You’re a man, now what?


One of the arguments I hear from people near the alt-right is that we should emphasize masculinity. Men should be tough, they should conquer, they should take what they want and things like that.

In Europe, the idea of a gentleman was a level above that of a man. A gentleman was able to fight, capable of taking what they wanted, but governed their ability to plunder and conquer with morals.

This is something the alt-right should really consider. Say you do drive out the foreigners from America, and you have a white country. Say you do gain control of the US military and find you have the power to nuke, the power to plunder, the power to destroy.

Now what?

The wise ruler realizes that he has a target on his back, and so he buys off all of the potential shooters. He forms unions and alliances until everyone who could do him harm instead does harm to his enemies. Forming “win-win” relationships means you can sleep soundly at night, knowing someone else is watching your back.

And that’s what gentlemanly virtues are all about. Living in a society full of men capable of violence, but arranging things so that they don’t have to. That is the ultimate virtue.

Of course, being surrounded by brutes who don’t embrace these gentlemanly virtues reminds people why gentlemen are necessary, and reminds the brutes just what the gentlemen are capable of.

It’s always nice to watch a man in a top hat brutally beat a robber in the face with his walking stick-turned-long mace.

10 Responses to “You’re a man, now what?”

  1. Jason Gardner Says:

    Now what? You get to live your life in peace, with your people, according to your customs. Live as people have desire to live since time immemorial. I don’t understand why is that hard to grasp.

    All leaders have targets on their backs. All prosperous societies have targets on their backs. Good bad or ugly there is always a usurper or thief waiting in the wings.

    Do you not see that Apple has competitors, no matter how much good they do? The king always has a long list of usurpers to contend with.

    I’ll give you an example. Charlemagne kept the Danes at bay through military action. His successor, Louis the Pious, wasn’t quite Charlemagne. In a bizarre act he knelt before Pope Paschal I and confessed. This “had the effect of greatly reducing his prestige as a Frankish ruler, for he also recited a list of minor offences about which no secular ruler of the time would have taken any notice.”

    Well, the Danes took note. They saw a weak and pitiful ruler in Louis. The age of the Vikings soon commenced. First act, sacking churches and murdering clergy.

    The point is there there is always a barbarian probing, seeing if you are weak. Seeing how the barbarian can benefit. (Read any history book if this surprises you.)

    Once a prosperous society degenerates into weakness, the barbarians pounce. (See all of human history for an example.)

    Now if we in the west lack the fortitude to protect our homelands and conquered land, if we lack the fortitude to preserve ourselves as a people, what message does that send to modern day barbarians? It obviously encourages more of the same.

    Example, Muslim grooming gangs in UK. Muslims have been flooding the UK in the last 30 or so years. They started up grooming gangs (a.k.a. rape gangs) where they systematically raped thousands if not hundreds of thousands of native British girls.

    Now, the response from the UK is the usual navel gazing, apologizing, showing forgiveness, fighting Islamophobia, etc. Typical weakness.

    Now what does that say to the potential barbarians? If I were to guess, I’d think that the barbarians see that the UK is so weak that you can invade their lands and they’ll pay for your housing. They are so weak that you can rape their young women (the next generation of the British people) and they won’t bat an eye. In fact, they’ll apologize to you for the inconvenience of it all.

    Do you think the barbarians respect the British?

    Do you think it’s sustainable to have a civilization that makes no effort to protect it’s land and women? How long can a civilization last that thinks so little of its homeland and so little of its girls?

    Honestly, what civilization has existed for more than 30 seconds that pays people to colonize their homeland and purposefully looks away while a generation of their women are raped?

    What morals do modern Christians have that allows them to turn a blind eye to their own invasion and elimination? I’m honestly baffled.

    “The wise ruler realizes that he has a target on his back, and so he buys off all of the potential shooters. He forms unions and alliances until everyone who could do him harm instead does harm to his enemies. Forming “win-win” relationships means you can sleep soundly at night, knowing someone else is watching your back.”

    So what was Rome’s win-win with the Vandals? What was Persia’s win-win with the Mongols? What was Ireland’s win-win with Ivar the Boneless? I mean, the man sacrificed a monk to Odin on top of an Catholic altar. Seems like he didn’t understand free markets!

    More importantly, who are our enemies? Who should we show no mercy to? Honest question…

    • Jonathan Gardner Says:


      The “win-win” is always “You stay over there, or we’ll kill you. Or you become one of us, in thought and deed, but only if we think we need you.” There are well-enforced borders, and always have been, for successful nations and empires. The moment those nations forgot the importance of the borders, that’s when they started to fall apart. Such weakness comes from lack of virtue, the righteousness. Righteous, morally incorruptible men have no doubts that slaughtering the enemy is the right thing to do, and to do it efficiently is better than less efficiently.

      The issue we face today is that the enemy is already well in our borders, and have already setup outposts with foreign troops and more. We are already in a Civil War, and have been for some time, but we have failed to realize it. Donald Trump has done more to expose this fact, and help us see the enemy and their leaders among us, than anyone else.

      What do we do? We chase them out. We slaughter those who don’t run fast enough or who turn to face us. We push out their women and children, or take them as spoils of war. As I’ve said before, America is ready for another real war, we just need a real war leader to pull us together and put us in our ranks. The first morally virtuous man who raises his sword will find millions ready to flock to his standard. Compare with Captain Moroni, an ideal standard for such a leader. Or Gideon from the Bible.

      In the meantime, we hone our swords, strengthen ourselves, our resolve, our will, our moral convictions. We remind ourselves of the true law that governs the earth and the heavens, and we build our strength while biding our time in captivity. At some moment in the future, God will raise up a leader we can all flock behind and win with, a modern Moses.

      I think it’s important to note that America is a country with borders, well-defined but even today not secured. We are also a tribe of people who agree on some very fundamental assumptions about the nature of rights and the duty of men. I don’t care what your heritage is, whether you are 10th generation American or 1st generation, if you don’t agree with those basic assumptions, you are the enemy, and if you do, you are our ally. If those laws and assumptions are not written in our hearts, what are we, and what would we be fighting for?

  2. Jason Gardner Says:

    Anyways, as to the Alt-Right stuff… Here is some writings of a clear racist, a founding member of the Alt-Right, that just doesn’t get that it is the current year and trinkets and shekels are what matter, not the old fuddy duddy values of self disciple and service to one’s people.

    “Heterogeneity of stocks may lead to faction. A city cannot be constituted from any chance collection of people, or in any chance period of time. Most of the cities which have admitted settlers, either at the time of their foundation or later, have been troubled by faction.”

    “The guard of a [legitimate] king is composed of citizens: that of a tyrant is composed of foreigners.”

    “It is a habit of tyrants never to like anyone who has a spirit of dignity and independence. The tyrant claims a monopoly of such qualities for himself; he feels that anybody who asserts a rival dignity, or acts with independence, is threatening his own superiority and the despotic power of his tyranny; he hates him accordingly as a subverter of his own authority. It is also a habit of tyrants to prefer the company of aliens to that of citizens at table and in society; citizens, they feel, are enemies, but aliens will offer no opposition.” — Gee, who thinks like that…. Maybe our (((elites)))?

    To sum up… “Thus, a mass of mongrels without identity is easier to rule than a self-conscious people.” This is a truth which the hostile elites who rule the West seem to instinctively understand.

    This crazy Nazi goes by the name Aristotle. He lived some thousands of years ago.

    I find it astounding that conservatives reject the ideas that have been the foundation stock of western civilization, in fact, all civilization since writing was invented. They reject the ways of their ancestors, the tried and true ways, and embrace a worship of money over their own kind. (Doesn’t the Bible warn against this?)

    Take the Roman mos maiorum (Ways of the Elders). This code would be fully recognized as familiar by the Spartans, the Saxons, the Vikings, the Apache, the Amish, basically any fundamentally sound and functional society. Why does it seem so foreign to men now? Why do “conservative” men find it so odd?

    If someone advocates a return to the old ways, to the old values, to the ways that got us to this point of prosperity, they are looked as an oddball ignorant who just don’t understand that we are in the modern year and all the old stuff just doesn’t hold. Why?

    Please explain how modern conservative values are conservative. Why do conservatives love money, free markets, over their own people?

    I’ll leave you with a quote from another Alt-Righer, Quintus Ennius (239 B.C. – 169 B.C.) “Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque.”

    Or, in English, “The Roman state survives by its ancient customs and its manhood.”

    Dam Alt-Righters again!

    • Jonathan Gardner Says:

      You’d have to define conservatives before you could answer your question.

      If you listen to the media, you get a picture of conservatives that no one I have every spoken to shares. The same goes for their portrayal of the Alt-Right. Why people don’t go to the source, I don’t know. Our nation had better pay attention to the Alt-Right, or we’ll be swept over by them, or worse, those who claim to adhere to their principles will come to power and pervert it.

      Modern conservatives can roughly be divided into two camps: The Christian conservatives and the atheist conservatives. One side is worried about abortion, while the other is worried about free markets. As you wrote in another comment, those things are not the means to an end, but an end in themselves, evidence of something that is truly desirable, but cannot be obtained by focusing on outcomes.

      My conservatism, which honestly isn’t shared by anyone I’ve met yet, is conservatism in the truest sense: Go back to the Founding Fathers, read what they wrote, and apply it to modern times. They were not perfect men, not by any stretch of the imagination, but their ideas are timeless and relevant today more than ever.

      The inward focus of a “true” conservative should be self-discipline and what the Alt-Right equates with manliness. A true conservative works. A true conservative prays. A true conservative isn’t scared of things, but is wise like a serpent. A true conservative is self-reliant and charitable.

      The outward focus of a “true” conservative is conversion. The goal is not to win elections, it is to win converts who can understand the principles and promulgate them. The so-called leaders of the conservative movement are all shams, probably put there by foreign interests, at least foreign to conservatism. Donald Trump was wise not to call himself a conservative. I am thinking maybe I should stop calling myself a conservative to, the reason being is those men are associated with me.

      Government can do what it likes; as long as it is intent on doing anything more than protecting rights, then I am better off imagining myself as a slave and they as the masters. How to get them to get back on track? That would require a revolution, probably involving blood. But we need a leader, someone who is righteous enough that they can fight with the people and God on his side, and someone powerful enough that he can challenge the entire corruption that is our government. Likely, they’d have to be a military man, even better if they are currently serving.

      Conservatives like myself don’t value markets or freedom or anything like that. Those are the natural results of governing wisely. Conservatives are patriots, with the definition of that being that they love their country and their fellow man, simply because they share the same space on planet Earth. Conservative principles require that you stand up for other’s rights, else there will be no one to stand for your own. The only ethnicity I am concerned about are those who ethnically identify with our Founding Principles, and I wouldn’t mind having an ethno-state where that was the only ethnicity allowed. I know that people who look like me and smell like me happen to be like me, and I don’t even trust myself, so I would be looking for a system of government that could factor out the human element in the interests of protecting individual rights, no matter how that worked out.

      We have a lot to learn from the ancients, particularly that the foundation of a civil society is most certainly not civility. As we discovered when everyone carried a gun, and was willing to use it, that sort of arrangement creates civilizations, while having people, no matter what you call them, wandering around without a weapon or unwilling to use it when necessary are most certainly not living in a civil society.

  3. Jason Gardner Says:

    I would define a conservative as one who conserves the old ways. An excellent example would be the Amish. They are not troubled by current fads, what the media says is popular, the Khardashians, the Super Bowl or whatever else bullsh*t is going on. They go about their business as they always have: According to the time honored traditions of their people. Most barely speak English, but retain their original Pennsylvania Dutch.

    I admire them for that. They have their ways and the keep their ways.

    Contrast the Amish with the Mormons.

    The Mormons went to the Salt Lake Valley and created Salt Lake with the sweat of their brow. There was no Salt Lake City before them. Nothing. Your ancestors created that part of the West out of nothing. They conquered and built a new civilization. An amazing feat by any standard.

    They did this so that they could live as all people have desired. With their own kind, according to their own customs and worshiping their own God as they saw fit. Very noble goals indeed that almost every human who has ever lived would think right and proper.

    But, unlike the Amish, they lost it. The mountain west is now around 50% European (down from almost 100%) a century ago. One quarter of the population is Roman Catholic Hispanics. The percentage Mormon is around 60% and falling fast.

    In short, the place that was created to be a refuge for Mormons and the Mormon way of life is fast becoming just another generic city in the Mountain West.

    The Mormons have lost, or will soon lose, the home they created for themselves. They will soon be a political minority, they will soon be a social minority and an ethnic minority. They will soon become outsiders in the very city they created! Politically impotent and cast aside.

    In short, the Amish have conserved and the Mormons have not. I consider this a failure on the Mormon’s part. I may not be a practicing Mormon but I would sleep easier knowing that the Mormons kept their birthright.

    The problem with an non-Ethno state is that history is littered examples where people get butchered by their former neighbors who thought they were on good terms.

    The Hutus and the Tutsis.
    The Jews and the Russians.
    The Germans and the Jews.
    The Jews and the Palestinians. (Yes, they lived together for hundreds of years before the current status quo.)
    The British and the Boers.
    The Serbs and the Bosnians.
    The Sunni Iraqis and Iraqi Kurds.
    The Yazidi and the “Free Syrians”
    The Koreans and the Japanese. (Google “Korean Comfort Women.”)
    The Irish and the British.
    Sudan in general. (South is black animist while north is Arab Islamic)
    Islamic Nigerians and Christian Nigerians (Mrs. Obama’s “Bring Back Our Girls” Twitter campaign.)
    White South Africans and their African “brothers.”
    Ukrainians and Soviets (See Holodomor)
    Chinese and Nepalese.
    Chinese and Uyghurs.

    These are just off the top of my head. A comprehensive list would be long and terrible. And this is just the last few decades. History itself is practically a course on genocide. “I thought we were cool” rapidly and reliably becomes “please spare my life.”

    The only safeguard you have, as history has shown, is your own people. There are very few incidences of mistreatment by your brothers. Most people have a hard time hurting people of their own kind.

    Soldiers are notoriously reluctant to kill their own. There is an account (see “On Killing” by Lt. Col Dave Grossman) where Prussian infantry and infantry from Alsace Loraine (German as well) stood across from each other, at 30 meters, and shot for the better part of a day without hitting anyone. Civil war rifles are often found with multiple loads, meaning that the solider went through all the motions of firing but just couldn’t pull the trigger. They re-loaded on top of an unfired round. Didn’t want to be a coward but didn’t want to kill a fellow American.

    This is why most people have an in born fear (racism if you will) to people who do not look, act, dress and talk like them. Generally speaking, a person who is not like you was exponentially more likely to kill you. There is a reason for this instinct.

    I mean, even babies too young to talk are fearful of people that do not look like them. Long before they understand anything, they understand it is safer to be with their own.

    Research has shown what common knowledge always knew. The more diverse a population is the more police and government are needed to settle disputes between people with different cultural expectations. Another result is that the more you are surrounded by people from other cultures the more stressful it is for the average citizen.

    That is why people create little Italy, Chinatown, or other ethnic ghettos. To be with their own kind as a reprieve from a multicultural society.

    Funny story… In LA the Latino gangs are moving in and killing the black natives. (

    Or, history is repeating itself in real time and people are behaving as they always have…

    • Jonathan Gardner Says:

      Well, for the mormons, we intend to conquer the world. The West was merely a temporary hiding place. We’re now expected to move into every corner of the world, infiltrate society, convert the others peaceably, and change the world. We’ve already converted a few countries to majority mormons, so much so that the majority language in the church is no longer English. We intend to convert them all. Oh, and we encourage people to not emigrate nowadays. We recognize life is going to be easier for you with your own people, and besides, the church can’t grow if we keep bringing all the converts back to Utah.

  4. Jason Gardner Says:

    The Korean comfort women incident is a pretty good example that might be easy to understand as it was close in time and close to home.

    Long story short, Japanese invaded Korea and then kidnapped Korean women to work as sex slaves around the Japanese empire. Basically, Korean women got kidnapped and then gang raped for a decade or so. The estimate for the number of women varies but there is probably a hundred thousand or so Korean women that met this fate.

    More than likely your wife has relatives for who this is historical oddity is quite real.

    So the question is how did this happen? (Step 1, acknowledge it happened…)

    Why didn’t the Japanese just kidnap and rape their own women?

    Why Korean women and not, say, American women? Meaning why didn’t they come to America and kidnap your grandmothers?

    What about the Korean / Japanese the relationship led to this?

    Why couldn’t Korean men stop their wives, sisters and daughters from suffering this fate? Were they not gentlemen enough? Not righteous enough? Not praying to the right God(s)?

    As an alternate history exercise… Imagine that the Korean men were replaced with super Koreans the size of Hapthor Bjornsson (6’9″ 400 lbs) who were trained in the modern version of the Spartan Agoge. Men who’s only wish was to die in battle for their fatherland. Men who only practiced the art of war.

    Would the Japanese have still invaded these super Korean men and kidnapped their women?

    • Jonathan Gardner Says:

      What happened was the Chosun dynasty became entirely corrupt and forgot that you needed to have a military in addition to universities. They spent all their time studying virtue, but never practicing it. General Yi Sun Shin was their Moroni, and he was thrown in prison, multiple times, for it. (How dare he send thousands of young men to die!)

      Korea fell to Japan because Korea was weak. The men were weak. The government was weak. The economy was weak. The military was practically non-existent. They didn’t know how to fight, and they weren’t taught to have a reason to fight. Japan did what any Asian country would do at the time: Exploit, exploit, exploit. They saw no problem with the injustice they were committing, because they felt like Heaven had granted them the power to conquer, and so conquer they must.

      Note that Japan itself had weak men as well. You had the military/samurai class exploit the peasant class since time immemorial. Never did they imagine that a regular man could stand up and fight without professional soldiers to tell them how to fight. They had to warn themselves never to invade the mainland of the US because behind every blade of grass was a rifle and a man willing to shoot it.

      Anglo-Saxons, who knew since the beginning of recorded history that soldiers are just people, and knew how to inspire their men to fight and knew how to win battles and wars even against tremendous odds. Later on as the English dominated the islands and came to power in the world, the whole world got to see what real men look like. Behind the top hat, cane, and monocle of an English gentleman was someone who had been in wars and fought against seemingly insurmountable odds in some forgotten corner of the world.

  5. Jason Gardner Says:

    South African’s chanting “White man, you must die” and burning tires in front of a High School. Seems like a reasonable group.

    Make no mistake, they are not kidding around at all. There are killings going on at this very moment. Your people are currently in camps. It will not end well for them.

    This is our future if we don’t play our cards right… There is predicted to be 4,200,000,000 Sub Saharan Africans by 2100 compared to Around 800,000,000 European/whites. A ratio of over 5:1.

    They are going to want our stuff. They have proven time and time again that they do not have the cognitive abilities to form their own societies and generate wealth. But they will have the numbers to storm and raid ours.

    Five Africans (average IQ = 70) just might overcome the one weeny soy boy western “man” left to defend his country. I wouldn’t want to live through that, but then again, I’ve always been against roving gangs murdering my kin and raping my female family members. Weird, but that’s just my old school morals acting up.

    This can only end badly if we don’t face reality…

  6. Jason Gardner Says:

    I agree with your honest analysis of the Korean situation.

    “They spent all their time studying virtue, but never practicing it.” – Totally agree. It is easy to philosophize about virtue. It is very hard to practice it or even understand what it is. In fact, if you are doing it right, in my opinion, you should and will spend you’re entire life trying to figure it out.

    The name of the pope escapes me but I remember reading a warning that has not left my mind. The human mind, the pope warned, has a tendency to fall in love with its own creations.

    What that means to me is that it is very easy to fall in love with concepts and spend your entire life waxing poetic about them. It is extremely easy to talk about the virtues of this or that. It is much harder to get up early and go for a jog, lift weights, eat right, read history, read philosophy and humble yourself before the process of developing character or whatever you want to call it.

    “Korea fell to Japan because Korea was weak. The men were weak. The government was weak. The economy was weak. The military was practically non-existent. They didn’t know how to fight, and they weren’t taught to have a reason to fight. Japan did what any Asian country would do at the time…” — Or anybody would do, and did do, throughout history. Including the historical time frame known as now.

    “Behind the top hat, cane, and monocle of an English gentleman was someone who had been in wars and fought against seemingly insurmountable odds in some forgotten corner of the world.” Also behind the top had and cane was the blood of vicious warriors.

    Below is an entirely readable and thoroughly entertaining book about the Vikings. It gives a history of the people, which includes England because the English are pretty much all Viking descendants. Goes along way in explaining why the world we live in is the way it is and how it was shaped, from Iceland to the Black Sea, by an incredibly violent band of northerners. Highly recommend.

Leave a Reply to Jonathan Gardner Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: