"A ZERO-SUM BATTLE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ACTUAL VIOLENCE WOULD BE INVOLVED OR NOT (SUCH A CONFLICT WOULD PROBABLY BE A SOCIAL COLD WAR), WOULD DESTROY SOCIETY AS BIRTH RATES PLUMMET AND OTHER SOCIETIES MOVE TO COLONIZE WHAT A NOW-BARREN WEST HAS ABANDONED..."
LOVE IS REACTIONARY
PUBLISHED: 8th July, 2019 | By MATT MARSHALL
A little personal anecdote before we begin today, dear readers. Not too long ago, I met a particularly enchanting and high-spirited young woman. She was also a strange anomaly: an attractive progressive feminist. Obviously as anyone who has read my columns will understand, this torrid relationship did not last long. Its end reminded me of a certain airship disaster. But I’m not here to talk about my own personal struggles; I’m here to talk about an issue that I think is very close to the hearts of many young right men: that is the very future of relationships between men and women.
Relationships are very different then they were in my grand parents day. In many societies historically, different families often arranged courtship between men and women. This was a particularly strong impulse amongst the richer classes. Even in time periods where men and women were allowed to choose their romantic partners, such as Victorian and Edwardian Britain, parental approval was required. As Western society has become less family-oriented and more oriented towards the individual, courtship has changed. There is now more choice and freedom in what some call “the sexual marketplace”, but less purpose. While before young man were taught to fish, now they are taught to simple drop a hook in the water and hope for the best. The very fact that a fishing metaphor has become a household saying (e.g. “plenty more fish in the sea”) in regards to dating shows how desacralized the process has become.
We see the symptoms of this disconnect between men and women today all around us. Roughly half of marriages in North America end in divorce. Articles are written every day by incredulous boomers of the “free love” generation, flabbergasted that young people are “having less sex” than previous generations. More and more people are marrying later in life, or not at all (the latter still being a small minority, but more than in my grandparents day). I remember when the dateless dork in high school was a cliché, a stock figure who would eventually gain confidence and get the girl in a redemption story. Now there is an entire genre of memes and jokes dedicated to being single and lonely. Read a /feels/ thread on the Chans and try not to have a visceral reaction to posts describing the lonely and pessimistic life of many young single men.
What are the causes of this? Well they are varied. One is the decline of organized religion, which has caused many social problems by undermining the meaning and the social bonds underneath our communities. Another is looming civilizational anxiety and dread on all fronts. Consider the “baby boom” after the Second World War, in which the survivors looking forward to a bright new future (especially in the immediate post-war before the Berlin Airlift) married and had families in record numbers. Today with people worried about every real and imagined threat from climate change to killer clowns, there seems to be less societal incentive to start a family. Feminism is of course one of the largest causes. Feministic ideals have been around for a while, and while every feminist claims that it refers to “equality between men and women”, in reality, feminism is a revolutionary movement dedicated to the overthrow of real or perceived masculine power. The first wave of feminism followed on the heels of universal white male suffrage and demanded the vote for women. While the first wave is deeply flawed from a reactionary position, it was at least coherent with classical liberal principles. The second wave was the feminism of the sexual revolution, demanding abortion, birth control and “free love”. While their grandmothers had wanted the same political power as their husbands, these women attacked the concept of monogamy itself. Sex and pregnancy were divorced, as were sex and marriage. However the sexual revolution went even further, with some of the more radical feminists of the 1960s and 70s divorcing sex and love, arguing that men were simply there to give women sexual pleasure and not for long-term affection or commitment. Naturally some hedonistic men also took to this with zeal. Now we are in third or fourth wave feminism (honestly who knows at this point), and men and women are actually becoming each other. The end result of feminism is the overthrow of the concept of gender itself, with an androgynous population that has sex purely for pleasure, aborts its children and flits between masculine and feminine roles as easily as I flit between glasses of whiskey.
So feminism is a revolutionary and self-destructive ideology that believes in replacing historical patriarchy with a fluid social blend of gender and sexuality. The male reaction to this has been varied. Some men have submitted to the new order and wholeheartedly embraced this post-monogamy and post-heterosexuality dreck, becoming the loathsome male feminist. Some others have used it to hedonistic advantage to have as many sexual partners as possible, trading meaningful connection for carnal release. Some men have also copied some feminist tactics, building the Men’s Rights Movement. While the MRM has some laudable goals, such as the right of fathers to see their children in divorces, overall it is the gender equivalent of College Republicans. An organization trying to copy the lefts playbook for right wing goals and therefore doomed to failure. And finally we have a number of men who are rebelling against the current consensus, although in different ways.
The most identifiable rebels are the “incels”, or at least to the left they are. I think the left has made a number of drastic errors in addressing the incel question, taxonomy being one of them. Self-identified “incels” don’t really exist as an ideology, except for a very tiny cargo-cult around notorious whacko Elliot Rodger. The men who are labelled as “incels”, do not have any single set of coherent beliefs, as far as I can tell at least. Many of them are right wing, but not uniformly so, and they don’t really seem to be a movement or have any organizations. They are simply young men who have trouble meeting women and forming relationships with them. And there are a lot more of them than there were in earlier eras.
People a lot smarter than me have dedicated a lot of ink to this particular issue: why the lack of intimacy and connection, despite are hyper-sexualized culture? Part of the reason is that women are increasingly dating for pleasure rather than to look for a prospective husband. This means they only date a small pool of men. Many men also feel like the perfect women will fall into their lap, they have been told by popular culture that the nice, quiet guys get the girl in the end. Pornography provides a Band-Aid solution to the great structural cracks in lonely souls. No one is taught about relationships anymore, we expect the kids to find it out by themselves. And finally, the political partisanship of today makes dating a minefield. I personally know the pain of having a meaningful relationship end because of politics, what is astounding is that it began in the first place. The “incel” represents one side of the choice for young men. A sort of nihilism with dignity. He may not have romantic relationships or future prospects for a family, but he will not bend the knee to shrieking feminist harpies either. He represents the angry rebel, the man who utilizes his own pain into a form of antipathy against the status quo. He gleefully mocks the loathsome progression of the destruction of society, rather like a clown (I adore the Honkler meme and wish to make an entire column about it soon).
As cathartic as the rage and humour of being an “incel” might be, it is ultimately a dangerous endeavour. Western Civilization has survived religious wars, race wars, and class wars; but we have yet to see a gender war. A zero-sum battle between men and women, regardless of whether actual violence would be involved or not (such a conflict would probably be a social cold war), would destroy society as birth rates plummet and other societies move to colonize what a now-barren West has abandoned. We need men and women to get along. The answer is a different rebellion, the rebellion of Self-Mastery that I mentioned in my last column. To the young men who are reading this who may be lonely and companionless, I have some helpful advice. First of all, you matter and you are better than most of the hollow-eyed you are trying to embrace. Do not look down on women, for they have been misled and manipulated by godless modernity as well. First of all, you must master your own strengths. Secondly, you must be honest about your beliefs from the start, do not make the mistake I made of dating hardcore progressive feminists. There are many women who might be left-leaning, but who will be swayed to more traditional modes of thinking if they are approached about it in the right ways. I recently had the pleasure of talking to a large group of young right-wing women and asked them about advice for young right wing men dating. They told me that men who were confident in themselves, worked a job and were clean and took care of themselves. They all made clear that they weren’t set on He-Man types with 5 yachts, but weren’t going to go out with the couch potato either. Self-improvement and mastery is necessary to get the ball rolling. Once it is rolling, you can be more sensitive (or less so, depending on your particular personality), but you have to come out confident and not reek of desperation. Or anything else for that matter. While the “pull oneself up by the bootstraps” is a rightfully mocked boomer talking point, in matters of self-improvement and relationships, it is necessary. One should seek out friends, both men and women for help in these endeavours. Western Civilization will perish without families, and many souls will be in the grip of modernity without the healing of romantic and familial love. Improve yourself, and help improve your brothers around you. The right women will take notice. Be confident and strong with them, but not haughty or cruel. As mentioned in my last column, the left is terrified of “normalization”. As a certain right-wing Jew whose handle is FrameGames once said, “there is nothing more humanizing than a love story”. The right needs families, it needs joy, it needs love and affection. Many of you are bitter, and not without reason. But you must shake the bitterness from your hearts. Marriage and romance is ultimately a reactionary position.
FOR A NEW FASCISM IS THE SECOND FULL LENGTH DOCUMENTARY FILM BY RICHARD HEATHEN AND LIBERTY MACHINE NEWS
IF YOU ENJOY OUR CONTENT AND WOULD LIKE TO CONTRIBUTE. SIMPLY DONATE THE PRICE OF A PINT, CHEERS.