Render unto Caesar

Whenever Islam is defended by its Western enablers an insidious sentiment of implied yuppie universalism lies just under the surface. “It’s a religion of peace!” we hear like clockwork every time Muslims peacefully relieve someone from the burden of being alive.  Embrace diversity! When demographic shifts alter the very character of streets, neighborhoods or entire towns.  All men do it! After the last refugee rape accusation. This belief has not only brought down entire countries abroad through Western intervention, but now threatens Western society as a whole with large scale immigration from the very regions that we’ve destabilized.

What do I mean here by ‘implied yuppie universalism’? It’s simply radical egalitarian projections applied to the nature of man, to put it simply, all peoples of the Earth secretly want to be live in a secular, liberal society with no restrictions to personal, sexual or economic freedoms whatsoever. Everyone wants to be ‘free’ like me.  This belief is supported by such ideas as “The End of History”, which posits that Western Liberal Democracy is the apotheosis of human political development.  Masai herders really just want to watch Two and a Half Men on Blu-Ray, Bedouin are just repressed homosexuals waiting to attend their first Pride Rally, the Chinese don’t need that pesky Confucius to burden them with antiquated ‘family values’ and okay sure, Islam effectively prohibits democracy, but wouldn’t it be grand if you Muslims could vote? At its core it relies on the same assumption as the generic “Freedom” the Neocons loved to spread forcefully, but rather than spread Freedom through bombs, the Liberal Establishment has found a new fascination with importing millions of people who adhere to the same Religious Ideology we’ve been in conflict with not just for 15 years, but for 15 centuries under the odious ideology of multiculturalism.


Liberal projections in specific, but Western assumptions in general, are one of the more fascinating remnants of “White Man’s Burden” and other colonial forms of self-assured, self-serving altruism that remain with us today.  The difference is we can no longer outright say our culture, society, way of life, or even our people, are in any way superior to any others that have existed.  At most, we should passively aggressively imply it is through some sort of virtue signaling.  Some on the Left would even like to contend that we are inferior in every way, our prosperity being the result of exploitation in general, and on an individual level, privilege.  Female Genital Mutilation? That’s just an expression of their culture, you bigot, now let me literally shit on your flag.


Despite this contradiction, however, Liberals and Neocons have both assumed that our vaguely atheist, sexually ‘liberated’, decadent, secular democracy with a powerful Hollywood ‘non-culture’ is the end of the line, the destination that all peoples, in all places at all times were somehow on the path towards; we just happened to stumbled upon it first. Neocons wanted to rush this process on with Kickass Country Ballads, American Flags and Stealth Bombers.  My one begrudging concession made to Bush Jr. was his assertion that ‘Islamo-Fascism’ (an inaccurate, nebulous term) was indeed the enemy, and in light of 9/11 a dangerous enemy that needed eradicated (but first let’s eliminate their biggest rival, Saddam Hussein!).  Their overall mission destabilized an already precarious political environment in the Middle East, ushering us, 15 years later, into a world where Islamic Fundamentalism is more powerful than ever.

The new Liberal Establishment, however, doesn’t see Islamic Fundamentalism as an enemy, and especially not a religiously motivated one.  In the typical leftist fashion, socioeconomic injustices, especially ones caused by colonialism or, somehow, Islamophobia, are the main causes of violence perpetrated by these “temporarily embarassed liberals”.  Instead of bombing people with an utterly incompatible worldview into accepting ours, the Left has instead invited millions of Muslims into Europe and North America in, ostensibly, a display of compassion and human rights for refugees.

The facts of this, of course, are utterly incongruent with the manipulative and obviously staged images of children washed up on the beach or covered in ash.  The media propaganda is meant to tug the heart-strings of women and weak men everywhere into accepting not just actual war-refugees escaping Islamic persecution, but of mostly young, illiterate men from far from Syria.  These economic migrants have been whipped into a frenzied search for their own El Dorado, where housing, money and the very real prospect of getting your very own blonde girl (jungfrau, alter!) are the prizes for the long, often dangerous, journey.

The issue is, however, is these migrants don’t really seem interested in the liberal democracy part of the deal.  And are certainly not in it for the safety.  Most migrants pass through half a dozen war-free zones that also, just a total coincidence I’m sure, don’t happen to have very generous welfare packages.  Strangely enough, some of these men from societies that condone and encourage tribal warfare, subjugation of women and the total submission of apostates aren’t just plopping on the sofa and playing xbox like their western, emasculated counterparts.

Instead, they’re grabbing axes and murdering people on trains.  They’re assaulting women en-masse.  They’re driving rigs through crowds of people.  They are utterly rejecting the Western worldview while leeching from the prosperity of the decadent West.  Most importantly, they are enacting demographic changes that Europe may never, ever, recover from.  The Left will contradictorily espouse both multiculturalism and an expectation of assimilation in response to normal, every day European resistance to this mass movement of people.  A light-bulb, say, from Somalia, is completely interchangeable with a light socket in France.  Right? Right?!


What the Left fails to realize, however, is the extent that the Islamic religious worldview informs their lives; Islam isn’t practiced in a mosque on Sundays between 9 and 10:30am followed by a fun brunch and mimosas, but a holistic political ideology that dictates how entire societies should function.

Religion, and this is the projection I spoke of earlier, is at best seen as a weekly inconvenience to a Westerner.  It may be a good way to keep up with friends and continue a family tradition, and hey, it may even stem from genuine belief in the Lord!  But Christianity is seen by many as either a decorative religious affectation or evil incarnate, not as a viable economic, political and judicial system with a deep jurisprudential tradition.  Christianity has certainly informed many of our beliefs, values and judgement protocols.  We do not, however, base our legal system directly from its teachings. We do not base our daily economic interactions from it.  We do not belong to the Christian State, but rather to a hypothetical Kingdom of God that exists solely in the next life.  Just as the early Christians did not renounce their valued Roman Citizenship, we today can be staunchly French and Catholic, American and Protestant and follow their respective legal codes based either in Common, Roman or Napoleonic Law.

Christ himself sowed the seeds of secularism in the Gospel with the source of my title;  Render unto Caesar what it Caesar’s / Render unto God what is God’s.

Mark 12:13-17 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
The Question about Paying Taxes

13 Then they sent to him some Pharisees and some Herodians to trap him in what he said. 14 And they came and said to him, “Teacher, we know that you are sincere, and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with partiality, but teach the way of God in accordance with truth. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not? 15 Should we pay them, or should we not?” But knowing their hypocrisy, he said to them, “Why are you putting me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me see it.” 16 And they brought one. Then he said to them, “Whose head is this, and whose title?” They answered, “The emperor’s.” 17 Jesus said to them, “Give to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they were utterly amazed at him.

We see here an attempt by the Pharisees to test and expose Jesus’ teachings as false.  If you truly proclaim the Kingdom of God as his earthly Son, how then, do you deal with paying taxes to an earthly power? Jesus’ response is up to some interpretation, but ultimately the message is clear; Give to your earthly power what they require from you (taxes, military or civil service) while also fulfilling your religious duties (prayer, worship and true belief).  With this statement, even though the later Roman Empire could be aggressively Christian with its state church and pagan persecution, they still noted a distinction between Church and State, Holy Law and Earthly Law.

Mohammed, on the other hand, founded a distinctly political religious ideology.  There was no Caesar, but only Allah, and his messenger was Mohammed.  The fierce pagan tribal identities found in 7th century Arabia, with blood feuds, constant raiding, matrilineal merchants and patrilineal nomads and an established Jewish monotheistic influence simply could not find itself united by anything but a total cultural overhaul.  W. Montgomery Watt writes “For us a religious body is a group of people who come together for common worship, and perhaps for some other limited purposes; but for Muhammad the religious community was a body of people associated with one another in the whole of their lives, that is, was also a political unit” (pg. 106 Mohammad: Prophet and Statesman).  Furthermore, as Mohammad furthered his political community, the early Muslims “had no other way of describing it than to say it was an ummah. It was neither a tribe, nor a federation of tribes, nor a kingdom; and these were the only political units with which they were familiar” (pg. 107).

We see Mohammad deftly deal with the age old Arabic tradition of ‘striving’ (jahada), a clever Arabic euphemism for raiding loot-filled merchant caravans.  This was effectively an age-old Arabic past time, meant to relieve the energies of young Arab men on the exciting, and only slightly dangerous equivalent of cattle rustling in the Arabian deserts.  Caravan guards often ran away before anyone got hurt, and wise raiders only chose the weakest of targets to hit as to avoid actual battle. As more Arabs submitted to Allah and joined his ummah, however, Mohammad could no longer allow the caravan ‘striving’ to take place within his new community, lest his fragile alliances be beset by blood-feuds literally informed by lex talionis.

Once again Watt addresses the sanctification of economic activities while simultaneously allowing us modern readers to see how untruthful Muslims and their enablers are when they say Jihad is just some generic term for self-improvement:

“The word translated ‘ strive ‘ is jahada, and the corresponding verbal noun is jihad, or ‘ striving ‘ which came in course of time to have the technical meaning of ‘ holy war ‘. This change from the razzia to the jihad may seem to be no more than a change of name, giving the aura of religion to what was the same activity. Yet this is not so… A razzia was the action of a tribe against another tribe… Jihad, however, was the action a religious community against non-members of the community… It was this ‘ religious ‘ character of the jihad which channeled the energies of the Arabs in such a way that in less than a century they had created an empire which stretched from the Atlantic and the Pyrenees in the West to the Oxus and the Punjab to the East.  It seems certain that without the conception of the jihad that would not have happened (emphasis mine)”  (pg. 108-109).

Above not only demonstrates Mohammad’s deft politicking, but also the extent to which every action had a place within Islamic teachings and jurisprudence.  Jesus never codified “not in peace, but a sword” into an established political system with details of court proceedings or how to negotiate a trade deal; rather his ideas were syncretized into an already established imperial system long after his crucifixion.  The original Nazarene communities, effectively communes, were the closest thing to enacting Jesus’ Kingdom of Heaven on Earth itself.  Though Mohammed did syncretize some pagan traditions, such as the supreme holiness of the Kab’ah, he did so tactically and as part of a living, established Islamic State that encompassed all aspects of the human experience.  In an Islamic State, there is little distinction between a religious, political or judicial leader; Mohammad was all three.  In fact, before his passing, Mohammad did not establish the first Caliph, Abu-Bakr, as the official head of state, emperor, king or prince but rather as simply “leader of daily prayers”.

This is just a small snippet of Islamic history which can highlight the Left’s inability to comprehend the current demographic upheaval taking place in Europe today.  They naively assume that all people want what they have; a secular, liberal democracy and hope that exposing people, especially Muslims, to our decadence will somehow lead them to “see the light”.  In the obvious and clear failure of these migrants to even attempt assimilation, the tired justifications of multiculturalism and accusations of Islamophobia come back into the playbook as Shariah law slowly ‘enriches’ our way of life while “Osmanen Germania” becomes more firmly established.


Right Wing Counter-Culture

Stepping out of the murky trenches of the ongoing culture war and viewing the West from the lofty perch of, say, an observation balloon, one starts to get an appreciation for the larger concepts at hand.  Beyond the barrages of memetic artillery, of the clashes between shills and weaponized autist stormtroopers, one comes to a startling realization; Conservatism, or more specifically, the Right, and auxiliary Right-leaning viewpoints, is a legitimate counter-culture.  In the real world, it is a socially dangerous thing to say that there are only 2 genders.  Stating your apprehensions about both Islamic immigration and terrorism could get you arrested.  Noting that the “Martyrs” of BLM were dangerous thugs and not delicate angels on their way home from Church could get you ostracized, or worse.

When we think of counter-culture, we typically think the Counter-Culture, ie. the mass student protests of the late 60’s against what was, at that time, “The Establishment”.  Like most Americans, we’ve been educated to see these protests as an inevitable result of deep injustice and oppression.  That view is not entirely wrong.  The Vietnam War was a tragic quagmire and government enforced segregation was a real issue that was directly targeted against the black community in an overt form of racism.  Speaking up about those issue certainly took a form of courage that I respect, and I for one am glad our ancestors put in the work, faced “The Man” and overcame what most of us can agree were real issues.  Unfortunately, these legitimate struggles against government overreach, racial injustice and needless war during the heat of the Cold War led to a wider rejection of the fundamental values of American society by the socialist, feminist and pot-smoking triple entante formed on college campuses nationwide.  Leftists who protested against government overreach have today become the primary instigators of intellectual oppression, censorship and the general malaise that has begun to truly plagued our country.

Fair enough

The U.S. was not alone in this surge of juvenile pinko protest; France and Quebec are notable examples of large-scale youth-born dissent of the dominant values at the time.  In Quebec, the FLQ engaged in terror operations for a sovereign, socialist Quebec free from “Anglo-Saxon Imperialism”.  Their campaign was part of a wider rejection of the “White Anglo Saxon Protestant”, which is unsurprising in a Franko-Catholic province under the yoke of the Commonwealth.   Not surprisingly, Socialist France is one of the most Orwellian countries in Europe today thanks to its ardent secularism, “hate speech” laws and growing crime and terrorism.
The U.S. however, was unique in that it was the WASP youth themselves who rejected en-masse the values of their parents, embracing instead a socialist radical egalitarianism informed at least partly by the academic influence of the Frankfurt School’s Critical Theory.   This ideology, fresh from the minds of German-Jews (Ashkenazi) who survived WW2, rejected hierarchy, racial, sexual or national identity, saw the family, sexual mores and Christianity as corrupt institutions, framed success as the product of privilege, framed failure of poverty as the product of oppression and ultimately saw capitalism as inherently corrupt and unjust.  Does any of this sound familiar?

What’s Aleppo?

This rejection of American values in favor of radical egalitarianism and feminism did not extend to common, red-blooded, blue-collar Americans who stand up for the pledge and play catch with their sons.  This was quite literally Marxist indoctrination from professors to their students )(something I personally experienced in University as well) fomenting rage and hostility to the very society that allowed them the wealth, security and freedom of one of the most prosperous nations in history.  These students who rejected traditional family values, embraced homosexuality, promiscouity and socialism were, despite being baby boomers, demographically a drop in the bucket compared to society at large.  This small, radical cohort, however, started a culture war that has not ceased to this day.  This cohort eventually grew up, leaving some, but not all of their agenda behind.  As they left their picketing, activism and giving their parents headaches behind, they started to inhabit influential posts in society; writers, teachers, directors and civil servants.

What they lacked in numbers, they had in influence, as of now holding the mantle of the dominant ideology of both the State and its 4th column media apparatus at this time, ya know, the current year.  The Right didn’t go down without a fight, to be sure, but ultimately the only political party for the American conservative was the same to out-source, undermine and destroy the American worker at every chance… But I digress.  The early battles of the Culture Wars were exciting and televised.  William F. Buckley called Gore Vidal a queer on television in the same era that entire cohorts of homosexuals, newly “liberated” from admittedly “unfair” anti-sodomy laws, died from HIV.  Neo-Cons engaged in imperialist invasions while entire American cities were left in squalor, drug addiction and violence in the “War on Drugs”.  Feminists not only forced most women into the workforce, but in doing so helped score the first decisive battle against the nuclear family and its . Manufacturing and energy jobs, the mainstay of the hard-hat wearing American Man of every race, were off-shored by hand-clasping merchants of the “Conservative” variety.

After a few notable conservative resurgences (ie. The odious NeoCons and their wasteful wars) The overton window has been shifted far, far to the left.  Politically Incorrect is a term used so often as to have almost lost its meaning, but when we refrain from speaking up at work, in public or at school for fear of being fired, ostracized or physically attacked we instinctively understand its consequences.   Our very understanding of reality has to shift to meet with the leftist narrative or else be engaging in thought-crime.  This is not far from what the original leftists dealt with when they questioned the system at hand.  There was a time when it was certainly “politically incorrect” to question segregation at the dinner table, or at work.  The dominant ideology, or memeplex, seems to act as a living organism, attacking burgeoning memes that could undermine its own ability to reproduce.  Demonstrators were shot. They were beaten. Some rightfully so, but the point remains: Regardless of who is in power memetic self-preservation is the primary need.

The most ironic of this shift in power is the Left continues to see itself as a counter-cultural fighter.  To see itself as currently embroiled in a conflict with the Right, at any moment its guard could come down and before long Mexicans will be marched into death camps where Arbeit Macht Frei, homosexuals are castrated and women are physically chained to the kitchen.  Portraying yourself as the underdog even as you hold the whip is a powerful tactic.  It gives you the power to control the moral high-ground while doing everything in your power to further your own ends.  The mere existence of say, Fox News, gives the appearance that the Right is right here, right now, trying to break up your union, sell your children to a factory and send poor black kids to the next war.  This controlled opposition is the ultimate deception.  The Left uses the political machinery of the Old Rulers, that is, Wall Street, Megacorporations and The Military-Industrial Complex with the Moral Indignation of Anti-Segregation marchers.  It’s as if their fight never ended, even as they stand dominant, manipulating and guiding the national narrative in much the same way the Old Rulers did.


Which brings me to my original point: The culture war rages on, but in a more, say, Terminator 2 underground resistance style.  Before the advent of the internet, the Memeplex in power could effectively completely dominate the political and social narrative of the time.  You were only allowed glimpses into the world if your handlers deemed it necessary.  Right-Wing activism in the sense of boots on the ground is a comical concept, and simply does not work (  You will be smashed and labeled a Nazi, Fascist, Segregationist or worse, a member of a loving and stable family.  You cannot achieve any sort of moral high-ground, even as your communities weaken, your women are assaulted and your government creeps further and further into an Orwellian nightmare.

Thanks to the internet, however, the Mainstream Media has lost its monopoly on the flow of information.  Young Westerners the world over are finding their own “safe space” where they can express their doubts that there are 92 genders.  Where they can doubt that norms of masculinity and femininity have a biological basis. Where they can doubt that everything bad that ever happened to anyone, anywhere, at anytime is somehow the result of their inherent racism and white privilege. Where they can doubt that allowing millions of people with a largely hostile and incompatible worldview to our own into our land is truly the “moral high ground”.   Unfortunately, the Government is slowly strangling the freedom the internet allowed.  You can now be jailed, fined or fired for posting Thought-Crime on Twitter.  You can be doxxed.  You can have a cartoon frog be declared a form of hate-speech.   These Orwellian measures, as comical or unbelievable as they may seem, are clearly reactionary to the huge success this counter-culture has achieved without having to face water cannons and batons.  It is a sign of their weakness, and of our strength.

The Left has been flanked by a force of weaponized autists and regular Americans tired of the regurgitated soundbites given to them by the media handlers.  The lies, the manipulations and the narrative that clearly conflicts with reality.  Fortunately for us, the Left has a deep inability to understand irony, satire or comedy. No, really. (HUGH MUNGUS WUT). Most comedy is forbidden in a leftist worldview, anyway.  Trigger warning, i’m about to make a joke! The ability to be an offensive, edgy shitlord is a purely right-wing phenomenon solely because the Left’s greatest weapon is a +5 Armor of Feels.  This is how the “alt-right” has made such huge ground in the culture war; Reals, not Feels, is how these autists play.


In the grimdark, cyberpunk semi-reality we live in, who could have predicted a major political dynast of the most powerful country on Earth would declare war on a cartoon frog?

Dreadnought Chesterton

“We often read nowadays of the valour or audacity with which some rebel attacks a hoary tyranny or an antiquated superstition. There is not really any courage at all in attacking hoary or antiquated things, any more than in offering to fight one’s grandmother. The really courageous man is he who defies tyrannies young as the morning and superstitions fresh as the first flowers. The only true free-thinker is he whose intellect is as much free from the future as from the past.This is, as I say, the first freedom that I claim: the freedom to restore. I claim a right to propose as a solution the old patriarchal system of a Highland clan, if that should seem to eliminate the largest number of evils. It certainly would eliminate some evils; for instance, the unnatural sense of obeying cold and harsh strangers, mere bureaucrats and policemen.”

— G.K. Chesterton, What’s Wrong With the World

Physical Weakness is a Status Signal

“Physical strength is the most important thing in life. This is true whether we want it to be or not” -Mark Rippetoe, Starting Strength

Can a man remain a man if he is physically weak? We’re not talking mental, spiritual or intellectual strength, but quite simply the ability to engage physically with the world by bearing heavy loads.

I have justified my own past weakness due to scheduling (I work for 1 week on, 5 days off), nature of work (in the woods, away from any gym), and lack of funds to provide self with enough food to even gain weight.  Honestly, they do make things hard (especially the food!), but ultimately, I tried to rationalize my skinny arms and narrow shoulders as those of an intellectual. I’m smart, see. I read books, see. My mind is my greatest weapon! I don’t need physical strength when I can out-think, out-rationalize and out-factoid someone. Right?


If men don’t respect you as a physical force, they will not respect you at all.

Thanks to writers like Jack Donovan and figures like Justin Garcia (Master Chim), I feel rightfully ashamed and dishonored to hold myself and speak of masculinity in my community yet myself not embody physically those very ideals.  What’s the point of all the Nietzsche, the Evola, or the Paeans of Sparta if you cannot pick up heavy shit and put it back down again? Is the 250lb meat-head who has never read a book in his life more masculine than someone who speaks and thinks of masculinity? I’d say so.

The Rightful King

“There is no creature on earth half so terrifying as a truly just man”
-Varys “The Spider” on Stannis Baratheon

Stannis Baratheon, the First of his Name, Rightful King of the Andals and of the First Men.  Rightful Heir to the Iron Throne, yet universally rejected of that role. Peerless tactician, clumsy politician.  Fierce fighter, reluctant lover. Subtly nurturing, quick to condemn.  Driven as much by insecurity, stubbornness and recklessness as by duty, honor and justice, Stannis Baratheon is one of my favorite characters, fictional or not, that I have yet encountered.

Part Macbeth, Part Cato Uticensis, Stannis embodies concepts that others merely give lip-service to, stands firm where others waver, and has infamously turned suffering into a teeth grinding artform.

Here I will demonstrate 3 reasons why Stannis Baratheon is a fookin’ legend, and worth any man’s admiration.

1.)    He knows this struggle shall lead to his death

“I know the cost! Last night, gazing into that hearth, I saw things in the flames as well. I saw a king, a crown of fire on his brows, burning… burning, Davos. His own crown consumed his flesh and turned him into ash. Do you think I need Melisandre to tell me what that means? Or you?”

Despite his admission that his pursuit of the Iron Thrones shall lead to his own, possibly horrific, death, Stannis carries on. He could have easily knelt before Geoffrey, Tommen, Robb or his own brother, Renly and led a comfortable, stable life in any manner that he chose. He eschewed his humble wealth, his castle, his security, his own family’s name in order to pursue something all said was impossible, illegal and foolhardy. Why? Simply put, Stannis believes, above all, in adherence to duty and its associated tasks. From a purely legal standpoint, Stannis is King of the Andals, and that is alone for Stannis to pursue something he admittedly doesn’t even want:

“I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head, but so long as I am the king, I have a duty … If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark … Sacrifice … is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice”

And this is ultimately what drives him:  Responsibility and duty are the foundation of a just society, and to eschew these tenets in light of adversity or obstacles is a moral weakness. To give up on his beliefs simply because adhering to them is difficult is not an option.

2.)    In victory or defeat, Stannis does not lose sight of his goals

During his brother’s rebellion, Stannis was tasked with holding Storm’s End, and hold it he did. The loyalist lords sent a large detachment of their main ground forces to deal with what they thought would be a quick and painless siege. Stannis was young, inexperienced and had only a small garrison. What the loyalists only later came to realize was the dogged determination the young Baratheon had. Rather than surrender as the loyalist lords held extravagant feasts before his castle walls, Stannis and his men ate dogs, cats and book glue for the better part of a year until Stannis’ future confidant, Davos, smuggled in fish and onions to the besieged party. This loyalist army, 50,000 strong, was kept from the main battleline, allowing his brother Robert to more easily defeat the other loyalist forces and ultimately win the war. Stannis was never thanked for this.

Siege of Great Wyk

Stannis went on to have an illustrious military career, staging daring naval battles against the Greyjoys at  Great Wyk and Fair Harbor. Many readers love Victarion and Euron Greyjoy, battle-hardened badasses who know not the meaning of mercy. Stannis made them his bitch multiple times, on their own terms and in their own element with a navy he built himself (once again, on his brother’s command).

Later on, with a small force, Stannis was able to withstand Wildfire and the might of King’s Landing in a near-victory to his cause.  Shaken, but not defeated, Stannis mobilized the remnant of his army to utterly crush the 300,000 strong wildling army, mammoths, giants and all, to prevent the certain death of the Night’s Watch defenders. This was with 1,500 knights.

Stannis inspired the loyalty of the Northern Mountain Clans, defeated the Ironborn menace in the North, and captured Asha and Theon Greyjoy while restoring local control of the North.  His shrewd battle-planning seems unphased by the historic blizzard currently ravaging his army outside of Winterfell, where, contrary to what HBO says, Stannis will win with ingenious tactics as described by Brynden Bfish.

And, even if HBO’s fanfiction comes true, Stannis will rise from the snow to once again wage war against the usurpers… Or die trying.

3.)    Behind (dark) blue eyes, lies a deeply caring man

Many criticize Stannis as a cold, uncaring and cynical man. This is all mostly true, but shows a lack of full understanding of his character. Stannis was raised in an environment where he was neither the strongest, nor the most loved, a true middle-child. He was berated and ridiculed his entire life by Robert, and made ashamed by the charming Renly.  Stannis watched as his own mother and father were killed in a shipwreck right before the castle walls. As he grew old enough to hunt, Stannis cared for an injured Goshawk in one of the most touching excerpts of character background in ASOIAF:

“When I was a lad I found an injured goshawk and nursed her back to health. Proudwing, I named her. She would perch on my shoulder and flutter from room to room after me and take food from my hand, but she would not soar. Time and again I would take her hawking, but she never flew higher than the treetops. Robert called her Weakwing. He owned a gyrfalcon named Thunderclap who never missed her strike. One day our great-uncle Ser Harbert told me to try a different bird. I was making a fool of myself with Proudwing, he said, and he was right”

This excerpt really demonstrates Stannis’ heartfelt care for a select few, but it also demonstrates his own insecurity, especially when his emotional investments don’t pay off or those who respects ridicule him.  His extremely awkward relationship with his own wife and daughter are testament to that, yet Stannis is willing to walk into certain death for a chance for Shireen, who he moved mountains for in order to prevent her death by the disfiguring grayscale, to sit the Iron Throne.

We also see how often Stannis is quick to either condemn or favor those few he trusts, as he does with Jon Snow and Davos quite often. Stannis is quite fond of them both and respects them as men, yet his ways of displaying those feelings might simply be hearing them out, rather than shutting them down immediately. He especially goes out of his way with Jon Snow to the point where it’s obvious Jon is no longer seen as a political tool, but an honorable man in his own right who Stannis respects.  After Stannis’ supposed death according to the Pink Letter, Jon is able to rally the Wildlings to fight at least partially to avenge Stannis. Too bad Jon died and all before that could happen.

I hope these few examples could give an understanding as to why, despite his numerous flaws, Stannis Baratheon is a man worth admiring, and in some ways, emulating.  I hope to continue to write posts such as these, with the general theme of “Men worth admiring” or something along those lines. We shall see.

Note: Though Stannis was portrayed well by Stephen Dillane, his portrayal in HBO’s Game of Thrones was character assassination at best. He was seen as incompetent, petty, short-sighted and, for lack of a better term, a gullible idiot. Even the music implied a certain villainy to him. The season 5 finale, culminating in Stannis’ army simply walking to Winterfell and him and his army dying horribly (after casual child sacrifice, of course), represents everything that Stannis is not. GRRM wrote fierce tenacity, D&D saw idiotic stubbornness. GRRM wrote unwavering adherence to unpopular ideals and casual confidence, D&D saw myopic self-assurance to the point of megalomania.
Note Note: Don’t forget that Stannis is an extremely funny character, as well. Many don’t notice his dry humor at first, but it grows on you

The Black Patriarchy: Rap Music as a portal to a PC-free world

A casual glance at popular rap and hip-hop videos, with their casual debauchery, cadillacs and gold chains, showcase a very simple truth about black men: They want power, respect and women. Or, in their vernacular: gold n bitchez.


Though their desires and mannerisms are hedonistic, materialistic and at times barbaric, I have a lot of respect for the Black American Rapper (provided he isn’t looting or abandoning his children, of course). Relatively untouched by the progressive agenda, their main form of cultural expression, music, embodies virile desire with an extreme, impoverished materialism only possible in the United States. Black men often participate in gangs with complex codes of conduct (including loyalty to tribe and place) and will engage in violence without question. This quality both befuddles and scares the average white hipster on the street, as the fear they might rightly feel seeing a group of black men together confuses their otherwise “colorblind” ideology.

Rap itself has a long tradition going far beyond the Sugar Hill Gang, as it is the black community’s analogue of Flyting, the Norse tradition of slinging insults in verse amidst a crowd of “hypemen”. For those who categorically dismiss rap, know that our Norse ancestors engaged in something very similar. Where our rapacious Norse, bedecked in the spoils of pillage, might insult a man’s ability to fight with axe or fuck a wench, our rappers, wrapped in gold chain, might “dis” a man’s ability to scrap, hustle or fuck bitches. I find the parallels too fascinating to pass up.

Would you invite them to Xmas dinner y/n

Moving on. Where “proper” white men are told to engage in a masochistic ritual of shame and self-denigration in the face of women and non-whites (especially non-white women!) as well as feel ashamed for their violent natures and history, no such narrative exists for black men as seen in most rap music, mainstream or not. The manner in which “hood” black men act towards their women make even me want to wag my finger in disapproval, for “bitch” effectively replaces “female” in a lot of their vernacular. One only has to spend a few minutes on twitter (used more by black youth than any other demographic) or WorldStar to see my writing here come to life. (In fact, I highly suggest you watch a WorldStar fight compilation if you’ve never seen one before.)

Why does this double-standard exist? There are certainly black SJWs, intellectuals and professional victims (activists), however, they appear, at least on the surface, to have no bearing whatsoever on the content of black culture itself. Single motherhood, widespread gang violence and drug use are serious problems plaguing the black community and though I am sure there are in-tribe men and women looking to solve these issues, The White Man is somehow always involved (twirling his oppressive moustache, of course).

Typically, black SJWS and intellectuals pontificate on how The White Man is currently oppressing them, while feminists of all colors denigrate The White Man for his sexist attitudes or subversive modes of air conditioning oppression.

Meanwhile, completely unabashed and without shame, black men can gang rape white girls while hundreds look on. Weird how White Men can rape with their thoughts, yet blacks gang-raping women seem to be off the hook in feminists eyes. Huh.

Again, why the double-standard? How is it that there is no popular writer or Jezebellien speaking up against this, yet an accomplished scientist gets the figurative firing squad for wearing a “sexist” shirt.


This hypocrisy is honestly one of the funniest aspects of the liberal narrative. You literally have a protected race who can embody, to almost comical extremes, every trait that liberals stand against.

Casual misogyny, violence and capitalist fueled dreams of “making it” seem to be allowed only as to not contradict the image of the black community as helpless, impoverished and in need of a Nanny State to provide them with bread and circuses. The great irony, of course, is that one of the major themes of rap music is the work and dedication these men have in not being dependent on the state, in not being broke, in not recreating the poor circumstances of their childhood on their own children. The means by which these men accomplish this is through violence, drug-dealing or music (typically, a combination of the three). AZ, Nas, Eminem, Freddie Gibbs, they and many others all deal with the same theme: Get money, get bitches, get out of the hood by all means necessary.

Ultimately, I don’t necessarily condone the senseless violence, hedonism and materialism found in mainstream rap music, I simply find the liberal hypocrisy too good to pass up. There is no irony when a rapper says “bitch sucka nigga dick or sumtin” and I find it hilarious. The flashy chains, brandished weapons and subservient bitches is an out of control extreme of masculinity and patriarchal values obviously exaggerated for music/storytelling purposes, yet there is a kernel of truth there. One can get very anthropological when speaking of these things (the symbolism of gold chains, big booty bitches, cadillacs, etc.) but ultimately it comes down to black men not giving a fuck about what over-educated feminists have to say and I respect that. It’s the patronizing blind-eye turned towards them that bothers me the most.

Our babysitters, the Internet

The so-called millennials, of which I am a cohort, are arguably the first generation to be essentially raised in part by the Internet. Mostly white and middle class, our mid-management or self-employed parents may have had any or all of the now comical iterations of personal computers released through the 90s, which they used mostly for work.  Thanks its near ubiquity post millennium, however, many of our formative years were formed by access, in some way or another, to the Internet.  Just like being front of the television was, and still is, a sickening, lazy (but often necessary) technique to raise a child in a time-strapped, single parent family, the internet was, for many, the “tv” of our youth.  Being in part ‘raised by the Internet’ has had huge implications, for better or worse, on our role in Post-Industrial society.

A familiar site for many of us growing up with or around a computer

While films such the Matrix and the entire genre of Cyberpunk made allusions to the deep sub-cultures that had existed within the Internet since its inception as a research and communications tool (DARPANET) for the military, techies, and nerds, they were effectively still a small, tight-knit set of communities on a budding new platform that was in no way user-friendly. It was chaotic, unruled and its obtuse nature gave it an undeniable sense of mystery. Now, however, children swipe mindlessly on tablets with an aloofness that would make William Gibson himself blush.

The millennial generation was their immediate predecessor. Whether it was at the school library or the creaking AOL connection at home, many budding young people had a glimpse into the wonders (and horrors) of the Internet in a way that differed greatly from our parents or grandparents whose accounts we were using.   Where my own superiors seen it as a way to email and make basic inquiries into still primitive search engines, we ‘surfed’ and found games, communities and information. I remember splitting my time after school between watching Cartoons and playing Runescape, posting on forums (including the famous and defunct AvidGamers) and learning things outside of my small world. I was also a total goober.

In a world of single-mother households and living in an existentially boring “nowhere” (ie. a soul-crushing subdevelopment surrounded by stripmalls and highways), the internet was my window to an otherwise inaccessible outside and sense of community. There were no forts to build, no forest to explore, no downtown (or town, for that matter) to bike around. I and many other of my generation had the choice between 6 lane highways, greenbelts and cul-de-sacs or dragons, mysterious worlds, and a nascent online community that would serve as validation. Many of us were imbued with a common framework of language, images and content which hold the same meaning for us as neon, synth and Kevin Bacon hold for the 80’s cohort. Looking at many blogs, ‘art’ and even some musical genres conceived by this generation one wouldn’t be surprised to see, say, a Charmander, a MySpace reminiscent layout, or Zelda referenced both earnestly and ironically.

This mainstream access to the Web was of course part and parcel of a rise of corporate hegemony and the beginnings of globalist capitalism, of which we were blissfully ignorant. While we read Animorphs and sat through another tortuous login of AOL, adults spoke of NAFTA and outsourcing. While we ‘collected them all’ , Wal-Mart ‘destroyed them all’. We were growing up and unwittingly contributing to a hyper-consumerist, materialist and increasingly vapid mainstream culture in which only our small, inconsequential internet communities could offer us the solace we didn’t know we needed. In those long-gone summer days of calling each other ‘pussys’ , ‘fags’ and ‘bitches’ on Halo matches, we had no idea something called a ‘feminist’ would eventually come to bearing down on our little world.

As I ‘matured’ I spent more time reading literature which I had only learned about through sleuthing and surfing, as my peers, teachers (too focused on standardised tests) and parents had no interest in Dostoevsky, Marcus Aurelius or other foundational texts made known to me only through the Web. Cite /r/iamverysmart all you want, but as far as my own intellectual journey is concerned, the internet was the primary resource for knowledge until I attended University.

I think this is where my path split from many of the so-called Social Justice Warriors, for they had a similar white, suburban, internet-raised background as I did, but perhaps my focus on great Western texts had imbued me with a sense of pride in my own people and their history, than, say, a neo- “White man’s burden” narcissistic tumblrite who spent too much time adjusting their top 8 on MySpace.

Am I projecting? Maybe. But many of the Manosphere and Redpill are also millenials, can draw on the same ‘cultural’ commonalities we share via internet and cartoons and a strong reliance on a tight-knit internet community, yet have obviously deviated from the path of SJW’s , ‘betas’ and neckbeards who have all fallen into the Mariana’s trench of the Clickbait/Facebook/Web 6.66.

This is one of the fundamental problems Western men have today, and it’s critical to our survival. Truly. They let the internet turn them into pasty, weak pseudo-intellectuals with nothing but Wikipedia, a Liberal Arts degree and shitty quotations pasted onto pictures of historical figures serve as their intellectual foundation. Instead of a tool, the internet has turned them into tools. Consuming, playing, consuming, masturbating, consuming, dying. We have been reduced to mere consumers whose employment is only to facilitate more consumption.

One of the most striking products of millennial culture is the lo-fi, lo-quality form of rap known as “Vaporwave”. To put it simply, Vaporwave is a genre which takes the jazzy, nondescript music from infomercials, the mall and ‘on-hold’ telephone calls and stretches them out, loops them and edits the disparate results into an ironically titled song written in a foreign script. The albums (which will never have a physical copy) will have visual references to childhood days long past, with Gamecubes, Pokemon, Anime or Windows 98 as common motifs. “Sad Boys”, a ‘group’ of rappers consisting of one kid, Yung Lean, epitomizes the ‘paradox of prosperity’ found in the West: Ennui, depression, obesity and consumerism as the norm for Men growing up in ‘the Matrix’ of corporate hegemony, globalism and forced egalitarianism. His videos are a cacophony of corporate symbols either in worship or crude parody of the consumer temples from which the music is sampled. This might be gleaning a bit too much off of untalented hacks unaware of what they are doing, but they are certainly reflecting this through their ‘aesthetic’ and sound. It’s a subgenre only millennial can truly ‘get’, to a degree.

yung lean
Here ya go son, why don’t you play with that there computator for a few hours

‘Vaporwave’ is but a drop in the bucket as far as internet sub-cultures are concerned, but I feel it is especially relevant regarding men and society. Within a service-industry oriented society where we work fast food and retail in order to ourselves afford fast food and consumer trinkets, many are mostly weak, sad, unfulfilled and refer meekly to the few symbols and toys of our youth, to Pokemon cards and Super Nintendo, to find any semblance of far-off bliss.  I know boys (they are no men), aged same as me, who still live as if they were 10, as if the caricature of a Vaporwave “Sad Boy” was walking in the flesh. They are weak, foolish degenerates wasting their life away with the only solid relationship they ever had: The internet and videogames.

The Great Men of our past: Antigonos Gonatas, Iulius Caesar, T.E. Lawrence would be considered racist, homophobic, colonial.  As children they would have been succumbed to the gauntlet of prescription drugs and mental diagnoses due to their avaricious desire to move, explore and fight with other boys.  Their insatiable thirst for ‘glory’ and their marked interest in ‘honor’ would be seen as perverse and backwards. They would at the least physically and mentally intimidate the sweaty neckbeards and vegan feminist males. Their undeniable manhood would be taken not for strength of will and body, but for a ‘personal crisis, ‘compensation’ or simply a ‘show’ by feminist authors. Were it not for the very traditional leanings of my stern father, a construction worker and golden glove in his youth, I too would probably have fully succumbed to the dystopian world Western progressives have been building for us all.  I am guilty of all of the sins I so vehemently condemn the ‘Sad Boys’ of this generation with. I was vegan, once. I attended college. I sat through the lectures. I’ve learned all about diversity, white guilt, white privilege and every other wrong my ancestors have done. As a proud German-American, I’ve learned to feel utter impotence, shame and dishonor in the face of non-white nations, creeds and ethnicities. I’ve “embraced diversity” so much it hurts.

Cultural appropriation! how dare he!

The issue with the millennial man and his fitting stereotype as a bumbling, effeminate weakling is that these men could rule the world. They could do anything. We really do, as white men, have the cumulative legacy of all the Great Western Men who have come before us at our advantage.  Each nation has their own heroes, their own stories, and I respect that.  But to me no one compares to Siegfried, Heros von Borcke or, of course, Theodore Roosevelt. Not even the racists (ahem, racialists) over at Radix or Counter-Currents would deny we are privileged in the sense that our Western ancestors were so disproportionately influential on the state of the world today.  This is what we came from.  This is what can continue to do.

The internet is a powerful resource which provides us with more knowledge than all of the Great Men combined had access to. Instead of striving to be like them, we harangue on the latest, greatest injustice a world away through a post on Facebook, or make token gestures against Capitalism while browsing Pinterest on our iPhones.  We demonize the very traits which have built the great cities, crossed the great oceans, and launched us into space.

The Internet which had served as a babysitter, the outside, and our reservoir of knowledge has turned into a massive circlejerk for most users. F5 F5 F5’ng our lives a way as we whittle time, consume media and masturbate.  It is in many ways still  our babysitter, ensuring good behaviour in ways x1000 spankings as a youth couldn’t have afforded.

Thankfully, there is an antidote.  A way to turn the degeneracy enabling WWW into a tool for intellectual, social and physical betterment.  The Red Pill and the wider Manosphere is a community of  (mostly!) half-coherent, computer literate individuals who pretty much dedicate their entire content to turning sloppy, fat neckbeards into assertive, confident and intelligent Men worthy of our legacy. They recognize the issue that Nth Wave Feminism and Post-Industrial degeneracy. It is reshaping the transformative power of the Internet from a breaker of men into a maker of Men.