“An aura of dominance creates a magnetic bubble; leadership provides the direction in which that bubble travels” – Newly Sharpened
Men’s dominance and leadership throughout history has always been the driving force of a functional and thriving society. Leaders of men were championed and admired since it projected the ideal masculine experience and as a result, children looked up to them in admiration and fellow men showed immense respect. As an extension of this, their dominance and productivity were seen by women as highly attractive and arousing. This social standing and dominance forced women to try everything in their will to make themselves valuable enough to become potential wives to these men. Furthermore, they desired big families since reproducing with dominant males meant strong, competitive genes would be passed on.
However, what happens when male dominance and leadership becomes demonized by a culture? the culture begins to destroy itself whilst its women subconsciously hope for balance to be restored. The duality of nature, especially masculine and feminine energy has always been needed for a society to fully actualize its potential. By emasculating a country’s men, a society voluntarily and/or involuntarily invites foreign men from more dominant cultures to restore this balance. A quick look at the immigrant welcoming countries shows the result of a female run society – as Chateau rightfully states, “men invade, women invite”. Since the welcoming of these foreigners, Germany and Sweden have reported rape epidemics, spike in crime rates and fear amongst citizens. The irony in all of this are the reports from multiple women calling for men to protect them. The same women who demonized violence and ‘male culture’ are now the ones demonizing men for not being strong or aggressive enough, alas, damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Female nature in an environment of violence and hostility tend to look towards their men to become more of the masculine archetype that is needed to secure survival for themselves and their family. However, when society becomes prosperous, and violence becomes much more obscure and covert, female nature thrives. At this point, a woman’s Machiavellian make up will begin to find ways in which to gain the most out of this prosperity. The men that they leaned on to secure their survival becomes the same individuals that they attempt to change, to become more subservient and sensitive. This poses as an internal quandary for most beta men because they believe by identifying with them, they become more attractive. This however is a grave mistake; when a female attempts to alter your habits, ideologies and thought processes, this in itself is a shit test. On a societal level, European men have failed this shit test by giving into the demands of Feminists and other movements that attack men in order to ‘empower’ themselves. They have taken the position of being lead rather than leading.
Nevertheless, as true to female nature, when they do succeed in getting what they want, they then search for what they now don’t have. In this context, masculinity becomes what they yearn for as society fails to offer them men that they can respect and therefore love. Looking into the birth rate most national couples have in these societies show that the women have little to no interest in passing on the couple’s genes. There are many factors that affect this but there can be a strong case that when a society becomes much more feminized, women are not inclined to make much children, if any at all. If this state remains, as is the case with many European countries, these women vote for policies that ensure the invitation of more alpha males into their lands under the guise of a humanitarian effort. Initially, this may be genuine but as these foreign men show themselves to be a sharp contrast to that of national beta males, they begin to become more attracted to them.
Slowly, as this trend continues, these foreign men become the dominant species in the land and they become the leaders of the society through attaining public (governmental and community) and private (business) positions of power. A look through the history books will show that this trend is not particularly new. The book ‘The Fate of Empires’ (I advise my readers to read this books in light of world events) details the trends through history that preceded the decline and subsequent fall of great empires. Interestingly enough: an influx of foreigners, a welfare state, the loss of a sense of duty and deferring political positions and power to women were all trends that followed the destruction of these empires. However, this all comes about through the softening of men in the nation as they have enjoyed prosperity for an extended period of time. They become more dominant intellectually but not physically; feminine but not masculine; following but not leading.
Unfortunately, I believe this decline is at a stage where enjoying seems much more beneficial than undertaking the responsibility of righting society’s wrongs. We have entered a time where transgenderism, homosexuality and nihilism are celebrated and deemed as bravery we should all admire. True male virtues are branded as evil and everything that goes against the male function and nature are not progressive enough to hold clout in the public eye. Change will only come when war breaks out and men are forced to pick up their weapons and embrace their primal, dominant nature that has brought society this far.