Direct Link to Latest News



July 24, 2010

david.jpg[Left, Michelangelos' "David." A measure of what "Confucian" is saying below: it was difficult to find images of manliness either on Google images or Flickr, almost as if "manliness" is being erased from our consciousness. (Henry Makow did not write this article but endorses it.)]

by "Confucian"

Confucius has been regarded as the central philosophical figure of Chinese thought. An attempt was made to destroy his work during the so-called Cultural Revolution of Maoism. But a similar attempt had already been made during the reign of the Emperor Chin Shih Huang-ti around 215 BC. That attempt failed, as the thoughts of Confucius became the official religion of the Han Dynasty and continued throughout other dynasties until the revolution of 1912.
A central concept in Confucius' Analects is that of the gentleman. For Confucius, a gentleman is someone whose words do not outstrip his deeds. For precisely that reason, this article is written anonymously, to ensure that the author's words do not outstrip his deeds. We may just regard them as thoughts to consider, without any person claiming to possess the quality about to be praised. That must eventually be determined in the battlefield of life  by the assessment of fair observers.
The quality is Manliness.
There is perhaps no quality more hated by the Integrated Control System referred to variously as the Illuminati, International Bankers, or whatever other label seems most appropriate. It is clearly the target of their most concerted attacks, linked with what they call a Patriarchal Power structure, machismo, sexism, etc.
One of Kipling's greatest poems, "If", embodies the hated quality in its explosive last line. After laying out a superb list of personal characteristics, he sums up the triumphant reward: "And -- which is more -- you'll be a man, my son." 

The Spartan women allegedly proudly boasted that only they produced men.
The essence of the targeted culture of the Afghan and Pakistani Pathans is Pashtunwali, an ethical system embodying hospitality, chivalry, courage...and above all manliness.
The tortures and humiliations at Abu Ghraib made no sense from the point of view of mere prison control. Clearly their target was Iraqi manliness.
The well-funded attempts to empower women internationally by selective grants to them over their husbands are clearly another attempt at international emasculation.
The welfare system that removes the need for the father is yet another facet of the program to eliminate manliness.
St. Paul is one of the thinkers most hated by international emasculators. His admonition that wives should obey their husbands in all things and that no man should ever be subordinate to a woman arouse the utmost fury. He was crystal clear that in order to fulfill his role in society and the family, a male must become a man. That is not an automatic promotion due merely to age. No, manliness involves a great deal more.
A manly person is gentle.
A manly person respects the dignity of others, as he insists on respect for his own dignity.
For a real man, there is no worse stain than a justified charge of cowardice. He must be unrelenting in the defense of his religion, his family, his nation, and every other voluntarily chosen affiliation.

There is no lack of manliness in refusing to defend an affiliation that he did not voluntarily choose. On the contrary, real manliness in that case requires defiance.

Real manliness is not embodied in the hormone testosterone, which can result in loutishness or mindless aggressiveness. On the contrary, such chemical facsimiles are endorsed by the control system, as a way of twisting the powers of traditional manliness into a tool they can use to subjugate others.
Real manliness consists in the ability to say: "I am not going to do that." Whether the refusal is to step over the line at the draft center, volunteer for the naked body scanner, to shoot an innocent victim, or salute a value one despises, the effect is the same. The manly person is uncontrollable.
Luther's famous words embody the essence of manliness. "Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise."
The heroes at Lexington Green in 1775 refused to lay down their arms. They could not be stripped of their manliness.
Demosthenes, by contrast, is a horror story in failure of manliness. After delivering some of the most stirring orations known to man, the Philippics, opposing Macedonian hegemony in Greece, he reportedly showed up in person at the final battle... and ran, leaving his shield on the field, the ultimate disgrace for an ancient Greek.
The Spartan women allegedly had a saying for their menfolk as they left for war: "Come back with your shield or on it."
The Spartans had a proverbial horror of talking too much. They felt that it was very easy to come across as a Demosthenes. So they were famous for keeping their mouths shut and letting their actions decide whether or not they were men.
Confucius, in his usual understated way, said that a gentleman... or a man, as we would put it... should never allow his words to outstrip his action. We should all see what we can really do, and then tailor our words, if we choose to use any, to stay within those boundaries.
But what is more admirable than the silent hero, the man who is so afraid of letting his words outstrip his deeds, that he merely prays thankfully after passing the test of courage that he has not disgraced his family name or his own?
If these words enlighten you, remember the much-vilified Kipling, who dared to praise manliness in the Afghans, Englishmen, and wherever else he could find it.

 Remember St. Paul, who was not afraid to praise manliness. Remember the understated Confucius.

As for myself, I merely pass on these thoughts anonymously, for fear of being another Demosthenes, fear of letting my own words outstrip my deeds. All of us who aspire to be men must pray that when our manliness comes unmistakably in question,  we shall conduct ourselves as men.


First Comment by Inwau:

I like very much what was presented here, but what Confucian is describing is a strong-willed adult /human/. It is perfectly possible,
in fact necessary, to be all these things and still be a good woman (not just female) and a good wife in subjection to her husband. What
good woman is not gentle? What good woman does not respect the dignity of others and insist on it for herself? What good woman is not
unrelenting in the defense of her religion, her family and so forth? Naturally, their battlefields are different, but a wife that does not
put her family, her religion and herself above outside forces is nigh worthless.

A common misconception on both sides of the 'traditional household' debate is the idea that the woman must be unable to think for herself,
must be unable to make any decisions, must be unable to have any input, must be unable to correct her husband when he makes a mistake
(tactfully and respectfully, there's no need to be a shrew about it). If the man is the Captain, then the woman is the First Mate. How can
the Captain run his ship if the FM is a bumbling idiot? If the FM must be micromanaged down to the tiniest detail and is incapable of making
a decision on their own? The Captain would spend all his time doing the FM's job and be without the time or energy to do his own. How can
he run his ship if the FM is not allowed to say, "Actually, Sir, given that the blah blah is such and such, it might be more prudent to.."?
He might have overlooked a grave danger or not caught a brilliant idea. None of us are infallible, but through the beauty of teamwork,
reason and stepping away from the ego, we can hold each other up and have a well-run ship.

Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "Manliness"

Bert said (July 27, 2010):

excellent article -- it addresses the problem of what how the real economic wealth of a nation is measured

the real economic wealth of a nation is measured by four things

-- the meekness of men (meekness is a paradoxical combination of courage, gentleness, strength, patience, ferocity, honesty, humility, as "Confucian" points out)

-- the tenderness of women (like meekness, this is another complex, but without the ironic suffering or "try" of chastity and tenderness, women lose their ability to inspire men, and men lose their desire to protect the family -- is it any wonder that today's Marxist women are hardened off and lonely, and men have no desire to protect them)

-- the innocence of children (whose minds are excited by discovery of truth and happiness, which is congruence and similitude with God. Today children are addicted to porn -- today's porn is highly scientific and it is targeted at children, both male and female), and

-- the wisdom of the elderly (while we embark on the completely insane policy of exterminating the elderly by bad dentistry and medicine -- though they are only a small segment of the population, because of their important "connection" with the young, and their power of forgiveness and understanding as they pass on, they inspire us with the idea of a spiral of life, and thus their contribution to the future economy is hugely important.

without the courage of men, the chastity of women, the innocence of children, and the forgiveness of the elderly, a nation has no true economic wealth.


btw, Michelangelo as a hard core Illuminati agent -- all of his artwork projects an existentialist theme For example, it's not hard to see the "frightened" look, full of self doubt and worry, that he carved into the face of his David. Michelangelo was skilled, and that was no accident. He actually portrays little David as a gigantic homosexual prettyboy. If you ever see the statue in real life, his hands and body posture are completely stiff and self conscious. David's hands also project a preoccupation with touchie-feelie ideas -- Who gives a damn about touchie-feelie when you are changing history -- David's face, hands or body posture are not those of someone who is goal oriented.

Jack said (July 26, 2010):

Might I add some distinctions with differences? For instance female should not be confused with woman and male with masculinity. A woman represents femininity whereas female only identifies biology.

So too with male vis-à-vis masculinity. Because the holy writ records man as having been created first and from the red clay of earth, the woman having been created second and not from the ground, this should suggest a divine law of subordination. And history illustrates that every perversion of this law results in the collapse of societies and the great civilizations that repudiated it.

Feminism is traceable to Eve. And matriarchy, which implies a system distinct from patriarchy, is like egalitarianism….it has never existed, doesn’t exist and will never exist. Only patriarchy exists; and it exists either as male-dominated patriarchy or female-dominate patriarchy. Female-dominated patriarchy happens when feminized males abandon and despise masculinity (like one reader) and permit moral rot in the family and society. Moral rot comes gratis the hybrid masculinized female actor. The modern masculinized feminist, like her ancestors, desires a role in patriarchy because she cannot conceive a different system. When females have risen to power in patriarchies in their respective societies social collapse always follows

Heterosexual incompatibility and dysfunction seen in (i) family disintergration (ii) skyrocketing divorce rates (iii) marriagelessness, (iv) soaring levels of bastard children, (v) the popularity of prostitution and (vi) the proliferation of ‘homosexual’ populations are a sampling of symptoms of dying societies.

JCW said (July 25, 2010):

It's sad we live in a time when we have to be instructed in manliness... It wasn't that long ago that our lives embodied the force of manliness... I have the unique opportunity, as do millions of other men, of living in a time when we have gone from being true American Patriots to being home grown terrorist... Honor and manliness have simply become an anachronism.

I'm in my mid fifties and I was raised with the whole God and country, honor, protect your family and so on... Now we have government sponsored documents from the Homeland Security Department who think that if you believe in God, the right to bear arms, the constitution, anti-abortion, believe that the two party system is failing and that a third party candidate needs to shake things up, is now considered to be un-American and a home grown terrorist.

As a man you didn't say certain things to woman... Yet today woman have become so integrated in our everyday lives that nothing is sacred anymore. In America, there was a time, it took courage to live and survive here, now we have become pacified and emasculated by prosperity. Let the system fail and there is no longer a safety net to fall into and then maybe the masculine spirit will rise like the Phoenix. The way things are headed I think we shall soon find out...

Dan said (July 25, 2010):

...i'm sure that well before the US got all their ducks in a row... into and onto their 19th century FEMA camps/reservations...
there was a world effort afoot to rid the world of any social structure that was tribal in nature...

a disconnect from the roots of the old sacred beliefs or familial bloodline allegences or any rememberances of it...

the family farm was one of the closets things we ever had to it in America... the Amish or Pennsylvania Dutch are close examples i'd think...

it's a basic community system that works for the people if you aren't concerned with... 'the economy ...stupid..'...

and we sure have all become stupid and dependent.... our tribes are broken up and scattered...

we need to begin gathering our tribes back together...

Johnny said (July 25, 2010):

Thank Bob I don't live in the northern hemisphere anymore. In fact, I grew up between both sides and some twenty years chose to skip the upper part for good and forever.

And I mean its "culture". Its poop pop culture. Culture is NOT your friend, it is the operating system you are forced to buy and install. You can not be a real man there, not openly, you will be singled out because you are dangerous to the hissy fit crowd with extreme cranial hygiene. And we are not talking about the hormones, the posturing, the Ersatz manliness. "Gentleman" is not a bad word to latch on to. Standing for something and defending it, no matter what.

So, being an observer of the Illuminati poop culture, I knew something was getting really poopy when I saw the face of Ratzinger being chosen, and then, this faggot nobody slinky pimp being chosen (different job, different corporation). Those two faces ALONE spoke almost more than millions of words filtered from the ether to understand what the poop is going on there. It is what is seems to be:

The jerks want to be in the bible!

Nothing against fagot pimps, black or white, I am not saying they have to go back into their closet. But they definitely have to stay in their room.

Jeff said (July 25, 2010):

Exactly right on target! I've watched with disgust the rise of metrosexuals on TV ads, in movies and all around me.

It's no surprise that the entity 'MEM' is so distraught over reading the obvious that she/he/it resorts to playing the 'penis card' and followed that play with the usual give-peace-a-chance drivel spiced with obscenities.

Keep fighting the good fight, my friend, as I will till my last breath. God Bless.

MEM said (July 25, 2010):

My dear friend who reads your articles regularly just asked me to take a look, so I did and I have to ask - how terrified of your penis are you? Substitute the idea of human - humanity - humanistic - humanitarianism - into your concept of manliness - and then you might have some clue to your responsibility as a "gentleman" - but wait - i forget - the ying yang is a conspiracy too - the concept of the masculine and the feminine being contained, integral, a part of - must be more Maoist dogma - but you aein't gonna make it with anyone anyhow... are you? You emote complete drivel as far as I can tell. Free your mind and your ass will follow. All you need is love. Give peace a chance. St Paul would be proud of you. Jesus Fu**ing Christ - What Would Confucius Do?


Dear MEM

Any man who is ruled by a woman is a pussy. That's what you are.


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at