In their never-ending quest to save Western Civilization by promoting manhood, the gang at the Red Pill Cult blog Return of Kings are always on to new and valuable insights. Return of Kings is run by manly Alpha leader, Roosh Valizdeh. Roosh has various guest authors from time to time, among whom is Troy Francis. Francis' major contribution to elevating standards of Western masculinity was a famous article titled, How to Get More Sex with Alpha Douchebag Club Game.
So Francis is at it again, with an ROK piece titled How to be the A******e that Beautiful Women Love. Francis' really brilliant insight for the betterment of men is that cultivating the Dark Triad approach to life and relationships isn't sufficient. Now for those unfamiliar with it, the Dark Triad is a malignant neurotic complex characterized by Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy. The Red Pills---who pose as the leaders restoring Christianity, masculinity, and Americanism teach young men to cultivate those traits: mostly in their dealings with women but in business and political relationships as well.
Francis asserts that what men really need is a Dark Tetrad because the missing element in the old behavioral model is Sadism. It's not enough simply to be an egotistical, manipulative maniac---a real man should enjoy himself while hurting and destroying others.
Francis also believes that the amoral psychopath should cultivate radical differentiation that is; rise above the herd of ordinary jerks. His bottom line to all this is that success with women comes from a complete indifference to the will of God or Man.
So what kinds of males would be attracted to a philosophy like that? Just read some of the comments afterwards:
"Totally agree. Female beauty is evil."
"The 'scars on your character' will prevent women from reducing you to a disrespected and wounded mess. It is essentially self-defense."
"Women's value has dramatically decreased for me since I discovered the Red Pill."
"Women are attracted to an a*******e because he mimics their own psychology."
"The one-way ticket to hot women is not to give a f*** about their feelings."
Does anybody see any redeeming value in any this? No---our civilization was built on the monogamous family and needs that same unit intact to survive. This doesn't come by teaching men to behave like barbarians---no matter how refined their barbarity is. Men are the providers and the protectors of women and families: that's how a culture grows strong. Francis is advocating behaviors even lower than the ape. At least apes are simply motivated by instinct. Mankind should not only know better; but it is categorically evil not only to behave like lower animals but employ our divine gifts of Reason to invent methods to exceed lower animals' behaviors with deliberate cruelty.
If it's true that women today are pursing toxic men, then our society needs to do a better job of educating women. Maybe some fathers and brothers should set examples against Hollywood's glorification of the Thug Culture. Maybe instead of cultivating the Dark Triad, single men should set some standards. Becoming the kind of man whom all real men despise doesn't make anybody an 'Alpha'.
The real shame of this is that sites like Return of Kings is given credence by many prominent commentators in the Conservative Movement. It's not a Conservative site, by any means. The Dark Triad represents behaviors we've grown accustomed to seeing from the Left: including, and especially, Sadism. We gain nothing by becoming like that.
While the US Corporate Media has been fanning anti-Russian fake-news, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops has moved to join President Trump's initiative in fighting the Opioid Epidemic. The Center for Disease Control announced recently that an average of 91 Americans die per day from Opioid overdoses. Overdoses are now the leading cause of death among Americans under 50.
The Trump Administration has taken steps to increase support for First Responders and has made funds available for new rehabilitation centers. Additionally, they have loosened federal restrictions on involuntary commitment. Hundreds of federal bureaucrats and contractors have been jailed for selling government-provided drugs on the Black Market.
Most of the Political Left is in denial that a problem even exists: in fact, Oregon has just voted to decriminalize Heroin. The fact that the epidemic exploded under the Obama Administration is worth noting.
Bishop Edward Malesic of Pennsylvania, whose Diocese saw hundreds of overdose deaths, proposed an initiative which would mandate parish educational programs addressing the crisis. But more importantly, he endorsed a growing movement among parishes to build support-groups for families effected by the problem. "This is a plague that has come into the homes and families of every city, town, and even rural areas in the Diocese." he stated. "We must accompany them with a courageous faith."
Bishop Christopher Coyne of Vermont has such a program already in place in Burlington. He testified before the Conference that his ministry also has taken the initiative to unite babies and children born to addicts to foster-families within the parish. Bishop Coyne noted that his support programs are designed also to help family members support a relative in recovery.
Similar programs have been established elsewhere. There actually though is nothing new about the approach; it is a restoration of the type of community activism and involvement that local churches engaged in until recent times. Over the last several decades, churches have ceded social welfare to state and federal agencies. The Denizens of the Deep State marginalized the church to the point that they had nearly become irrelevant. And indeed, without church participation in community affairs, religious institutions tend to lose much of their relevance. As St. James the Apostle bluntly wrote: what good does it do to tell the destitute to have faith if they see no good works supporting that faith?
State welfare programs have their purpose, but the State is not an institution that, at least on a collective level, considers itself answerable to God for the stewardship of a community. State officials are answerable to their superiors, the governor, and the legislature. While the Church and family may have intimate knowledge of a particular person's situation, the State typically does not; and follows a universal policy that may or may not be in the best interests of the needy.
"The closer you get to the Catholic Church, the closer you get to the Wounds of Christ," Bishop Burns said at a press conference after the initiative was endorsed, "And it is important for us to recognize that we accompany many people who are wounded. It is the very essence of the Church to reach out to those who are wounded."
True words, and we might add here that it is rarely the case that the State reaches out to anyone in need. That's a main distinction between legal and religious duty.
In closing, it should also be noted that this resurgent spirit of Christian community activism seems to parallel the advent of the Trump Administration. Both President Trump and Vice-President Pence have voiced support for greater religious participation in community affairs. The previous three Administrations positively discouraged it. The three previous to those attempted a sort of government-church partnership in community affairs which was very ineffective other than to politicize churches and create religiously-based political lobbies (although it should be stated that Presidents Carter, Reagan, and Bush Sr. were probably well-intentioned in pursuing these policies).
The Trump-Pence approach is far more pragmatic. Their policy seems to be that if Churches can do a better or equal job to the government in solving local problems---then don't interfere. It's very possible that younger generations of church leaders are seizing the opportunity to practice a dynamic and proactive faith after 40 years of stagnation. In America, churches have historically been community leaders. Bringing that back to American culture could only help.
Readers may recall a story we've been following since last December about Red Pill leader Andrew Anglin and the anti-Semitic harassment campaign he waged against the Gersh family of Whitefish, Montana. We last encountered this story in April, when a consortium of lawyers filed charges against Anglin for Invasion of Privacy and violating Montana's Anti-Intimidation Act.
So it appears now that Anglin himself is intimidated. Attorneys for the Gersh Family have been unable---after three months---to locate Anglin and serve him with official papers. Yes, Anglin is still spouting off his hatreds on The Daily Stormer. His disciples---all alleged victims of Jewish economic oppression---have managed to come up with over $150,000 in spare change to donate to his legal defense fund.
But where Anglin actually is physically, no one seems to know. Or at least nobody who does know is telling.
It doesn't seem to occur to Anglin's minions that his actions are quite at variance with what he preaches at The Daily Stormer, An avowed White Supremacist and Red Pill MGTOW fleeing in terror from a Jewish girl's threats is hardly the sort of thing one would expect from a manly Alpha leader. But the story gets even more interesting.
After Interior Secretary Zinke put a stop to Anglin's activities in Whitefish, Columbus Alive did a profile story on Anglin on February 8th. The article contains this interesting passage: "Anglin's current whereabouts remain unknown. Citing FBI sources and Anglin's social media activity, a November, 2016 Huffington Post article believed him to be residing in Germany."
How about that? If that story is true, it would mean that Anglin was inciting Troll Storms, Harassment Campaigns, and even an armed Skinhead march on Whitefish while safely out of the country to avoid any conflict or suffer any consequences himself.
But that is what we've come to expect from these phonies. Vox Day, Matt Forney, and Ramzpaul are among many provocateurs who foment problems in America while hiding out in Europe. And they funnel through the Internet European extremist ideologies that they palm off as 'Americanism'.
During the night, a rumor originating from ISIS' media sources announced---with few details---that ISIS Supreme Leader Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was dead and that a successor would be named soon. The report came from the Iraqi village of Tal Afar, an ISIS-occupied redoubt west of Mosul.
The story was met with initial skepticism, as there have been conflicting reports about Baghdadi since he fled Raqqa in May, 2016. Russian Military Intelligence claimed at the end of June that the believed the Caliph was killed in a Russian airstrike in Eastern Syria. During the final days of the Battle of Mosul, ISIS religious leaders issued a fatwah against publically announcing Baghdadi's death; and the fiends even burned an Imam who violated that policy at the stake to make their point.
Fars News, an Iranian publication very closely connected to Iranian Intelligence and Military sources also confirmed the story today. Iranian Intelligence has actually proven quite accurate during the course of the war. According to them, there is an internal battle going in ISIS now for control of the group---although why anyone actually would want this job right now is difficult to comprehend. (Well, we are talking about madmen here). It is noteworthy though, that Iran didn't confirm the earlier Russian report, even though the two countries are allies and share intelligence.
Iranian officials are not certain as to the cause of the Caliph's demise; but some unnamed sources told Fars that there is suspicion that al-Baghdadi was overthrown in an internal coup following the Battle of Mosul. Others believe that he may have died this weekend in Mosul from some battle-related cause.
Regardless of how Baghdadi met his demise, the world is now rid of one of the 21st Century's most notorious master-criminals. Baghdadi unleashed a Reign of Terror on par with other political killers of the modern era: Robespierre, Hitler, Lenin, Pol Pot, etc. And unfortunately---as was true of these others---he'll serve as inspiration for future collections of fanatics. Baghdadi was especially noted among this infamous group for his refined cruelty. These others at least sought efficiency in their means of killing innocents; Baghdadi seemed to delight in, and even encourage, his followers to kill with the most hideous means that their evil imaginations could suggest.
Political and religious fanatics are invariably driven by an obsessive hatred. Classical psychologists believe that the fanatic---driven mad by the evil within himself---sublimates this hatred under an affected superiority and then projects what he hates of himself onto other groups or individuals. Psychologists also believe that the reason that fanatics gain followers is that they attract others of a similar neurotic inclination whose evil tendencies find validation in the fanatic's approval. This explains the so-called charisma that such personalities seem to have---and why it effects some people deeply while having no effect on others. As the fanatic's movement grows, others are lured in through cunning propaganda and the social effect of the fanatic's popularity.
Baghdadi seemed to have been consumed with such a hatred of humanity in general that he was able to act as a human conduit for anybody else with a hatred they wished to act out upon. Any one who hated the Allied Governments; or the West, or Christians, or Jews, or Moderate Moslems; or Westerners who hated their own cultures; or hated women---all were welcome to join ISIS. ISIS was truly innovative in that was an equal-opportunity hate group. Adherents had to pledge a superficial loyalty to the Wahhabi Cult; but they were basically free to commit sins against Islam and Crimes Against Humanity afterwards.
From the sociological standpoint, let us all pray that Baghdadi's innovations aren't setting a trend for the 21st Century. At least fanatics of earlier times had to seize control of governments to cause global mayhem; the world is really going to have a problem if ISIS-like groups can spring up out of nowhere in various discontented parts of the world.
ISIS will survive Baghdadi's death, but in much the same way that Naziism continued after Hitler. It's always going to be a problem, but its main driving-force is now gone. ISIS, as a worldwide movement effectively died with Baghdadi. There is no real threat of them any longer building a Caliphate in the Fertile Crescent, which was Baghdadi's objective. Yes, they will still be active here and there and commit some further attacks on occasion. And the Allies still have to liberate Raqqa and a few other areas under their control. But it's only a matter of time now before this exceptionally evil group recedes into history.
As Leslie Charteris, the author of The Saint series, once had his character say to a Nazi commander, "You and your kind represent nothing in world history more significant than a forest fire. You burst onto the world scene bringing your black gifts of terror and destruction; but one day the forest will be green again and nobody will remember you."
And we can't think of a better eulogy for Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi than that.
Following the dynamic meeting between Presidents Putin and Trump; the President of China, Xi Jinping held a much-awaited meeting with the US leader. Relations between the two countries have hit a few roadblocks. The RINOs in the State and Defense Departments have continued Obama's policies of pressuring China by military and economic provocation.
Xi impressed upon Trump the futility of continuing these policies. He expressed considerably empathy, though, with Trump's position vis-à-vis his own. "The Sino-US relationship is determined by reality, not by tough rhetoric." said a spokesman for the Chinese Government, "Beijing is willing to develop stable ties with Washington and meanwhile stick to its bottom line on issues concerning his national interest. This has determined Beijing's attitude on matters that Washington is concerned about. The US' China policy---intertwined with different interests---is often unpredictable...Washington will gradually realize that Beijing has little room to make concessions in the face of US pressure."
Trump seemed more or less inclined to agree, calling the meeting 'excellent.' The main accomplishment of the meeting is that both countries agreed to set up a bilateral high-level commission to work out US-China economic policy and prevent escalations in tensions. This was a brilliant move on Trump's part. The new commission will allow Trump considerable latitude to deal with China pragmatically without pressure from American anti-China interests. The first meeting is scheduled for July 19th.
"There are still forces in US strategic circles calling for being tough on China. They like neither China nor Trump, and instigate Trump to counter China. They hope that the Washington-Beijing relationship will see major problems. The Trump Administration has not been as tough on China as expected. This annoys those who wanted to see more of Trump's aggressive personality displayed towards China."
Absolutely. Once again, the editors of The Global Times see the issue with twice the clarity of the US Corporate Media. Trump, as a businessman, completely understands the mentality of the Chinese leadership---which is essentially a corporation itself. The problem that Trump has encountered is that both the majority of his constituents and his enemies in the Deep State are deeply anti-Chinese. Obama especially hated and envied the Chinese owing to his childhood in Indonesia and days as a Chicago 'activist'. This came out in his foreign policy very clearly.
Trump and Xi are both economically-minded men who'd rather cooperate in mutually profitable trade than engage in a mutually destructive war. That could refer both to trade wars or military conflict. As Xi stated, this is reality, not rhetoric. We've reached a point in world history where Sino-US conflict is mutually assured destruction, whether hardliners on either side of the Pacific like it or not.
This isn't to say that Xi doesn't deal with anti-American elements in the CPC as well---there is still a strong Maoist faction in Chinese politics who are locked in a Cold War mentality. That's why this bilateral commission was such a master-stroke by Trump. It allows for a gradual---but necessary---thaw in relations much like the US-Soviet Détente pioneered by the Nixon Administration. We never had such a directed dialogue with China, but it is none to late to begin.
The two presidents also discussed North Korea, THAAD, and the pending Taiwan arms' deal. Nothing was really resolved on these issues other than a resolution by both parties to refrain from any unilateral actions. Overall, though, the meeting was a success and Xi Jinping clearly has greater respect for Trump than for Obama.
Trump also announced at G-20 that he planned to visit China sometime later this year for the two leaders' third summit in less than one year.
So what could be better news than Trump's diplomatic victories against the Deep State at the G-20? How about the news that ISIS' last major Iraqi stronghold has fallen to the Allies? There is jubilation and celebrating throughout Iraq tonight as news from the Front is pouring in that ISIS forces have surrendered Mosul after a nine-month battle.
The Battle of Mosul ended much the same as the Battle of Aleppo; a spearhead through the center of the ISIS lines split the enemy forces into pockets. The last few ISIS troops chose either 'martyrdom' or surrender---most preferred the latter course.
ISIS' defeat in Mosul means that the Eastern Theater of Operations in this war is essentially over. The few desert redoubts under ISIS occupation will be gone soon and Iraq will be free of the Jihadi Menace once and for all.
The Iraqi Government also hopes that their victories will end any further pretexts for Pentagon interference in their internal affairs. General James Mattis abandoned Iraq to ISIS on Obama's orders in 2014. Obama sent troops to Mosul again---over Iraqi objections---in 2016, to try and assume credit for ISIS' defeat. Iraqi forces refused to serve with Pentagon troops, and so our brave men and women in uniform were mostly confined to base doing photo-ops and occasionally interfering with Allied operations.
Commander Kareem Al-Nouri of the Shiite Militias stated that "Washington wants to have a share in the final victory announcement against ISIS and benefit from it. But I have to emphasize that this victory belongs to the Iraqi people and that the United States did not play any role in it."
The credit indeed belongs to the Iraqi people. After Mattis' poltroonery, 2/3 of the country fell to ISIS. The Iraqi Army was demoralized under a decade of Pentagon political correctness. Then, with Russian equipment and Chinese and Iranian advisors---and most importantly, the united support of the Iraqi people---the tide turned and turned rapidly. Iraqis formed militias: Shiite, Christian, Kurdish, and fought side-by-side with the Iraqi Army. In ISIS-held cities, men and women resisted ISIS, serving as snipers, saboteurs, and spies at the risk of their own lives.
Mosul was the first major city captured by ISIS and was the first capital of the so-called 'Islamic State'. ISIS Supreme Commander Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi proclaimed himself 'Caliph' there in 2014. The whereabouts of Baghdadi remain unknown; several witnesses reported seeing him in Mosul during the battle. Whether alive or dead, the 'Caliphate' is doomed; and that is the important thing.
RINO UN Ambassador Nikki Haley is once again undermining the President's foreign policy and usurping his authority. After a week of feuding between the White House and CNN, Haley appeared on that network to disparage the historic meeting between Presidents Putin and Trump before a hostile audience. This occurred only a few months after President Trump warned Haley to stop speaking out-of-turn.
After the meeting, both Trump and Putin acknowledged that the fake-news about Russian election-hacking had been discussed, and that Trump accepted Putin's denial. Even the Corporate Media is beginning to back off 'Russiagate'; especially since CNN itself was caught by Project Veritas fabricating most of their stories and sources for ratings.
So Haley instead betrayed the President by going to his avowed enemies and spinning the story as though Trump had covered up 'Russiagate' and demanded that Putin cease interfering.
"Everybody knows that Russia meddled in the election." Haley spouted the DNC talking-points, "They're not just doing this in the US, but in multiple countries to sow international chaos."
Haley also stated falsely that Trump accused Putin of election-meddling and demanded that he stop. She expressed hope that other nations would follow suit and begin resisting Russia.
This isn't the first time that Haley has sold out to Left-Wing interests. As governor of South Carolina, she initiated the nationwide ban on Confederate flag displays and supported the removal of historic Civil War monuments. She also came out in favor of Open Borders and was originally a supporter of Jeb Bush. As UN Ambassador, she's frequently presented false evidence---provided by Soros-funded front groups---against various countries like Syria and North Korea which have led to actual and near armed conflicts.
Republican Party and Conservative activists should not overlook this latest affront to President Trump. Haley crossed a definite line by going to the President's enemies and misrepresenting his position on Russia. We urge all Trump-supporters to demand that President and GOP leadership remove Nikki Haley from office at once and fill the UN seat with someone who supports the President and his positions.
