girls that identify as gay men loitering down the local woods in the hope of some anonymous cock gobbling or bum banditry.
In this world … anything is possible.
yeah, but in this particular case it would probably be better if it weren’t
You are saying that ‘girls that identify as gay men loitering down the local woods in the hope of some anonymous cock gobbling or bum banditry’ is one of the worst imaginable things in this world? Dude, you’re so vanilla.
well they’ve already completely spoilt my enjoyment of grinder.
It’s the old problem of women pushing into male spaces. Ducky
Hahaha. I feel ya, brother. (Not that way)
I like the hope and the spirit here, but sense unwarranted optimism.
These folks can rationalize anything and are immune to arguments made from logical progression.
I have been screwed over, professionally, on more than one occasion- Im not sure I see myself as a victim, it was bad luck. I couldve ruined my boss’ career, but I chose not too(he did that himself years later).
You would have gotten much more satisfaction if you would have ruined his career instead of just experiencing schadenfreude later. Revenge is a million times better than pussy unless you grudge fucked his wife for sippenhaft while he was an unemployed homeless bum sleeping in the gutter
“Feminists have notoriously killed the nice guy by denying him any right to victimhood, that is, by denying that he had suffered unfairly and consequently had a right to acknowledgement and empathy as a nice guy.”
Can suffering be ‘fair’? And if it is ‘fair’ does that mean one is not allowed to suffer and let oneself feel the pain, instead each time the pain comes up, one has to suppress it with ‘I deserve this’? What does ‘fair’ mean? Karma? Golden rule? Or is it dictated by social norms?
I cant say that feminists have killed the nice guy. But they hate him. The worlds nice guys are out there, learning the hard way not to be nice
In the book ‘No More Mr Nice Guy’, the author argues that nice guys aren’t really that nice. They are dishonest and carry covert expectations along with the nice persona they portray.
I agree in My experience I find most nice guys to be fake. Cry on my shoulder shoulders so I can your pants. Most just do not have the balls to say what they want. Few men want a woman as a friend. They might befriend a woman they want to fuck hoping more comes latter. I take all that back if you grew up with the girl. But outside of family most” I’m a good friend” nice guys are fakes.
Yup
Besides, who ever said that ‘niceness’ is generally good? It has its place, just like aggression and other facets of human life.
I grew up with a girl from 4th grade forward. By high school she quickly morphed into an HB 9.5. Hotter than fuck. So I had this weird dilemma (for me, at the time). Here was a girl I’d actually been genuine friends with since we were both snot nosed 4th graders, who turned into nothing short of a top shelf bikini model type. What to do?
We stayed friends, I really started wanting to fuck her with every passing day. I went to boot camp, came back, went to a party at her house and when everybody else had left, pulled her to her feet, kissed her like the world was about to end, and fucked her brains out for the rest of the time I was on leave, and then some.
So yeah, grow up with a girl, she’s a friend, but if she turns hot, you get in there and do your God given duty as a man and tap that ass.
I thought the author was a bit rough on blaming nice guys for all their dating woes.or for being fake. They are more misguided imo. For sure they want to get into the girl’s pants just like the cocky charmer, but they play the long game hoping the girl will appreciate him for being a supportive & devoted bf. Its been a loser game for a few decades now for the majority of those nice guys, but most of the ones I knew were not fake unassertive jerks. They may act bitter & resentful down the track when they were not getting what they wanted out of the dating scene, but dont assume they were not authentic earlier on. Its just weak game to make up for their lack of looks, charisma, machismo. The ones who make a fuss about being a ‘nice guy’ probably more inclined not to be genuine.
Lots of girls will say ‘nice guys’ just pretend to be my friend to get in my pants, but the guy from the club who hit on me and banged me that night is authentic. Yeh well both want to bang her, but much better chance the ‘nice guy’ is going to be more authentic when it comes to sticking around and treating her well without expecting bj. I think they get demonised by women to help justify going for their opposite number. As been said here before many women think that what turns them on will turn a guy on, well nice guys make the same mistake when it comes to women. .
Good point about making the same mistake.
Yeah, I don’t really want to put blame, as it’s not helpful. But I think it’s true nonetheless. If we can look at it from a detached perspective and just observe what happens subconsciously, I think the author is kinda spot on.
Is this what I would tell a nice guy who wants to get laid? Hm. Nah. I would take some approach with compassion probably.
On the other hand, it CAN help if you set it up right. If a nice guy is like ‘omg, they are such jerks (and I kinda wanna be one too)’, you can say: Well man, in a way you already are. You’re a sneaky bastard. You just have a bad strategy. So become a sneaky bastard with a good strategy.
They are accountable for their own actions, but society & women also help make them buy into the nice guy routine as well. We are now living in a more feminized society and testosterone levels have fallen 20% over the last 30 odd yrs. For many its not a routine but just their nature and the way they were raised. Most of them wanted nice sweet caring devoted gfs and acted the same to match what they wanted + also they went with that as their strong card since they lacked the looks & charisma & machismo, they were born with + society and women have changed over the last couple of generations. As Rollo says they are operating under the old book of rules, which is now outdated. I definitely think that author wrote a good wake up book for nice guys but just didn’t think they deserved to be chastised for being nice or assumed to be fake, and the guys who read the book already feel bad about their lack of success and really just need an instructor to tell them what & how to change.
Definitely some view themselves as victims, but it doesn’t go down well with women (they think only they can be in dating), and I suspect some learn to shut up about it or others just become bitter (which is not good for your psyche). What annoys me sometimes when it comes to the victim card is how some women can flip between being the ‘strong independent’, ‘you gogrrl, girls kickass’ type to victim when it suits,
I dare argue that the real victims in this world are not the ones we see on TV. The real victims sit alone in their homes, scared shitless of even telling anyone about their pain, because they feel guilty and ashamed of it. Too ashamed and guilty to even acknowledge to themselves that they are in pain, telling themselves ‘Oh Im just lazy if I can’t handle this’. Real victims don’t go out on streets to protest. They secretly think they deserve all the pain in their lives.
“Victimhood in general means having part of one’s identity, through one’s real or purported history, tied to past or present undeserved sufferings. We should distinguish between felt victimhood, which pretty much everyone can harbor, and acknowledged or institutionalized victimhood which carries a variety of benefits….”
“Such advantages flow from what we can call a victimhood economy, where the group whose sufferings are the most dignified or acknowledged enjoys the greatest share of the market and consequent advantages—exactly as the bigger shareholders of a company will enjoy the biggest dividends”
This is an interesting subject, one which is at heart of the manosphere dilemmatic.
Firstly there is the perception that manhood / masculinity, and (white) heterosexual males in particular have been attacked so successfully that in a sense victimhood is a truer description of the status quo than the claimed ‘privileged’ status that men officially enjoy.
Traditionally, the language of victimhood could have been avoided simply by claiming that an injustice had been done and some kind of restitution was due.
Unfortunately for (white) heterosexual men, this traditional option is not entirely adequate any more, because as the article suggests, to simply renounce victimhood, as one would expect would be the instinct of every man is potentially to renounce a rich seam of wealth.
This is the dilemma. Today, on account of the particular transvaluation of traditional values it could be said that strength is weakness and weakness is strength. By this new regimen to claim to be strong, is immediately to invite claims of re-distributive justice against oneself such that that strength is taken away. In the same way, to claim to be weak (that is a victim, or otherwise vulnerable) is to immediately make claim through re-distributive justice to have resources or power distributed to your benefit. More simply put to be strong is now to be weak, and to be weak is now to be strong. At least it is to the extent that the machinery of progressive redistributive justice works effectively (which of course is only half the time). Thus, as the author suggests, to succeed is automatically, at least if you are a male, to provide evidence of privilege, or structural inequality, or to put it another way, to succeed is to fail, and to fail is to succeed.
Inevitably, men find themselves somewhat confused by this situation. Both because it is an unprecedented situation whereby to admit or claim weakness (victimhood) may seem to be to a man’s advantage rather than to his disadvantage. Weak men have traditionally been bullied or worse, and the dilemma here is in part that the options for men here may not in fact be the same as for women or other fully fledged members of the victimocracy. If one looks at how progressive identity politics works, women win (power, acclaim, reward etc) both when they are weak (through redistributive justice) and when they demonstrate strength (e.g. you go girl scenarios; role-model scenarios etc). Men on the other hand, while they may be attracted to taking up the victim subject position, will in likelihood, at least for the present moment, be highly likely to lose both when they are strong and when they are weak. And of course that is what we see again and again. Women may reward strong men (with sex etc) but increasingly, to the extent that the sisterhood presides they are likely to be attacked to the extent that they are perceived to be strong. If on the other hand they are position themselves, or are positioned as victims, they will likewise be attacked on account of the inherent disdain that weakness in men has always attracted.
So, as we already know, men are damned in strength and damned in weakness. We have long perceived this double bind, but what we are only now grappling with is the slow revelation of the true nature of how the crypto-power of victimocracy works. As yet it both eludes and dazzles / vajazzles us.
It seems to me, the immediate task is to continue to identify the problem clearly, and only then to work out what kind of relationship with this new world order of hidden power would most benefit us. Taking up the victim position is not ultimately an option. However injustice is injustice, and there is nothing that says a plaint cannot be clearly described or remedy sought.
I’ll try to simply the thoughts the article is attempting to investigate. I may or may not be successful.
The political process, the nature of having a government, means there will always be victims. That’s the point of it. To victimize one group of people for the benefit of another. Furthermore political power is served by creating divisions between people. Convince this group the other group is responsible for their state of affairs. Then victimize both of them. Use groups against those that may challenge the ruling class.
It’s really that simple. There are only two real groups of humans. Those who rule and those who are ruled over.
A bit of a thought exercise: Malcolm X and Martin Luther King both eventually came to this conclusion that whites and blacks had more in common with each other than either with the ruling class. What happened to them? Others, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton promote division. What happened to them?
The last thing the ruling class wants is people to get together and figure out how they are being fucked. Look at the ruling class scramble to support Hillary Clinton while working to absorb Trump. Look how the media works to divide people on trivial nonsense with what it chooses to cover and how it covers it.
The moment the people aren’t fighting with each other and look up the gravy-train comes to a screeching halt. So everyone has to be a victim of everyone else but those who are victimizing everyone.
Is it permissible to accept victimhood as a man? Socially no, because that means realizing what the game really is. Realize how you’re being fucked by the system.
MLK would likely be offended what has happened to the black society of today. 95% of blacks voted obama. We are so far away from “content of character” as a society versus color of skin that he would be ashamed.
A bit about non-white and feminist SJW victimhood: by putting these groups on a hierarchy of how oppressed they are, it is the same as saying that white males are superior but in more patronizing terms. If whitey is the oppressor, the oppressed, logically, are weak. By saying it is institutionalize oppression, they are saying the oppressed are inherently weak. They are also saying (with this whole “ally” bit) that these groups are thoroughly incapable of survival without white male welfare.
So the SJW is saying: you are inherently inferior. You cannot survive without whitey. And white guys, it is your duty, your noblesse oblige, to help this pathetic lot out.
Like obama going to the all black congressional caucus at a blacks only event and telling them to vote for Hillary or he will be black offended. I plan on getting out my white robe, my pointy hat and going to my all white male club and have a bbq in honor of the founders of the white race. If blacks can have heroes’ like MLK .so, can I. !!!!
In a country where the only group that can be legally discriminated against in multiple areas is straight, white males, it is sophomoric to say that those who complain about this fact are falling into a “victimhood” mentality.
I don’t buy the jews hate white men thing at all. Neither that everyone hates white males. Why would the media run by jews continue to idolize white men like in movies?
If anything every race worships white men. All women of every race favors white men except for black women.
“All women of every race favors white men except for black women.”
Them too. However that is only in aggregate and as everyone has a personal preference (eg. I prefer slavic or Japanese women), so I usually dismiss those types of studies.
What language was that?
All is fair in love and war, so, tactically speaking, whatever works is justified in the short- and long-term. Whine about religious/ethnic prejudice. Be creative. Lying to one’s enemies is to be praised.
NEVER.
Unless you are acting or have a firm grip of what you are doing, “Victimhood” is never a philosophy to endorse or believe in
If so, you are waiting for some motherfucker in the sky to save us or wait for some motherfucker coated in red to blame it on. In that case, what will be the difference between us and women?
Men can not play the victim card unless they want to get their dick removed and pin to the wall as some sort of mantle due to other men, or women to use a trophy
Nobody wants to hear you complain. Nobody doesn’t give a fuck…..positively. Its just how things are. Sure, family and friends will listen but even that is a stretch. Don’t play that card unless you are aware of what you are doing. Period
https://fakephilosophy.com/
OP speaking here. My piece seems to sparkle some debate, so let me precise or phrase again some of the most important points here.
The kind of victimhood we should want is the kind of victimhood that is, in fact, productive. I carefully distinguished between personal resentment, which tends to be useless if one just drowns in it daily and does nothing in life, and shared victimhood, which allows for shared consciousness, shared moral intuitions, solidarity with other men and allies… We want a victimhood that calls for empathy. That binds us, that motives us. I would add that we should will more than the “hey brah, life is tough” attitude: did you think the Left happened to go that far by preaching resignation spirit? Of course not. IMO, if we are to do anything important, we have to be willing to unite and change things: end Leftist totalitarism, existing inside the academia and institutions, weighting in culture, be considered as eliciting sympathy or empathy just as any of the “minorities” today… The individualistic, pseudo-tough stance is becoming increasingly irrelevant. We have to be tough and willing of course. But remaining isolated and without moral ambitions is akin to doing nothing. We must be able to compete with Leftism everywhere it is if we want it destroyed for good one day. And here comes the right kind of victimhood – a kind that binds, that fosters energies, that moralizes just the right way.
Men should never expect pity and do NOT accept victimhood whatsoever. In order for you to avoid that, you have to be strong in the first place. Strong physically and mentally. If you really want to enjoy peace then strength comes before. Without strength and you being weak, you can never enjoy peace because you will always be a target.
Men take care of business and fix their problems. That is why men are men and women can never be men.
Men should not whine, moan, complain, cry, bitch, gossip. That is not manly trait at all.
Men get things done. Self responsibility in knowing that you can change your own inner being and the things around you. Of course you can’t change the whole world but you can do best to be the better version of yourself as always. People will respect you more and treat you more if you self respect yourself and put limitations with people. People treat you like shit if you allow them to.
People respect and fear power. Be the man with power. You are not obtaining power to try to control others but you do obtain power so that you can wield it when shit hits the fan and you use it to optimize yourself.
Also be proud of your roots and heritage. Your purpose is not to demean, attack and insult other heritage but just love your own more.
Do not let others shame you when you are succeeding. Let it fall in deaf ears.
If it’s within your control (your weight and money issues) then fix it. If it’s not within your control (geopolitics) then don’t worry about it.
Also in society, you are being held down in some ways but you also have ways to go around that. So no excuse if you fuck up.
If you don’t want it badly enough then you do not want it.
If you want something, you have to want it badly enough which causes you to lift your ass up and go get what you want.
If you say you want to get rich but you are playing video games, and being a lazy sloth then words don’t mean anything.
I see a lot of men who seem to be out of touch with reality and expect society to sympathize with them and so on. Society doesn’t give a shit about you Men.
Society only cares about the value Men brings. That’s it.
Society respects Men who are self made and picked up their own shit and changed it for the better. Not the men who cried all day, expecting sympathy and begging for respect. You have to TAKE IT.
Among men, you earn respect but when you are dealing with inferior creatures, you just TAKE IT away from them.
Bro I have spent quite some on your website and I must say this will be my last article read. My skin is not white and I don’t feel like being excluded from the inner circle for another day because I don’t “fit in”.
This is your undoing. Rather than leave it in the arena of gender, you bring race. You are a fool. Furthermore, life is a story and yours has yet to end. I would love to see the look on your face when you realize you’re all alone and all these things you rely on to work the pack are fucking useless. An abomination in the eyes of the one true god.