My site stats tell me that several people have been searching the site for my views on same-sex “marriage” –probably due to the attention the issue has been getting recently (as well as those obnoxious HRC-inspired “equality” Facebook profile pics and memes every progressive is posting).

Yesterday, I joined Alternative Right‘s  Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki and Colin Liddell for a conversation about the subject. We had some good laughs.

Click here to listen:

VANGUARD RADIO: “BOURGEOIS TYRANNY”

Love the image they picked for it.

For more of my views on the subject — I included a long essay against same-sex marriage in my first book, Androphilia, titled “Agreements Between Men.”

Also included in the second printed edition of Androphilia is an essay I wrote for Alternative Right  a few years ago contrasting same-sex marriage with  the issue of homosexual men in the military. My basic argument was that homosexual men serving in the military is gender normative (and probably good for the men who would want to do it), whereas men marrying each other subverts traditional sex/gender roles.

Further, my second book, Blood-Brotherhood and Other Rites of Male Alliance, was initially conceived to offer a masculine alternative to “marriage” for homosexual males. The first edition includes this argument, but the second edition was edited for a general (hetero) male audience, because blood-brotherhood has always been a predominantly hetero social institution, and I wanted more straight men to read about it and think about male friendship and bonds of brotherhood.

 

“Head of a Capri Girl” (1878) – John Singer Sargent

“Stop doing that sketchy thing. You’re in art school now, son.”

My freshman year figure drawing instructor wanted me to draw hard, decisive lines. When most people draw, they make little, tentative sketch marks to feel out the curves. They aren’t confident; they don’t trust their hands or their tools.

You can pull decisive lines out of a sketchy drawing, and that’s what most people try to do. But the virtuosity – the real mastery in rendering — is in the bold, confident stroke.

Look at a John Singer Sargent portrait.  Up close, it’s a mess. Take a step back, and you see the work of a man who knew exactly what he was doing. Sargent painted with authority. That’s the difference between his work and the muddy slop of someone trying to copy his style.

Do or do not. There is no “try.” 

Now that I’m in art school again, I’m constantly reminded of this.  I’m learning how to tattoo, and you can’t sketch on someone’s skin. You need to put down lines like you mean it. Every line is forever.

The difference between a drawing that works and a drawing that doesn’t work is in the decisive edge. People want to know what they are looking at. It has to be clear. The talon can’t be some wobbly line that runs into the wing. It has to be a talon.

Things in nature are what they are. It doesn’t matter if it’s a flower or a mountain — it is what it is. It’s not “kind of” anything.

People today don’t want to be strong. They want to be flexible. They don’t want to commit to a line. They want to bend whichever way the wind blows.

Nothing truly beautiful can come of this.

“Strategist Jack” over at the politics and firearms training blog Warriors and Capitalists just published an in-depth review of The Way of Men.

THE WAY OF MEN BY JACK DONOVAN – A BOOK REVIEW PRESENTED IN CONTEXT OF GOOD MEN SEEKING SECURITY AND PREDICTABILITY IN A WORLD OF INCREASING DANGER AND CHAOS.

The book seems to be finding an audience with the guns and freedom guys, and I am grateful for that.

I was also glad to have someone write something about the book this month, because I’ve been too busy between a new job and tattoo school to write much of anything lately.

If you’re interested in learning more about firearms and tactics, you may want to check out their books and videos at Pulse Firearms Training.

I don’t have a handgun at the moment, but as soon as I’m in the market for one again, I’ll be looking into their videos. These guys have been great to deal with online and they seem to know what they are talking about.

Split a meat plate with a progressive pal the other night at a tucked-in little workshop pub called “The Tannery.”

Good bier wurst.

The two mainstream groups in American politics are made absurd by obvious internal contradictions.

The “Republicans” position themselves as advocates of small-town values, yet defend the big businesses most responsible for eroding the small business, family farm lifestyles that make those values possible.

How can you save small town values with big businesses? 

The “Democrats” are called liberals, and position themselves as champions of personal freedom, yet offer absolutely no solutions that don’t somehow involve increased government regulation or oversight.

How can you increase personal freedom with big government?

“Conservative” Republicans say they are fiscally responsible, but they support fiscally irresponsible, unnecessary, protracted and un-winnable wars.

“Progressive” Democrats say they are against war, but they tacitly support fiscally irresponsible, unnecessary, protracted and un-winnable wars when their own party leaders continue them.

“Progressive” Democrats say they are against big business and white privilege, but they advocate taxation and regulatory policies that make small businesses difficult to start. When I go to progressive areas and patronize new “politically correct” small businesses, it seems as though the majority of them were started or bankrolled by the children of wealthy white people.

 

Pup Creek Falls, OregonOver a year ago, I wrote an essay titled “Hate Globally, Like Locally.”  Opponents of globalism ought to be finding things to “like” around them, and I vowed to do that — because I actually like where I live. Too many on the far right come off like miserable cunts who hate everything, and give no reason for anyone to sympathize with them.

I ended up promoting the things I like about Portland mainly through my Facebook pages. However, what I found is that I really don’t give a shit about Portland, per se. I work in Portland, but I don’t live in Portland, and I would live further away from it if I could figure out how to make money out in the sticks. There are things I like about Portland. Portland has a great, unpretentious food scene, and some hipster-ish cultural trends I can get on board with, like old-fashioned barber shops. But when people ask me why I live so close to Portland, my answer is:

Because Oregon.

At your right, find a photo of Pup Creek Falls. I did a 7-8 mile (round-trip) trail run/hike out to see this a few days ago. The trailhead was 40 minutes from my home in Milwaukie, which is only about 10 minutes outside of SE Portland. It also happens to be within a few miles of the pull-off where I go to shoot guns with rednecks from Clackamas County.

On a Friday afternoon in March, I was the only one on this lush, primordial trail. I don’t know any other mid-sized city in America where you can truly get out in the middle of nowhere so quickly.

Here’s more information about the trail.

http://www.portlandhikersfieldguide.org/wiki/Pup_Creek_Falls 

I’ve started tattoo school, so I may not be doing a lot of writing in the next 6 months, but I renamed the “Portland” section of this blog “Cascadia.” I’m going to try to keep track of the things I like about the Pacific Northwest, including Portland, with brief updates and photos posted to that section.

“In a society that has abolished every kind of adventure the only adventure that remains is to abolish the society.”

—Situationist graffiti, May 1968

 

As a political ideology, fascism was a mixed bag of 20th Century ideas. Its athletic presence hung with flirty, politically expedient schemes like universal suffrage, in many ways last century’s fascism was defined by its responses to other political movements of the time—like Marxism and liberal capitalism.

But, just beyond the historical details of fascism, there is something eternal. Italian writer Umberto Eco called it “Ur-fascism” —meaning “primitive” or “original.” Unfortunately, his snatchy “fourteen points” were overly concerned with the top-down totalitarianism of fascism’s notable dictators and their party boys. His “ur-fascism” wasn’t “primitive” enough. It wasn’t “eternal” at all.

The word “fascism” has become sloppy shorthand for any violent, intrusive police state. For most people, fascism evokes a people forced into lockstep conformity by an all-powerful government. 20th Century political fascism had many other features, and they were instituted differently in different nations. Oppressive, runaway governments are also not unique to 20th Century fascism. Marxism, Catholicism and Islam have all produced cruel, iron-fisted police states. If being more afraid of your own government than you are of its external enemies is a measure of totalitarian tyranny, America’s own “progressive” surveillance state is headed that way. Fascism and totalitarianism may be confused in the popular imagination, but they aren’t the same thing.

Etruscan FascesThe fasces was a powerful symbol before Mussolini was born, so it is possible to separate the symbol from his regime and see it in its own right. I am not concerned so much with the usage of the fasces as a symbol of magisterial power in Republican Rome. I am more interested in the phenomenon this pre-Roman symbol appears to represent. Fascism has been described as a “male fantasy,” and I agree that the fasces symbolizes a distinctly male worldview. What is it about the fasces that captures the male imagination?

Most people associate the “evils” of fascism with a top-down bureaucratic institution, but to me the fasces itself appears to symbolize a bottom-up idea.

The bound rods of the fasces represent strength and the authority of a unified male collective. That’s its “primitive” appeal. True tribal unity can’t be imposed from above.  It’s an organic phenomenon. Profound unity comes from men bound together by a red ribbon of blood. The blood of dire necessity that binds the band of brothers becomes the blood of heritage and duty that ties the family, the tribe, the nation. The fasces captures the male imagination because it appears to symbolize the unified will of men. Men prefer to believe that they offer their allegiance by choice, whether they truly do or not. Free association—or the appearance of it—is the difference between free men and slaves. If you can’t just walk away, you’re a prisoner. If you choose to stay, if you choose to align your fate to the fate of the group and submit to the collective authority of the group, you are a member, not a slave. As a member, you add the weight of your manhood to a unified confederacy of men.

Mercury Dime FascesThe fasces became a popular decorative motif for American government buildings in the 19th and early 20th Centuries, and its symbolism is consistent with an earlier Latin motto adopted by the union: e pluribus unum. “Out of many, one.” 20th Century political fascism itself was preceded by the Italian fascio—voluntary “bundles” or unions of men uniting to assert their collective interests. Mussolini was member of a fascio before he was a “fascist.” This idea of men choosing to band together and increase their strength was most eloquently explained by the ape “Caesar” in Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011).  Breaking a single stick, and then gathering a bundle, Caesar shows his imprisoned comrades that, “Ape alone…weak…apes together…strong.”

When the fasces is revered, it symbolizes “our power.” When the fasces is reviled, it is despised because it has become a symbol of “their power.”

Virile men do not unite to become sandbags. The fasces symbolizes men bound together with an axe, ready for action, issuing a threat of violence—of “or else.” The fasces is a warning, a promise of retaliation, a paddle on the wall for traitors, slackers and law-breakers.

In The Way of Men, I wrote that “The Way of Men is The Way of the Gang.” Primal masculinity is rooted in the practical, tactical ethos of a gang of men struggling to survive and triumph over external forces.

From this perspective, I see the fasces as a “universal gang sign.” It symbolizes, better than any other symbol I can think of, the moment when men tie their fates together and align themselves against nature, against other men, against…the world. The fasces depicts the genesis of “us,” of “our team,” of “our culture,” of “our honor” —the formation of a collective identity. It symbolizes then moment when the war of all against all becomes a war of men against men, of “us” against “them.” The fasces symbolizes the moment when men create order from chaos.

This pure, primal manliness can only be realized under stress. It can only rise out of chaos, as a reaction to external forces. From there it matures, shaped by time, into an honor culture, and from that culture—that combination of collective history and custom that characterize the identity of a people—comes Tradition. Everything I recognize as good and worth saving about men and masculinity thrives in this cultural sweet spot between the purity of the warrior-gang and the spoiled, conniving depravity of complex merchant-based cultures.

With no more frontiers to explore, save space—which can only be allowed, even in fantasy, as a neutered bureaucratic project—the modern, effeminate, bourgeois “First World” states can no longer produce new honor cultures. New, pure warrior-gangs can only rise in anarchic opposition to the corrupt, feminist, anti-tribal, degraded institutions of the established order. Manhood can only be rebooted by the destruction of their future, and the creation of new futures for new or reborn tribes of men. It is too late for conservatism. For the majority of men, only occupied structures and empty gestures remain.

The way of men can only be rediscovered in Night and Chaos.

Ur-fascism is the source of honor culture and authentic patriarchal tradition.

Ur-fascism is a response to anarchy.

The political position of The Way of Men is “anarcho-fascist.”

This anarcho-fascism is not an end; it is hungry for a new beginning.

START THE WORLD

 

The secrets of the hoarie deep, a dark
Illimitable Ocean without bound,
Without dimension, where length, breadth, & highth,
And time and place are lost; where eldest Night
And Chaos, Ancestors of Nature, hold
Eternal Anarchie, amidst the noise
Of endless Warrs, and by confusion stand.

—Milton, Paradise Lost

Buy Blood-Brotherhood in PaperbackThe following descriptions of blood-brotherhood rituals were excerpted from Blood-Brotherhood and Other Rites of Male Alliance, by Nathan F. Miller and Jack Donovan.

Many more rituals are included in the book, which is now available in paperback through Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble, and other online retailers.

Blood-Brotherhood and Other Rites of Male Alliance is based on a massive amount of research about blood-brotherhood stories and traditions from around the world. There’s nothing like it out there, and no better book about dead serious, “who would you call to get rid of a body” friendships between men.

The Ugandan Coffee Bean

The Ganda people of Uganda called blood-brotherhood mukago. During the ritual to make mukago, the men divided the two beans of a coffee berry. Each man made a cut in his stomach, rubbed the bean in it, and fed his blood-coated bean to the other man. Then each man put a knife and a spear beside himself, to symbolize mutual protection. This ritual was followed with a great feast.

The bloodied bean was thought to somehow remain in the body, and to have the ability to swell up and kill an oath-breaker. If either man were to attempt to cheat this magic by not swallowing the coffee-bean, it was thought that the bean would immediately kill him by swelling up in his mouth.

Roman Civil Brotherhood

A very different sort of bond between men not using blood was a practice of legal brother-making in imperial Rome. Second and third century Roman jurist Julius Paulus is cited in the Digesta of the Code of Justinian discussing this legal bond. He describes how one man could properly make another his heir simply by declaring, “Let this man be an heir to me,” with the indicated man present. Paulus further states that in this way a man who was not a brother, but loved with brotherly affection, became a properly instituted heir with the description of “brother.”

Scthyian Men Don’t Have a Trashy Number of Brothers

Second century CE rhetoritician Lucian of Samosata also refers to a blood-oath of friendship among the Scyths in his Toxaris, a work which takes the form of a dialogue about between a Scyth and a Greek about friendship. Toxaris, the Scyth, says that this form of friendship is made only with men who are found to be brave and capable of great deeds, and is pursued with the same patience and seriousness as courting for marriage. The men make a solemn vow to live together and to be ready to die for one another, if need be. The bond is sealed by cutting the fingers and dripping the blood into a cup; the men then dip their sword points into the cup and drink from it simultaneously. Toxaris says further that such compacts may include no more than three men, and that the Scyths compare men with excessive numbers of friends to promiscuous women.

Blood and Sod

A detailed account of the methods of a Norse blood-brotherhood ritual appears in the Gísla Saga Súrssonar (Saga of Gisli Sursson), one with four men making a bond simultaneously. The men went out upon a sandy spit of land that jutted out into the sea. They cut up a long strip of the grassy turf, being careful to leave the ends still connected to the ground, so that the strip could be lifted up into an arch. The strip was propped up with a spear that was ornamented with runes. The spear was quite tall; a man reaching up could just touch the rivets attaching the spearhead to the shaft. All four men were to pass under and through the lifted sod. Each man then opened a vein and let the blood drip together into the hollow of earth under the arch, and then they mixed together the blood and soil. Then they fell together to their knees, and calling to the gods as witnesses, swore to treat each other as brothers and to avenge one another.

The Covenant of Blood

A blood-brotherhood rite that survived into the 19th century among the Syrians was known as the “Covenant of Blood” (m’ahadat ed-dam) and the men who made use of it “Brothers of the Covenant” (akhwat el-m’ahadah). The two men would call together relatives and neighbors who were to bear witness to the sealing of their compact. Their oaths were written down in duplicate and signed by both men, and also by the witnesses. One man then opened a vein in the other’s arm, and inserted a quill in the vein, through which he sucked the blood out. The blood remaining on the blade used to make the cut was then wiped onto one of the covenant-papers The second man then repeated this with the first man’s arm. The two then declared, “We are brothers in a covenant made before God; who deceiveth the other, him will God deceive.” Each of the papers was then folded and sewn up into a small leather case about an inch square, known as “the House of the Amulet” (bayt hejab), which the men would wear hanging from the neck or upon the arm.

This bond was considered greater than marriage, as marriage could end in divorce, but the blood-bond could not be dissolved. It was also stronger than natural brotherhood. Siblings were called “milk-brothers” or “suckling brothers,” as connected by common milk; the created connection of blood was thought stronger still. The blood-brothers thought themselves possessors of a double life, as each man was ready to lay down his life for the other, or with him. In fact, the blood was taken from the upper arm in the ceremony because the arm represented a man’s strength. The blood covenant was often used by business partners acting in confidence, by conspirators and robbers, yet also was the chosen compact of loving friends.

Read more about blood-oaths and blood-brotherhoods in Blood-Brotherhood and Other Rites of Male Alliance, by Nathan F. Miller and Jack Donovan. now available in paperback through Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble, and other online retailers.

 

I’ll be doing a Reddit “Ask Me Anything” (AMA) this Sunday– February 24 — on the The Red Pill Room (r/TheRedPill/).

I’ll actually be logging in from somewhere in the state of Washington, where I’ll be recuperating from a routine liver stress test with Max Inappropriate and Bronan the Barbarian.

If you have a question about The Way of Men or my other recent work, please chime in and ask away. I’ll be online for about 2 hours. After that, I may log in to clean up loose ends and respond to late questions.

 

The city block-sized Portland landmark Powell’s City of Books now officially stocks The Way of Men and my first book, Androphilia, at their Burnside location.

The Way of Men is shelved in Gender Studies – General (I’d rather see it in “Psychology – Men”)

Also, I recently came across this post by Albert Suckow, which includes a good general summary of The Way of Men, as well as a basic “study guide” outlining some key concepts found in the book.

Donovan’s The Way of Men shows exactly what it is that must be preserved and how this is to be accomplished. While the understanding of masculinity can be advanced by reading the book, the principles must be put to work in order to do anything for you.

Read the rest here.