Monday, November 24, 2008

End the Fed!!!


Yesterday was End the Fed day!!

Although I wasn't able to make any of the protests, I was definitely with them in spirit.

Here's some video:

Some quick background on why the Fed Sucks:

And finally, options that We the People have when it comes time to enact radical monetary reform:

While this year's End the Fed rally was sparsely attended, I feel comfortable in saying that widespread protests against the banking elite will become more and more commonplace, just like in good 'ole bankrupt Iceland.

The failure of the Federal Reserve to manage the crisis that it unleashed upon the People to begin with, and the widespread realization by the public that it is the root cause of our current financial crisis, will guarantee that in the not-to-distant future, millions of Americans will gather and shout in one voice.... END THE FED!!!


Sunday, November 23, 2008

The Lost Art of Discipline Part II.

Welcome back to Togakure School!

Let's dig in.

It is better not to marry.

Today we continue with our examination of the lost art of discipline.

As previously stated, we are going to limit the discussion of this virtue to the context of married, monogamous, male-dominated marital relationships.

Before I disclose why I am focusing on married couples, I wanted to share with you highlights from an excellent article written by Mr. Robb Fedders of No Ma'am entitled, Marriage is Fraud:

... Males have a surplus of labour but a shortage of reproductive ability.

Females have a surplus of reproductive ability but a shortage of labour.

Now, perhaps, you can see why marriage is an economic contract.

The male “sells” his surplus labour to the female in exchange for her reproductive ability.

The female “sells” her reproductive ability to the male in exchange for his surplus labour.

In order to “sell” something, you first must “own it” yourself, and upon “selling it,” you are agreeing to transfer ownership of it to the buyer. This is the basis of economics, and as you can see, it is based on property rights.

In the economic contract of marriage, the female agrees to transfer the ownership of her sexual reproductive ability to the male, and she takes ownership of his surplus labour as payment for it.

So, yes, while the feminists harp on and on that women were once “owned” as chattel, there is truth to this because in a very real sense, a woman’s sexuality became the property of the husband. He very much was considered to “own” her sexuality and the products of her sexuality (children). The children of a marriage became his property, because he paid for them...

Mr. Fedders continues...


What was originally based on a woman “selling” a man the ability to have his own children and taking his surplus labour as “payment,” has become a woman having children of HER own and still taking a man’s surplus labour as “payment” for that which she is NOT selling. THAT IS FRAUD!

If you go to a car dealership and buy a shiny new car, you might sign on the dotted line and agree to make payments for the next five years, but it is implied in the contract that you own the car.

The dealership cannot decide 6 months later that they want the car back, show up at your house, and just take it. And certainly they cannot force you to make the next 54 payments on it if they take it away from you with no breech of contract on your part. It is your property and they have no right to it. To suggest otherwise would be to suggest you signed a fraudulent contract. To suggest that you would still have to pay for gas, maintenance, and insurance after they sell it to someone else because “it is in the best interests of the car” is to suggest an insanely fraudulent contract.


But this is what we are left with in the marriage contract...

The writer sums it all up in a dramatic fashion:




If you haven't done so already, I would urge you to read the entire essay. It is, in two words, brilliant and irrefutable.

Marriage, as Mr Fedders has stated, was and is a contractual agreement [a][b][c] in which the marital parties promise to perform certain actions.

Failure to perform certain duties in past eras equated to a breach of contract. At that point, the innocent party would move to have a court of law determine fault, or who violated the obligations that the marriage contract imposed on all applicable parties (see The Law and Economics of Marriage, pp. 41-43).

However with our modern day No-Fault Divorce regime, the virtues of responsibility, duty, justice, fairness, and discipline have been thrown out the window. As Robb so eloquently states, Western marriage is a farce, a fraud, and not worth entering into nine times out of ten. If it wasn't for my traditional Japanese wife, who believes strongly in marriage and has a basic level of respect for men, I wouldn't be married today.

There is absolutely no way in hell that I would put myself on the chopping block and marry a woman born and raised in the West.

Some would point out that I have Damocles' Sword hanging over my head by simply residing in the Feminized West, and I would agree with this statement. Although my wife and I married in the ancient city of Kyoto, where the marriage laws are much more Man friendly than in the United States, my wife (because she has resided in our state for more than six months) can walk into an American courthouse, divorce me without any rhyme or reason, receive all manner of financial, legal, and "moral" support, and banish me to child support/alimony hell, at the drop of a hat. And we dare lecture the world about our "family values!"

I understand these risks, and until we leave the United States for more family friendly pastures, I live with them with a happy heart. While I have greatly reduced my risks by choosing a wife with great care, nothing is certain.

All things considered, it is better for a man not to mate or marry within the borders of the Feminized West, unless and until laws are changed, and certain virtues return to prominence.

Why the focus on married people?

If marriage is such a death trap,
you may wonder, why am I limiting my discourse to married couples?

A fair question to ask.

As I write about the lost art of discipline, I need to inform the reader that since the purpose of this post is to explore concepts that have either been ignored or have fallen out of favor with mainstream society, I am making a few assumptions that will help us in our study:

a) I am assuming that we have reached a baseline legal understanding that all human beings have worth in the eyes of God, and that all individuals, man, woman, and child have Natural Rights and Responsibilities, and that all citizens receive equal treatment under the law.

b) That marriage is recognized as a contract, with enforceable provisions, and that before any marriage takes place, all parties undergo a negotiation period so that all aspects of the union are understood and agreed to before the union takes place, including issues regarding separation, child custody, financial arrangements, and the like. Once all terms are agreed to, without duress or fraud by any party, then these terms would be binding forever unless all parties to the original agreement agree to change the terms, or unless there is a breach of contract by any one of the original parties.

c) As part of this negotiation, the dominant partner (in our case study, the man) is recognized to be the leader and the final decision maker of the marriage, and that the dominant partner fully understands the full range of responsibilities this entails, and the legal consequences of abusing his power. Unlawful assault, battery, and other violent crimes cannot be justified under any circumstances. However, the law recognizes a difference between corporal punishment and aggravated battery, and we shall in kind recognize that physical methods of discipline are not automatically in themselves immoral or unjustifiable.

More on this later.

d) The happy couple declares their intentions, vows, and promises in a public ceremony where family, friends, or other members of a group (such as a religious gathering or a BDSM collaring cermemony) are in attendance.

e) The married couple, male and female alike, strives to live up to their duties and their obligations in a spirit of good faith, affection, harmony, devotion, and loyalty, and they also make their best effort to assume that each partner has the others best interests in mind, and are also aware of the fundamental needs and differences between the male and female sex, and try their best to meet them.

If American style marriage conformed with the assumptions made above, then it would be the preferred and dominant social arrangement for the care and raising of children, the accumulation of capital, and the distribution of cultural values. If these assumptions were actually facts, marriage would become the gold standard of human relationships.

Once individuals enter into such a contract of their own free will, the virtue of discipline becomes very important. It is a basic element of the glue that holds the marriage together.

For the sake of longevity and stability, discipline is essential. And, based upon the positive economic, financial, and social capital that marriage provides in perpetuity, the long term stability of the association is in the best interests of an advanced society.

If two people are merely dating, or cohabiting without intending to make any form of long term agreement or public declaration, then there is no need for the discipline I shall describe in this series.

What claim does the boyfriend really have on the girlfriend? Has anyone else ever thought about how silly it is to talk about "my girlfriend" once one has graduated from high school or college? Should one really get pissed because his "sex-friend" is acting stupid?

My answer: Absolutely not.

When I was a single man, I had my fair share of love affairs, with women from all over the world. I was an equal opportunity womanizer.

I've experienced exquisite love, and suffered through devastating heartbreaks. I never allowed a woman to walk all over me. I was "mean" and an "asshole." If my girlfriend at the time was giving me a hard time, I would simply break it off with her. I would dump her ass. I would stop calling her. I would refuse to speak to her for weeks at a time. While one could consider these actions as discipline, or keeping your woman in check, these actions are not very practical in the context of marriage.

In any event, my basic attitude before I got married was: If I let this girl go, another will take her place. Whatever.

You know what they say... there's plenty of fish in the sea.

I remember on one occasion, after my then girlfriend decided to embarrass the Kidd in public, I got in my car and drove away, leaving her stranded in a hotel lobby somewhere.

To this day, I don't know how she managed to get home. I do recall getting a voice mail from her in which she called me an "asshole."

See ya, wouldn't wanna be ya! These are the breaks.

It goes without saying that a man should not be living in the same house with his girlfriend, for theological and legal reasons [aa][bb]. But even if he is foolish enough to do so, he can always do what I did when it comes time to move on... plot and scheme in secret for months and when she isn't home, pack up and bail!

Problem solved. By the time your offending ex-girlfriend arrives home, you and your stuff will be long gone. A hastily scrawled note of "BITCH, I'M GONE!" makes the break-up official.

Basic common sense tells us that dating and cohabiting are not the same as marriage. When one ties the knot, couples declare, in front of family, friends, society, and the deity of their choice, that this man and this woman are now officially a unit. And once this occurs, the relationship takes on a greater significance to the health, wealth, and stability of Nations. It's kinda like leaving the Minor Leagues in order to play in the Majors; it's a whole different ballgame!

The bulk of the human experience confirms this to be so, and civilizations (such as ours) who ignore this fact inevitably sink into the waste bin of history.

Successful civilizations are built on strong family units. And stable family units are built upon a foundation of virtues (and not laws!) of loyalty, trust, affection, and discipline. When I mention families, married people, or similar terminology going forward, I mean specifically relationships that meet all of my previous assumptions.

For the remainder of this topic, unmarried pairings of a casual nature will not be commented upon. I leave that discussion to others.

Men and women are fundamentally different.

Our present day feminist regime has distorted the Free Marketplace of Love to such a degree that men and women find themselves in a chaotic state of disharmony and confusion.

Any successes that one may find in the familial and marital realms is in defiance of our popular culture, not because of it. "The World" is doing all it can to keep men and women weak, separated, and distrustful of one another.

Our Money Masters have very good reasons for doing so.

Consider Mr. Walter Block's lecture entitled, Is the Market Racist and Sexist: The Wage Gap and the Glass Ceiling, or Mr. Thomas Sowell's talk entitled, Gender Bias and Income Disparity: A Myth?.

Both of these gentlemen state two very important points:

A) The Free Market does not discriminate against women because of their sex. The so-called wage gap that feminists complain about endlessly is a big, fat myth.

B) There is a definite economic incentive for those who do not value marriage and family to prevent the joining of men and women in matrimony, and to discourage childbirth. Any mainstream economist will tell you that the more young people a society has, the poorer that society tends to be. The emphasis here is that less children = more economic growth (see African Economic Development, p. 109).

If we look carefully, feminists, Marxists [1][2], and Platonic philosophers have all attacked marriage and childbirth for differing, yet closely related reasons, among them being economic wealth and political power, in addition to the control of limited, yet vitally strategic resources.

In short, from the hills of Sparta to our modern day, there are powerful political, economic, and philosophical forces in direct opposition to our biological and spiritual imperative to come together, form stable familial bonds, and bear children to continue the human race.

A casualty of this never ending war between those who favor marriage and family and those who seek to destroy it is the knowledge that men and women have significant and meaningful differences. The reality is that men and women have differing and deep seated needs, wants, and desires.

The great Austrian Economist Murray Rothbard wrote:

... In his brilliant refutation of the women's liberationist Kate Millett, Irving Howe outlines several important biological differences between the sexes, differences important enough to have lasting social effects. They are

1. "the distinctive female experience of maternity" including what the anthropologist Malinowski calls an "intimate and integral connection with the child … associated with physiological effects and strong emotions";

2. "the hormonic components of our bodies as these vary not only between the sexes but at different ages within the sexes";

3. "the varying possibilities for work created by varying amounts of musculature and physical controls"; and

4. "the psychological consequences of different sexual postures and possibilities," in particular the "fundamental distinction between the active and passive sexual roles" as biologically determined in men and women respectively.[8]

Howe goes on to cite the admission by Dr. Eleanor Maccoby in her study of female intelligence that

it is quite possible that there are genetic factors that differentiate the two sexes and bear upon their intellectual performance…. For example, there is good reason to believe that boys are innately more aggressive than girls — and I mean aggressive in the broader sense, not just as it implies fighting, but as it implies dominance and initiative as well — and if this quality is one which underlies the later growth of analytic thinking, then boys have an advantage which girls … will find difficult to overcome.

Dr. Maccoby adds that "if you try to divide child training among males and females, we might find out that females need to do it and males don't."[9]

The sociologist Arnold W. Green points to the repeated emergence of what the egalitarians denounce as "stereotyped sex roles" even in communities originally dedicated to absolute equality. Thus, he cites the record of the Israeli kibbutzim:

The phenomenon is worldwide: women are concentrated in fields which require, singly or in combination, housewifely skills, patience and routine, manual dexterity, sex appeal, contact with children. The generalization holds for the Israeli kibbutz, with its established ideal of sexual equality. A "regression" to a separation of "women's work" from "men's work" occurred in the division of labor, to a state of affairs which parallels that elsewhere. The kibbutz is dominated by males and traditional male attitudes, on balance to the content of both sexes.[10]

Irving Howe unerringly perceives that at the root of the women's liberation movement is resentment against the very existence of women as a distinctive entity:

For what seems to trouble Miss Millett isn't merely the injustices women have suffered or the discriminations to which they continue to be subject. What troubles her most of all … is the sheer existence of women. Miss Millett dislikes the psychobiological distinctiveness of women, and she will go no further than to recognize — what choice is there, alas? — the inescapable differences of anatomy. She hates the perverse refusal of most women to recognize the magnitude of their humiliation, the shameful dependence they show in regard to (not very independent) men, the maddening pleasures they even take in cooking dinners for the "master group" and wiping the noses of their snotty brats. Raging against the notion that such roles and attitudes are biologically determined, since the very thought of the biological seems to her a way of forever reducing women to subordinate status, she nevertheless attributes to "culture" so staggering a range of customs, outrages, and evils that this culture comes to seem a force more immovable and ominous than biology itself...[11]

As I've written in Part I of this series, men and women have varying degrees of masculine and feminine energies. And since every woman is unique, the degree of femininity will vary from person to person. However, if we took a statistically significant sample size of women from all over the world, and placed the data on a bell curve, we would find that the majority of women would deviate to a mean measure of femininity. We would also find that, compared to men, women would rate much, much higher on the femininity scale.

Which isn't too surprising... after all, femininity is a trait of the female sex.

And so for the rest of this series, when I speak of women, I am referring only to women who would show up on the mean measurement of femininity, or in other words, your average, heterosexual female. Those women who do not fit this mold, such as the "manly" feminist women who are more masculine in spirit, or lesbian women who are attracted to femininity as opposed to masculinity, will not be considered here, as I leave the analysis of such women to others.

And vice versa, when I speak of men, I speak of men who would fall on the mean measure of masculinity. "Feminine" men, or men who are romantically and sexually attracted to other men will not be considered here, and I leave analysis of such men to others.


With a solid foundation in place, we can now talk about the good stuff.

Next time:

Why good girls like bad boys, how to be a Playa, and why being a punk is bad for your marriage.

Toku out.

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Crash Course! Money, Inflation, and Debt.


Look very carefully at the dollar bills above.

One of them is a substitute for real money, and the other represents an I.O.U. issued by a private banking institution [1][2].

Will the real U.S. Dollar please stand up??

If you have a moment, please watch the videos below.

And, lest I forget, I gotta give a Big Shoutout to my man Ba1anced for recommending Mr. Chris Marten's Crash Course, a series of short lectures hosted on the website.

Crash Course is accessible, easy to understand, and powerful.

Highly recommended viewing.

Please understand where your money comes from.

Please understand that those Federal Reserve notes you carry in your pocket do not represent wealth. Those dollars that you work so hard for are the living embodiments of debt slavery and fiat monetary peonage [a][b][c].

Once you understand what your modern day money represents, then you will know who your real enemies are.

And if you are ready to hit them where it hurts, the battleplan is simple:

1) Avoid fiat currencies whenever possible and move into tangle assets of real value.

2) Avoid wasting your precious resources by supporting our consumer driven economy. Even if you are forced to use Federal Reserve Notes as a medium of exchange, simply keeping your bills under your mattress will wreak havoc on our debt based regime that absolutely depends on new issuance of debt, and a constant supply of money circulating within the fractional reserve banking system.

3) Avoid taking on unnecessary debt as much as possible. When you do, you give our fiat economy a new lease on life. Why do you think there is so much pressure for banks to lend money, and for consumers to take out new mortgages and max out their credit cards?

4) Don't put yourself in a position where you are forced to hand over Federal Reserve notes by family court decree.

5) Educate your friends and family, and encourage them to educate their friends and family. We want as many people as possible to understand what our money is, what it represents, and how they can fight back.

6) Chill out, have a good time, and watch as our debt based system implodes under its own corrupt weight.

Sincerely yours,


Thursday, November 20, 2008

The Slanderous DART ads.


In response to the latest Media Radar alert, I wrote the following letter, which was sent to Fox News, CNN, all of my elected officials, and the offending Domestic Violence advocacy group responsible for these ridiculous advertisements:

To the employees and staff of,

Your advertisements are beyond slanderous.

As a black man, I have to ask you… HOW DARE YOU sully our reputation and our honor as black men.

How dare you assume that white men are going to grow up to beat their wives?

How dare you use children to spread your misleading message? It is a proven fact that women BEAT, BATTER, AND ABUSE ON PAR WITH MEN.


Your lies and your manipulations will no longer go unchallenged and unquestioned. Whenever groups such as you attempt to slander men, excuse violent women, and utilize children in your quest to spread propaganda, groups such as Media Radar, and individual citizens such as myself will be watching you, and will counter your efforts with the cold, hard truth.

If you have any integrity, you will issue a public apology, and refrain from promoting such nonsense in the future.

Take note...people like you who try to use the serious crime of domestic violence to obtain more funding and more public support will be challenged from here on out.

Not my best writing, but I think sufficient enough to communicate my outrage.

Some have asked me, why do you get so upset when feminist groups put out this blatantly anti-male propaganda? It doesn't affect YOU does it? You ARE a good man who wouldn't hurt a fly aren't you? So what's the big deal?

My response: Anytime a group or individual puts out such obviously false, misleading, slanderous, and inflammatory propaganda, it makes my blood boil.

An attack on one innocent man is an attack on all innocent men.

The concept of Honor
, which most men have forgotten in their quest for feminist crowd pleasing metro sexuality, is something that I take very seriously. No matter what material objects, or worldly successes a man may have, it means absolutely zero if his integrity and his honor is dragged through the mud. The hard truth is that no one is going to defend the Pride of Men except us, and no one is going to give us respect until we respect ourselves and stop turning the other cheek. Enough is enough!

The best defense is a strong offense. And I get seriously offensive when feminists such as the Bitches of Family Place decide to utilize children and bogus statistics to further their own aims at my and my son's expense.

Two words for feminists who think they can do or say whatever the hell they want without a word of complaint... THINK AGAIN.

The time for being nice is over with. No more Mr. Nice Guy. If a feminist talks shit, then she'd better be prepared for the tongue-lashing she is going to get in return.

Remember when I said that feminism is on its way out? The uproar this DART campaign has caused is yet another sign that the tired old feminist rhetoric is finally meeting with a small, yet determined resistance.

Big Respect goes out to those speaking out for men in a very public way on this.

Peace to my man Glen Sacks who was kind enough to set up a quick and easy way to protest the DART campaign, and Props go to Media Radar and all of the individuals and groups that support Radar in its efforts.

Back in tha day, feminists such as our Familyplace friends could spout feminist bullshit all day long. So to see this group put on the offensive, and have the lamestream media provide some coverage to this issue, is a positive step in the right direction.

At some point in the very near and turbulent future, I expect that society at large, for a host of differing yet convergent reasons, will give feminists and their ideology the cold shoulder. The survival of civilized society depends on it.

And when that day comes, I'll be sure to have a glass of champagne to celebrate the Day that Feminism Died.

Until that moment comes,


Sunday, November 16, 2008

The Lost Art of Discipline, Part I.


Well friends, another roller-coaster of a week has come and gone. Hopefully everything is going right in your world. If it's not, keep your heads up, and keep going your own way. You know what they say... Tough People last, tough times don't.

Please note that today's topic, why a man should not fail to keep his woman in check, is a controversial one that doesn't get mentioned much in polite company. Indeed, some will find this deeply offensive, because, as we all know, there is NO excuse for Domestic Violence (except, of course, when women beat, batter, and abuse with impunity).

Understand that Assault and Battery against peaceable and innocent persons is illegal, immoral, and reprehensible.

However, I believe that there is a distinct difference between these criminal offenses and justified discipline which is an essential component of any successful long term association. I am of the opinion that in past eras, there was an unspoken understanding between criminal assault and battery, and discipline that was employed to keep rude, uncouth, and potentally destructive behaviors in check.

More on this later.

Financial and Economic tidbits of note.

I wanted to share some items of interest with you.

Some of you who move in financial circles might be caught up in the Inflation vs. Deflation argument. Some commentators are calling a Hyperinflationary endgame, whist others are looking for a Deflationary Death Spiral.

While I am a hardcore Inflationista and Goldbug, (largely because my own personal analysis is indicating that Inflation and gold will be the victors in our economic melt-down) I will be the first to say that Deflation, defined as a strong currency in limited supply (or the reduction of the aggregate quantity of money and credit), is actually better for everyday individuals versus the inflationary regime we have lived under since the creation of the Federal Reserve.

Some may think this is a strange position to take, as many financial professionals, economists, and politicians absolutely abhor Deflation, and will do anything to combat it.

For more insight as to why gentle and controlled Deflation is a good thing, please listen to this outstanding lecture from entitled, Deflation and Liberty.

Many would point out that, under a Deflationary regime, such as Japan, economic growth stagnates, unemployment is widespread, and life is miserable all the way around. However, I would disagree with this notion. There are other barriers to economic growth in Deflationary regimes that include fiscal (tax) policies, monetary policies, and other forms of government intervention in the marketplace. Indeed, until recently, Japan was humming along just fine, Deflation and all.

I would like to see controlled deflation, which would be the result of a gradual return to the gold standard, the repeal of individual income taxes for all Americans, a low, flat tax rate on businesses, elimination of wasteful government spending, and the gradual phase out of entitlement programs.

In addition, the gradual withdraw of our Imperial forces from around the world, the re-opening of military bases on American soil, and reduced spending on defense would also remove the need for an Inflationary print-fest.

And most important of all, interest rates must be set by the marketplace, not a cabal of Federal Reserve bankers.

When interest rates are at a natural level, it makes more sense to save money instead of borrowing it from a bank. And coupled with a Deflationary regime in which gently falling prices (a result of greater efficiency, productivity, and technology) are the norm, the People become self-sufficient, and the self-financing of capital projects (instead of borrowing money from a bank) becomes possible again. The power, scope, and authority of government is reduced dramatically, and the people become much wealthier and independent over time.

It would become possible, with today's efficiency, productivity, and technology, for a single breadwinner to provide for his or her family. And it would be feasible for that single earner to work less instead of working themselves to death in the quest to earn increasingly worthless wages. Money, Finance, and Banking would become less important in such a system.

Imagine what it would be like for you to work only 32 hours a week, earn a decent wage, and throw the unspent amount (which could be a decent sum, since the basics like food, fuel, clothing and shelter would be inexpensive and would remain stable over time) in the bank to earn a decent amount of interest, which could be anywhere from four to seven percent, if we use history as our guide (Strategic Factors in Nineteenth Century American Economic History, p. 167-168). You could potentially work less, owe less, save more, and support wives and kids without too much of a struggle.

This system I am proposing would by no means be perfect. Poor people would still be around, and there would still be gaps between the rich, the middle class, and everyone else. However, the great masses of people, under the Deflationary regime I described above, would be wealthier, more independent, and more able to check the power of the government and the bankers, who would still plot and scheme to bring the people back under their inflationary regime of enslavement.

So in summary, Inflation and Deflation are at once widely misunderstood, and vastly important. Like our modern day feminist regime, the Inflationary order has hopelessly enslaved the minds of the Sheeple, to the point where many would vigorously fight to defend it.

The people could truly have wealth, happiness, and power beyond their wildest dreams... the moment they STOP giving their personal power away to people and belief systems dedicated to holding them back.

Forgive me Dear Reader, I tend to digress.

Now without further ado...

Equality is the foundation.

As I have said previously, I am not a Conservative.

Although there are many conservatives out there that are staunch allies against feminism, and many bravely crusade for traditional family values, I do not buy into the philosophy itself for a host of reasons.

For one, what is conservatism conserving? For the last forty plus years, this nation has been firmly under the thumb of feminists and feminism.

Social and economic policy has been in lockstep with Marxist, Communist, and Platonic ideals for decades.

The allegedly "Conservative" Redumblicans have aided and abetted the feminist, socialist, and globalist agenda without regret. The vast majority of the GOP has turned a blind eye to the interests of Men, and the sooner we realize this, the better.

So again, what is it that the conservative ideology is conserving? Feminism? Socialism? Misandry on a wide scale?

Nay, it's better to be a Liberal, a Classical Liberal that is. Only a Classical Liberal can stand up and fight for our interests, because modern day conservatism and liberalism have abandoned our interests completely. The only solution at this point is to insist on the equal and unalienable rights of all individuals, and in this manner, secure the Rights and Responsibilities of men going forward.

Another issue with conservatism I have is this... it tends to degenerate into a spirit of self-hating Misandric chivalry [a][b]. It becomes a warped honor system that tends to elevate women, indiscriminately, upon that old time magical pedestal, the wicked woman's traditional seat of power from whence she hurls her thunderbolts of injustice and cruelty upon her unwitting male subjects.

Don't misunderstand me. I believe firmly that all people, regardless of sex or race, are born with Natural Rights that must be respected. This idea of equal rights, versus special rights, or that equality is more important than equity, is the foundation of my philosophical beliefs.

If Jim Crow were around today, I would oppose it. If women were chattel property without suffrage or rights, I would support their campaign for liberty.

At the same time, I do not believe that I am of a lower status because of my sex, heterosexual orientation, ethnicity, religion or my political ideology. I refuse to debase myself, or to allow my person and honor to be slandered by anyone, especially by groups that seek to profit at my expense, such as the feminists. I do not buy into any notion of "male guilt" because women were supposedly treated worse than men at some point in history, even though life sucked for the majority of humanity for a very long period of time. I will not bow down to any man or woman, nor will I worship at the Pedestal of Sacred Womanhood in a misguided belief that women are the champions of virtue, or the "fairer sex."

In two words: Fuck That.

I treat individuals with the same kindness and respect that they show me, and I live and let live so long as people respect me and mine. I am not going to bow down and give somebody a pass to walk all over me just because it is politically correct to do so.

Don't Start no Shit, Won't Be No Shit.

Virtue is greater than law.

Now that we have established equality under the law and the Natural Rights and Responsibilities of all persons as our base, we can now move to the next level.

According to the Ethical Reason-A Confucian Perspective website:

... It is not through the creation of thousands of laws that will produce and mold ethical citizens, it is through teaching virtues that citizens will become ethical citizens. How many times do we see on the news situations where people literally get away with murder because of a “loop-hole” in the law? Confucius argues that there is an innate sense of right and wrong within all of us. We need to cultivate this inner sense through virtuous teachings. All decisions should be made based on these innate virtues.

To see what is right and not to do it is want of courage, ” says Confucius. That which is lawful, may not be right. To determine rightness, we need to look at our core values rather than written law...

So what is Virtue?

Etymology: Middle English vertu, virtu, from Anglo-French, from Latin virtut-, virtus strength, manliness, virtue, from vir man — more at virile

Date: 13th century

1 a: conformity to a standard of right : morality
b: a particular moral excellence

2plural : an order of angels — see celestial hierarchy

3: a beneficial quality or power of a thing

4: manly strength or courage : valor

5: a commendable quality or trait : merit

6: a capacity to act : potency

7: chastity especially in a woman

Our present day Matriarchal society is in terminal decline, because the virtue of the nation is in terminal decline; laws and constitutions notwithstanding. The people and the institutions that they are in charge of are hopelessly corrupt.

The current situation will degrade itself until wars, revolution, riots, enslavement, and political upheaval become the order of the day, unless we reverse our present course of action.


Because this nation's politicians, businessmen, theologians, and citizens at large have abandoned the Universal Law.

Legislated and adjudicated it right out of existence.

Hoping against hope, and fighting against reality, society is warped and distorted as various interests compete, like jackals, for their turn at the carcass of what was once the Republic.

Certain ideas, such as savings, thrift, self-reliance, justice, order, and especially discipline have gone out the window. Preaching, teaching, and advocating for these forgotten ideals are the new Deadly Sins in our modern day Empire.

The greatest error in our society today is the emphasis on rights, and the neglect of responsibilities. While it is true that all people have Natural Rights, it is just as true that all people have basic responsibilities to themselves and others.

Freedom and liberty is not a massive free for all orgy where people do whatever they want, whenever they want, fail to take possible negative outcomes into account, and then expect to get "bailed out" when things go wrong.

So sorry, but God did not create the Universe to work in this manner. Everywhere around us, there are a host of laws that govern creation. These Laws are not subject to debate, they are cannot be repealed, and they can only be ignored at one's own risk.

The Creator will not be mocked.

It is universally understood that the successful business, society, or family unit is the one that follows the Universal Laws as closely as possible. The unsuccessful business, society, and family unit chooses to ignore and break the Universal Laws at every opportunity.

As we have seen with the American Constitution, written laws are not enough to have a real impact on the day to day workings of society.

We have an obscene number of laws on the books, and I'm quite sure that the average American breaks quite a few of them everyday without even realizing it.

So what keeps American society from completely imploding, even during the worst disasters, riots, and financial turmoil?

A natural affinity for the Universal Laws that guide creation and human behavior; although this affinity is feeble and rapidly being extinguished.

In essence, virtue is more powerful than the law.

It should be understood that while I have written much about the Natural Law, and how the Natural Rights of men are being ignored, please don't think that Natural Law is the only solution to this issue.

The law is only a baseline foundation of how human beings should guide their conduct. True civilization is based on the level of virtue, or unwritten laws of behavior, that its citizens possess, and how zealous they are in its application to their everyday lives.

The Lost Art of Discipline.

For this series of posts, I want to focus on the concept of discipline. Specifically, I will examine why it is vitally important for those men who find themselves the dominant partner in their marriage to provide the discipline that their familial unit needs in order to win the game of life.

What is discipline?

According to Merriam-Webster:


Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French & Latin; Anglo-French, from Latin disciplina teaching, learning, from discipulus pupil

Date: 13th century

1: punishment

2 obsolete : instruction

3: a field of study

4: training that corrects, molds, or perfects the mental faculties or moral character

5 a: control gained by enforcing obedience or order

b: orderly or prescribed conduct or pattern of behavior

c: self-control

6: a rule or system of rules governing conduct or activity

Before we continue, let me explain why I am narrowing my focus.

Firstly, there is a sliding scale of masculine and feminine energies, and each of these energies brings with it dominant and submissive tendencies.

Not every man is going to be 100% masculine and dominant, nor is every woman going to be 100% feminine and submissive. These qualities will be present in various degrees, according to the unique makeup of every human being. However, someone is going to be in charge, and setting the course for their business, their family, or their nation. And more often than not, this person will be a man.

Since this distribution of manliness and femininity is a proven fact that has been verified by science, theology, and everyday observation, we must acknowledge the right and the responsibility of each man to associate himself with his female compliment.

In the free marketplace of love, as I like to call it, Men and women will find the mate (or mates) that suit them the best. We will also find that the majority of relationships will be heterosexual in nature, monogamous, and male dominated.

Indeed, most women want a man who is slightly, moderately, or completely (again, accounting for individual taste) stronger, more forceful, or more "manly" than she is. If this quality of manliness is not present to the degree that she is best suited, then the union is doomed to fail, or can only be maintained with great difficulty.

More on this later.

Now if a woman happens to be the more dominant partner in her marriage, so be it. There is nothing wrong with a "manly" woman, and in the free marketplace of love, she will find a man who is "feminine" enough for her taste. She is free to seek such a man, and the feminine man is free to enter into the relationship. They both have the Natural Right to make such a choice. However, in the broad scheme of things, this form of relationship is in the minority, and I leave the analysis of such pairings to others.

Since the vast storehouse of human history holds the irrefutable proof of the general nature of relationships, we will, at this time, narrow our focus to the general pattern of the male dominated marital relationship.

Why focus on married versus unmarried relationships? you wonder.

An excellent question, and one which we will consider in Part II of this series.


For many decades, individuals have lobbied for their rights and their freedoms. And in most cases, such freedom was richly deserved, and a long time in coming.

However, I fear that in the struggle for liberty and equality, society as a whole has lost focus on the other necessary ingredient that comes with liberty:


One cannot abuse freedoms for selfish and unlawful purposes without severe consequences; and our 40 plus years of crusading for rights without limits is starting to bear bitter fruit.

If we as a society are to survive and thrive, we must change our thinking. We must understand that freedom comes with responsibility, and that choices have consequences, both positive and negative. Freedom to choose requires that those who choose wrongly accept the consequences of their actions.

We must also understand that liberty and equality is the foundation of a great civilization, and not the end all and be all of human endeavor. It IS possible to create a society that protects basic freedoms and enforces basic responsibilities, and then proceeds to build upon that foundation in order to uplift the citizenry to fully develop their talents and contribute their best efforts to society.

Ancient Egypt was one of these societies. Women had many legal rights, and at the same time, deeply traditional family and marriage customs were maintained. In addition, manliness was not only accepted but encouraged. Male Headship as an institution thrived during Ancient Kemetian civilization.

There is NO NEED to throw the baby out with the bathwater. All it takes is a wise and enlightened citizenry and government that understands that one can have their cake, and eat it too. We CAN walk the middle road; the only thing that it requires is wise Men to show us the way.

Getting bogged down in unlimited rights and minimum responsibility will lead to societal collapse. The great nations were the ones that managed to build a solid foundation, and elevated and expanded their search for greater knowledge and understanding.

And discipline, of self and others in one's care, is a vital, yet under-appreciated ingredient in the success or failure of nations.

More to come.

Monday, November 10, 2008

THIS is what we're facing...


I have two stories that I really need you to read.

First up, is predicting that our New Great Depression will cause up to TEN (10,000,000) MILLION people to lose their jobs and...

Second, the New York Times, in their article entitled, Stunned Icelanders Struggle After Economy’s Fall writes:

Published: November 8, 2008

REYKJAVIK, Iceland — The collapse came so fast it seemed unreal, impossible. One woman here compared it to being hit by a train. Another said she felt as if she were watching it through a window. Another said, “It feels like you’ve been put in a prison, and you don’t know what you did wrong.”

This country, as modern and sophisticated as it is geographically isolated, still seems to be in shock. But if the events of last month — the failure of Iceland’s banks; the plummeting of its currency; the first wave of layoffs; the loss of reputation abroad — felt like a bad dream, Iceland has now awakened to find that it is all coming true.

It is not as if Reykjavik, where about two-thirds of the country’s 300,000 people live, is filled with bread lines or homeless shanties or looters smashing store windows. But this city, until recently the center of one of the world’s fastest economic booms, is now the unhappy site of one of its great crashes. It is impossible to meet anyone here who has not been profoundly affected by the financial crisis.

Overnight, people lost their savings. Prices are soaring. Once-crowded restaurants are almost empty. Banks are rationing foreign currency, and companies are finding it dauntingly difficult to do business abroad. Inflation is at 16 percent and rising. People have stopped traveling overseas. The local currency, the krona, was 65 to the dollar a year ago; now it is 130. Companies are slashing salaries, reducing workers’ hours and, in some instances, embarking on mass layoffs.

“No country has ever crashed as quickly and as badly in peacetime,” said Jon Danielsson, an economist with the London School of Economics.

The loss goes beyond the personal, shattering a proud country’s sense of itself.

“Years ago, I would say that I was Icelandic and people might say, ‘Oh, where’s that?’ ” said Katrin Runolfsdottir, 49, who was fired from her secretarial job on Oct. 31. “That was fine. But now there’s this image of us being overspenders, thieves.”

Aldis Nordfjord, a 53-year-old architect, also lost her job last month. So did all 44 of her co-workers — everyone in the company except its owners. As many as 75 percent of Iceland’s private-sector architects have probably beenfired in the past few weeks, she said...

PLEASE read these articles carefully. Understand that we are just like Iceland.

On second thought, no... we are many multi-trillions of dollars MORE vulnerable than Iceland. What happened there, will happen here in time, and what happens here will be much, much worse.

UNLESS we as a country do the right things, and quickly, we are either headed for the Depression style scenario that the I-Tulip folks are talking about or... we are headed for a currency collapse similar to the Icelandic folk.

Please prepare yourselves accordingly, and speak with your licensed financial adviser before making any decisions.

If you and your planner decide that gold is part of your overall preparedness strategy, I would humbly encourage you to check out

No, I'm not getting paid by them or anything, but I am suggesting them to you because I have placed quite a few orders with them, and I've had no problems whatsoever.

These days, I like American Gold or Silver Eagles, and I try to pick up Austrian Philharmonic coins whenever I can. Coins minted by governments have a higher price than basic bullion coins, but they tend to trade easier. If one is simply going to buy metals to hold onto for a rainy day, I'd rather go with a government minted coin. Takes a lot of the guesswork out of the equation.

In any event, buying gold and silver coinage with Gainesville is just like buying anything else online... go to the site, choose the coins you want, put in your credit card and your mailing address, and Presto, real money arrives in your mailbox.

You will have successfully traded in your U.S. dollars for a currency that will survive the upcoming storm. It should be noted however that gold and silver, being as volatile as they are, can go up or down in price. And for goodness sake... don't take out a loan in order to speculate on the gold price. Just think of gold and silver as an insurance policy, and you'll be aiight.

Once again, before you place any orders, check with your financial adviser to see if precious metals are something that is right for you. While I know what is going on in a general sense, I have no idea about your risk tolerance, or your unique financial situation.


But whatever you do, Ladies and Gents, get yo' shit together.




Another good film I need you to watch:

I.O.U.S.A: The Short Version.

As you watch, please keep in mind that the overall amount of the liabilities mentioned is much higher... to the tune of TRILLIONS of dollars.

Please watch and understand why getting your affairs in order is absolutely crucial... and one also needs to have some non U.S. dollar assets in their portfolio, in the event that the U.S. Dollar is devalued at the upcoming G-20 economic summit.

A lot is happening in the world of finance these days... and none of it looks to favorable for U.S. Citizens in the long term.


Sunday, November 9, 2008

Obama's Victory: The Aftermath.

Another week has come and gone, and as usual, there's a lot to talk about.

Without further ado...

Obama: The Nation's Sixth Black President?

Well gang, I don't need to tell you that Barack Obama has been elected President of the United States.

As a man with Mozambican, Columbian, Irish and German ancestry, I definitely appreciate the significance of this moment.

Forty or so odd years ago, black people weren't allowed to sit at certain restaurant counters, or to use specific bathrooms. And now, we have the first obviously black President-elect.

Why did I say obviously?

Well dear reader, the Kidd does his homework. And I know that there have been other black Presidents who have been elected to office, if we apply the traditional understanding [a][b] that a single drop of black blood makes a person black. Click here for more info on our other "black" Presidents [c][d][e]

Some have asked me why I don't focus more on race and racism instead of holding women and feminists accountable for their destructive ways.

The short answer is, while racism is still alive and well, the question of which racial group is superior, or chronicling the ignorance of what people do to one another in the name of "(fill in racial group) power" is the lesser of more important evils at this point, and the election of Senator Obama goes a long way towards bolstering my position. The question of Racism is not that important to me in comparison with the wholesale discrimination Men receive in the Matriarchal West.

The facts are that blacks and whites have a very long and intimate history, from ancient times [1] to this very day. In suffering and in pleasure, black and white Americans are a great deal closer than many would be prepared to believe or to accept [f][g].

Close and critical examination of the history of American slavery will find that there are two outside groups whose role in this evil institution is seldom acknowledged and little understood, causing more confusion for black and white Americans alike.

Consequently, I view feminism as the greatest threat that Men of all stripes and colors face today, because it is a silent oppressor that robs us of our children and our livelihood, our Natural Rights and our Honor. Therefore, this is where I direct my energy. However, I am well aware that racism exists amongst all classes of people, and I support the efforts others are making to combat this ignorant way of thinking, so long as the free speech rights and responsibilities of other people are not suppressed in the process.

I should also add that just because a group of people of common ancestry wants to celebrate or take pride in that culture or ancestry does not equate to racism in all cases. I believe people should be proud of the good things that their ancestors have contributed to the world, and its simply not true that someone who is proud of their heritage is automatically hateful towards everyone else. People should take refuge in the deeds and sayings of their ancestors, so long as they don't fall into the trap of insulting (ethnic group X) in order to elevate their own status. This evil attitude is responsible for much suffering in the world.

As for me, being a multi-racial individual, I am comfortable with all aspects of myself, and I pay homage to all of my ancestors accordingly. It is my opinion that if all people understand where their people came from, and acknowledge and respect ALL of their ancestors of whatever origin, then a lot more people would be more comfortable "in their own skin."

And finally, I disagree with those who argue that multiculturalism means that all cultures are exactly the same, that everyone has to act in a certain homogeneous manner, and that the negative qualities of a culture have to be accepted without a peep of criticsm or evaluation.

There are differences and tendencies across cultures and groups that I have observed with my own eyes. I know that the English and the French have differing perspectives on various issues, that Koreans tend to be more musical and rhythmic than their Japanese cousins, and that black Americans have always had a love affair with music and spiritual matters.

There is room to be different, and it is dangerous to place people into neat little categories and keep them there by force, because generalities do not apply to all persons at all places and at all times.

For these and other reasons, the basic rights and responsibilities of all men need to be upheld and enforced. In a free society, individuals will pursue their chosen goals with passion and purpose, individuals will be able to make contributions that benefit the greater society, and truly diverse nations, who can draw upon the combined strengths of individuals and groups, will outperform their more homogeneous peers.

Hopefully, in post Obama America, we can begin to work towards realizing the Dream: True, complete, and just equality under the law, the ironclad guarantee of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for all individuals without respect to race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or political worldview, and the absence of "special rights" for specific groups that have led to much suffering and strife throughout American history.

Obama's Priorities.

Before I begin my thoughts on the subject, please listen to this segment from the Financial Sense crew. Their analysis is spot on, and form the backbone of today's discussion. My commentary builds off of their central theme: the Financial Crisis will greatly constrain the new President's political objectives.

The utter breakdown of families in the real world (the true engine of real and sustainable economic wealth and prosperity) due to feminism, cheap money and credit, government interventions in the marketplace (see Ron Paul's Pillars of Prosperity, p. 313), and massive amounts of anti-family propaganda, has led to the manifestation of a consumer driven economic downturn that the world hasn't seen for decades.

As the Financial Sense commentators noted, in addition to banks requiring massive cash infusions, State and local governments, automobile manufacturers, and other entities will need trillions in aid.

And one false move on the part of the Obama team could lead to either a massive selloff of U.S. dollar denominated assets, leading to a dollar collapse, or a deflationary depression (see Youtube video below) that would cause all manner of havoc.

In short, the economy is going to take up much of Obama's time.

Obama's Precarious Position.

Mr. David Hass has written a very interesting article posted on Market entitled, 2008 Election Shocker! NOTA Wins by a Landslide:

IMPORTANT UPDATE: 9am EST, November 6th, 2008 - The voting counts are now closing in on their final percentages and here is the latest approximate tally based upon a known U.S. voting-age population of 231,229,580 and currently-estimated voter turnout of 133,300,000:

97,929,000 - 42.35% - NOTA
63,500,000 - 27.46% - OBAMA
55,800,000 - 24.13% - MCCAIN

14,000,000 - 06.05% - OTHER

The author continues:

... When pushed to talk about his “stand” on “the issues” or describe his philosophical “platform” NOTA answers, tersely if not impatiently: “My stand? The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights spells it all out concisely and clearly for all of us so, if you're not familiar with what they say, I suggest you run - don't walk - and go read them both.” “My platform? It couldn't be simpler… Do not harm others. Mind your own business. Keep your own house in order. Live and let live. Clean up your own messes. Do all that you say you will do. Love your neighbors and your country. Always play fair with others. Be nice and be generous - in deed and in spirit.” Indeed. Words of profound wisdom seldom heard in the cacophony of the modern-day political carnival.

So, exactly who is this NOTA character? NOTA is the consistent winner in each and every election held in the United States in modern times. In fact, NOTA has probably dominated every election since 1900 or before. NOTA is more commonly known as NONE OF THE ABOVE. And, whether you like him or not, NOTA is the preferred choice of the preponderance of voting-age and voting-eligible Americans.

Here are the recent facts, according to an ongoing research project conducted by the Department of Public and International Affairs at George Mason University there were:

231,229,580 - 2008 Total U.S. Voting Age Adults (known)
213,005,467 - 2008 Total U.S. Voting Eligible Adults (known)
133,300,000 - 2008 Total Voter Turnout (projected based on results observed)

UPDATE: 2008 Could Mark Highest Voter Turnout Rate Since 1968

Observation #1. In 2008, a presidential year, 57.6% of voting-age adults voted.
Observation #2. In 2006, a non-presidential year, 37.1% of voting-age adults voted.
Observation #3. In 2004, a presidential year, 55.4% of voting-age adults voted.
Observation #4. In 2000, a presidential year, 50.0% of voting-age adults voted.

What immediately becomes clear is “to not vote is still a form of a vote”. It is still a personal statement. It should still be counted (and it is by the likes of the researchers at George Mason University) and, since these are our fellow Americans, their voices should still matter...

Please note that a total of 167.7 MILLION people, or 79% (167,729,000/213,005,467) of the voting age adult population "voted" against Obama! Among those who showed up to cast a ballot, 69,800,000 people, or 52% of the voters, voted against Obama.

And so, while Obama has a friendly Congress to work with, and may end up appointing hardcore Leftists to the Supreme Court (furthering consolidating his power), upon closer analysis, Obama is much weaker than he appears to be.

Any leftist misadventures, such as the passage of blatantly discriminatory, in-your-face, anti-male and pro-feminist legislation, such as a nationwide "Man-Collar" program, or any attempts to take guns away from the citizenry, could very well cost him control of Congress during the 2010 midterm elections. Significant ideological campaigns against the Sovereign People will most definitely help him become a One-Term Wonder.

Domestically, Obama has the wind to his back. But if he thinks that he can do whatever he wants and alienate the vast majority of Americans who did not elect him, he is in for a very rude awakening, which could come within two short years.

Obama's International Challenges.

The private intelligence group Stratfor, writing for Market Oracle, notes that:

... Obama will have many options on domestic policy given his majorities in Congress. But his Achilles' heel, as it was for Bush and for many presidents, will be foreign policy. He has made what appear to be three guarantees. First, he will withdraw from Iraq. Second, he will focus on Afghanistan. Third, he will oppose Russian expansionism. To deliver on the first promise, he must deal with the Iranians. To deliver on the second, he must deal with the Taliban. To deliver on the third, he must deal with the Europeans...

... As with all American presidents (who face midterm elections with astonishing speed), Obama's foreign policy moves will be framed by his political support. Institutionally, he will be powerful. In terms of popular support, he begins knowing that almost half the country voted against him, and that he must increase his base. He must exploit the honeymoon period, when his support will expand, to bring another 5 percent or 10 percent of the public into his coalition. These people voted against him; now he needs to convince them to support him. But these are precisely the people who would regard talks with the Taliban or Iran with deep distrust. And if negotiations with the Iranians cause him to keep forces in Iraq, he will alienate his base without necessarily winning over his opponents...

... Obama must deal with extraordinarily difficult foreign policy issues in the context of an alliance failing not because of rough behavior among friends but because the allies' interests have diverged. He must deal with this in the context of foreign policy positions difficult to sustain and reconcile, all against the backdrop of almost half an electorate that voted against him versus supporters who have enormous hopes vested in him. Obama knows all of this, of course, as he indicated in his victory speech.

We will now find out if Obama understands the exercise of political power as well as he understands the pursuit of that power. You really can't know that until after the fact. There is no reason to think he can't finesse these problems. Doing so will take cunning, trickery and the ability to make his supporters forget the promises he made while keeping their support. It will also require the ability to make some of his opponents embrace him despite the path he will have to take. In other words, he will have to be cunning and ruthless without appearing to be cunning and ruthless. That's what successful presidents do.

Cunning and ruthless. Very Machiavellian.

In any event, the new President has many challenges to deal with. With any luck, this will keep the Joe-Bama team busy, and will put their pro-feminist and anti-male agenda on the back burner for a time.

Realistically speaking, however, feminists will push hard for "reforms" and additional funding in an attempt to solidify their political position. They are well aware that their power is diminishing. Events beyond their control are stripping them of their influence. Ever so slowly, feminist opponents are making headway in the courts. Amazingly, even the feminized, man unfriendly Republican party might decide to champion Men's rights and pro-family policies, providing men with a nationwide vehicle to directly oppose feminist tyranny.

They know things are beginning to unravel... this is why the femmes have redoubled their blogging, their brainwashing, and their political efforts in a futile quest to hold on to power.

They aren't going out without a fight, and those of us who oppose them MUST do everything in our power to defeat them. Be it blogging, Youtubing, joining other like minded organizations, educating others about the cause of Men's Rights, or running for political office, IT IS TIME THAT MEN'S RIGHTS ACTIVISTS STOP PROTESTING FROM THE WILDERNESS, AND SEEK POLITICAL POWER, AS WELL AS FORMING COALITIONS IN ORDER TO FURTHER OUR AGENDA. Instead of running away from the system, we need to actively take it over in order to hasten the changes we seek.

The feminists have gotten this down to an exact science, and MRAs need to do the same. Please watch the video below for a more through explanation of what I'm getting at.


From the beginning of Mr. Obama's rise to power, this blog has warned about his globalist connections, and his anti-male rhetoric.

And here we are. President Elect Obama is poised to take the world by storm. How successful he will be in implementing his political ambitions is largely based on outside forces beyond his direct control. It will be an interesting time, and those of us who value true freedom and equality will be watching for any opportunities to advance the cause of freedom at the President's expense.

I would like to leave you with these videos featuring Dr. Ron Paul. His comments on Obama will prove to be prophetic, in my opinion.

There's no time for sleep friends... keep your eyes open.