(Continued from Part 1. This concludes the article.)
The Philosophy of Manliness
Let us start with a reference to one of the few righteous feminists, Camille Paglia. In her book Sexual Personae [11], she distinguishes between the Apollonian male principle of order and civilization, and the Dionysian female principle of nature = chaos. As she says, “[c]ulture and civilization are created by men in an attempt to control that force.” We see this clearly in the feminist attack upon male “logic,” and the savage postmodernist assault upon scientific rationality. Yet, as she observes, “if civilization had been left in female hands, we would still be living in grass huts.” Reflecting upon the technological wonders that surround her, primarily created by men, she writes: “… One of feminism’s irritating reflexes is its fashionable disdain for “patriarchal society,” to which nothing good is ever attributed. But it is patriarchal society that has freed me as a woman. It is capitalism that has given me the leisure to sit at this desk writing this book.”
We may take rationality and technological mastery to be one of the defining qualities of manliness, as most of the technologies that have ever existed were created by men, and still are, despite affirmative action overload. Mastery is the capacity to develop skill and techniques to enable control over the physical and social environment, and it is a preoccupation of manly males to engage in mastery of themselves and their environment.
Jack Donovan in The Way of Men [12] depicts the way of men as being the way of the “gang,” but anthropologically better terms would be “tribe” or “group.” The group struggles to exist, and defends the perimeter, the frontier, however it is defined throughout human history. In any type of severe collapse situation, the group, be it a team, or just a family, is highly relevant to survival, as one person can seldom do everything on his own, and even Rambo has to sleep sometimes. And it is typically males who will take on the role of defenders, because the bottom line is that humans have sex, and women get pregnant, putting them out of any action.
For the ancient Romans, virtus meant “manliness,” “vir’ being Latin for “man,” giving an essential link between manliness and virtue. Manliness for the Romans involved a display of martial valor, courage, strength and tribal loyalty. [13] These are the tactical virtues of virtus, qualities needed to defend the homeland. [14] Donovan outlines his basic tactical virtues of manliness to be physical strength, courage, mastery and honor. Physical strength and toughness are indeed a necessary quality of manliness, as also detailed by Clark Savage in King of all Things: A Guide to Man’s Martial Purpose [15], as it is a quality needed for the capacity to fight. But it also encompasses thumos, or spiritedness, the assertiveness of manhood. [16] That too is needed for defense.
Courage is “confidence in the face of risk” [17], and Aristotle in The Nichomachean Ethics, equated courage, andreia, with manliness. Courage typically involves risk taking in the face of real threats, often putting one’s life on the line.
Mastery has already been discussed, and an extended discussion is provided by Anthony Esolen in No Apologies: Why Civilization Depends upon the Strength of Men. [18]
Honor defines the man as the defender of the turf, the protector of self, family and property. [19] Honor is based upon reference to an honor group, a group of peers with similar values and is a “concern for one’s reputation for strength, courage and mastery within the context of an honor group comprised primarily of men.” [20] It is in short, the status and worth of the individual within the group, and it may be a factor in individual men exhibiting courage, to display honor, or to act with honor and receive favor in the eyes of peers.
These are the basic tactical virtues, and excellence in them will be necessary for survival in the Mad Max world to come. There are other virtues beyond these defining I believe the “higher man,” and the ancient Romans did move beyond the tactical virtues in their evolving account of manliness. Donovan spends some time discussing the distinction between being a good man, and being good at being as man. A good man is a moral concept, the man behaves morally, but one can be good at being a man in the sense of ranking high on the tactical virtues without being morally good, in fact the evil may rank high. Yet I think at least from a Christian perspective that manliness has in addition to the tactical virtues, other qualities. J.H., writing in 2017 at SurvivalBlog.com. lists some such qualities, such as faith, trying to live a life in accordance with the Scriptures; generosity, charity, compassion and altruism, integrity, a protector of family and the vulnerable as far as possible, and one who acts in moderation and is respectful and gentlemanly. [21] I agree with all of that and think most readers would as well.
The other quality I would add here to the list of manliness qualities is wisdom. There has been much philosophical speculation abut the nature of wisdom, from ancient Greek philosophers such as Socrates (died 399 BC), to the traditions of the Bible, with a classic wiseman being Solomon, at least before his fall: 1 Kings 11. Much can be said about “Godly wisdom”, but for my purposes, wisdom can be seen as using knowledge and experience (including pray), to make morally just choices in dealing with problems of life, and to therefore “live well.”
I will apply this idea in the next section in showing how the Christian man would confront moral challenges in the post-apocalyptic wastelands. All that being said, it will be objected that all of the above qualities of manliness will mean that looking at the biological males of today, very few would measure up to almost any of the listed qualities. Even with strength, the strong men of today cheat by taking steroids, and often pay the ultimate price of heart attacks and death by other means, for looking “cut” and muscular. True; there will be few males who take up the challenge of being good at being men by cultivating the masculine virtues. But that is just how it is, and we can expect most of these people to perish in the coming collapse anyway. Even in terms of survival preps, most of the liberal woke Left will not make it. I don’t rejoice in this, but stoically accept that this is simply the remorseless working of things.
As the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) said: “Let me here remind you that the essence of dramatic tragedy is not unhappiness. It resides in the solemnity of the remorseless working of things. This inevitableness of destiny can only be illustrated in terms of human life by incidents which in fact involve unhappiness. For it is by them that the futility of escape can be made evident in the drama. This remorseless inevitableness is what pervades scientific thought. The laws of physics are the decrees of fate.” Likewise for the laws of biology.
Manly Morality in the Post Apocalyptic Wastelands
“It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman.” – Proverb 21:19
The Great Collapse will be bad, but not all bad. Sure, one will need to live a life on the edge, in condition yellow on the Jeff Cooper Color Code of Awareness. But the return to a state of nature will spell an end to the present woke nonsense we are immersed, if not drowning in. It all comes crashing down with the Great Die Off; there will be no hospitals, no surgery, and no sex alignment surgery. No evil synthetic gender bending hormones will be available; no transgenders, unless it is all done on their own time; no contraceptives to allow women to pursue their brilliant careers, while the net reproduction ratios of society crashes; society has crashed anyway. The universities, which have been for almost a century a breeding ground for woke Leftism and every possible form of decadence, darkness, and decay, but never dealt with by conservatives, will be one of the first institutions to fall, and fall it should. The entire cesspool of postmodernity will be swept away in the flood of The Collapse. Our time is arguably as evil, if not more, than the time of Noah [22], where as depicted in Genesis 6:5, the “wickedness of man was great on the earth.” Just with abortion alone, with the tens of millions of babies that have been murdered globally, right up until the point of birth in some jurisdictions, we should not be surprised that in the end, this world is either destroyed, or falls apart from its own internal rottenness. It is cosmically, and metaphysically fitting.
Without the rule of law, with no government, post-apocalyptic Christian man will confront many possible moral dilemmas. Such men must resist the Satanic temptation to become warlords and barbarians, because they are judged for eternity on behavior in this world, and it is intrinsically wrong anyway. There must therefore be the rule of morality even in the collapse.
A typical moral dilemma discussed in philosophy is the trolley problem. Posed by Philippa Foot, we are supposed to be the driver of a runway trolley. It rounds a bend and five workmen are on the tracks. You go for the brakes, but they fail. However, there is a spur of track that you can divert the trolley onto. Only one workman is here. He will be killed. Should you divert the trolley to save five workmen, but kill one? [23] The problem as stated is artificial and implausible, since there is no reason why the workers could not get off the tracks, or take some sort of evasive action. Nevertheless, there will be similar, more realistic moral dilemmas facing survivalists in a collapse scenario.
One issue discussed in this blog is that of the uninvited friend, relative, or neighbor, who has not prepared, but knows you have preps. He/she, may have a young child or baby, crying with hunger. [24] Should you help him/her with food? The intuitive Christian answer, based upon charity is, “yes.” But what if there are two such people, then three, then thirty, then a few hundred? At some point supplies will be exhausted, and a “tragedy of the commons” type situation arises. [25] We can agree that some limit to charity must exist before oneself and family perish (1 Timothy 5:8), for why bother prepping in the first place, simply prayerfully accept death?
As I see it, there is no set philosophical answer to this, because it is highly contingent upon circumcises. The rich should make very generous donations to community, especially to children who will carry on the human race. Poorer people with much less preps will have less to give, perhaps nothing at all. But, overall, this problem is primarily one arising from not retreating to a survival location far away from the maddening crowds, soon enough. The wise man, and family, should have bugged out long before this dilemma arises, and should have an isolated and protected location, where the unprepared cannot reach his team. As described in Genesis 19, Lot escaped the destruction of the evil city of Sodom, but his wife who disobeyed God, and looked back, was turned into a pillar of salt. It was not Lot’s job to save Sodom, as he failed to find an adequate number of righteous people, and not for lack of trying.
Other moral dilemmas would arise from combat, and firefights protecting the prepared homestead. [26] One issue is the ethics of sniping, shooting from concealment. I see no moral problem if there is a definite indication that people approaching are being prepared for attack, clearly indicating their intent, as then the fight is already underway. This will be a judgment call, but there are clear-cut cases, such as a group, armed with guns at the ready, moving stealthfully towards one’s home. In other cases, a group of people, seemingly unarmed, may be given the benefit of the doubt, but dealt with by extreme caution. Again, there is not going to be hard and fast rules as a moral philosopher would like, and decisions will be made literally on the hop. One should pray that the right decision is made, but it may not be, and one will need to live with that and face Divine Judgment. But for the common good of the group/family, better safe than sorry, or dead.
There will also be tougher cases, where after a firefight with attackers, there are some who throw down their weapons and surrender or are wounded and stop fighting. Intuitively shooting them would be immoral. But what happens now? Suppose as depicted by Pierro San Giorgio [27], that these attackers had been part of a raiding Satanic cannibalism gang. In his story, the survivalists have a trial, find them guilty and sentence them to death. One member executes them. It is far from clear what else could be done under the circumcises, as imprisonment for life would be a drain on resources, and banishment will only lead to a second attack as they know the location. In cases like this, highly unpleasant actions will need to be taken, and there should be one brave man who does it, and is prepared to face Divine Judgment for such actions, his sacrifice sparing others. That is the ultimate test of manhood, going beyond even risking one’s physical life. The Western film Purgatory (1999), is not a bad portrayal of this level of manly courage: a man’s got to do, what a man’s got to do.
It is the real way of men.
References
[1] See Dr. Joseph, “Dark Age 2.0: Melee Weapons – Part 1,” April 4, 2024, https://survivalblog.com/2024/04/04/dark-age-2-0-melee-weapons-part-1-by-dr-joseph/; Dr Joseph, “Martial Arts in The Collapse: A Question of Limits – Part 1,” April 12, 2024, https://survivalblog.com/2024/04/12/martial-arts-collapse-question-limits-part-1-dr-joseph/.
[2] S. Smith & J. Smith, “Dark Age 2.0: The Coming Collapse of Civilization,” July 13, 2023, https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2023-07-12/dark-age-20-coming-collapse-civilization.
[3] C. Dilworth, Too Smart for Our Own Good: The Ecological Predicament of Humankind, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009).
[4] N. Church, “Thinking the Unthinkable,” July 21, 2006, https://survivalblog.com/2006/07/21/thinking-the-unthinkable-by-no/; J. Hollerman, Grid Down: Death of a Nation: The Psychology and Physiology of: Human Desperation, Starvation, and Living Without Rule-of-Law Through a Prolonged Grid Down Scenario, (US Taskforce on National and Homeland Security August 2023), https://www.griddownconsulting.com/grid-down-report.
[5] James Wesley, Rawles, “Letter Re: Why Christianity? and Recommendations on the Great Lakes,” June 2, 2006, https://survivalblog.com/2006/06/21/letter-re-why-christianity-and/.
[6] J. Folks, “Manhood Under Attack,” May 4, 2024, https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/05/manhood_under_attack.html
[7] For YouTube commentary on the state of social decay of man-women relationships see, PearlDaily, with Pearl Davis, “50% of Women will be Single and Childless. Marriage is Never Returning – What Does the Future Look Like?” and Whatifalthist, “A Message to Young Men,” and “The Coming Population Crash.” On the issue of “What is a Woman?’ see Matt Walsh’s online film, at https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman.
[8] C. Murray, “Man or Bear? Many Women Say They’d Rather be Stuck in the Woods with a Bear in the Latest TikTok Debate,” May 3, 2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2024/05/03/man-or-bear-many-women-say-theyd-rather-be-stuck-in-the-woods-with-a-bear.
[9] L. Sugimura, “Opinion: Why Women Would Prefer to be Alone in the Woods with a Bear than a Man,” May 4, 2024, https://phys.org/news/2024-05-opinion-women-woods.html.
[10] T. Durden, “Man vs Bear Debate: The Dumbest Feminist Argument Yet?’ May, 6, 2024, https://www.zerohedge.com/political/man-vs-bear-debate-dumbest-feminis-argument-yet.
[11] C. Paglia, Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickson, (Yale University Press, New Haven, 1990).
[12] J. Donovan, The Way of Men, (Dissonant Hum, Milwaukie, 2012).
[13] Donovan, as above, p. 17; M. McDonnell, Roman Manliness: Virtues and the Roman Republic, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006).
[14] McDonnell, as above, p. 5.
[15] C. Savage, King of All Things: A Guide to Man’s Martial Purpose, (Pirates’ Cove Publishing, 2022).
[16] H. C. Mansfield, Manliness, (Yale University Press, New Haven, 2006), p. xi.
[17] Mansfield, as above, p. 23.
[18] A. Esolen, No Apologies: Why Civilization Depends upon the Strength of Men, (Regnery Gateway, Washington DC. 2022).
[19] Mansfield, as above, p. 65; J. Bowman, Honor: A History, (Encounter Books, 2006).
[20] Donovan, as above, p. 57.
[21] J. H. “The Measure of a Man,” December 31, 2017, https://survivalblog.com/2017/12/3/measure-man-j-h/; J. A. G., “Practical Christianity for TEOTWAWKI,” January 9, 2011, https://survivalblog.com/2011/01/09/practical-christianityt-for-teo/.
[22] C. H., “Prepper Lessons from Noah’s Ark,” November 24, 2019, https://survivalblog.com/2019/11/24/prepper-lessons-noahs-ark-c-h/.
[23] J. J. Thomson, “The Trolley Problem,” Yale Law Journal, vol. 94, 1985, pp. 1395-1415; P. A. Graham, “Thomson’s Trolley Problem,” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, vol.12 (2), 2017, pp. 168-189.
[24] J. W. Rawles, “Surviving an Age of Greed and Envy – Criminal Looters and Looters Under Color of Law,” July 11, 2008, https://survivalblog.com/2008/07/11/surviving-an-age-of-greed-and/; Rolf in the Northwest, “Two Letters: How to Reply to “When the SHTF, I’m Going Over to Your House,” January 23, 2007, https://survivalblog.com/2007/01/23/two-letters-re-how-to-repl-to/; J.L., “One Week’s Worth – Examining the Ethics of Preparedness,” May 8, 2011, https://survivalblog.com/2011/05/08/one-weeks-worth-examiniong-t/; Just a Jarhead, “Letter Re: One Week’s Worth – Examining the Ethics of Preparedness,” May 9, 2011, https://survivalblog.com/2011/05/09/letter-re-one weeks worth-e/.
[25] G. Hardin, “The Tragedy of the Commons,” Science, vol.162, 1968, pp. 1243-1248.
[26] P. A., “The Ethics and Methodology of Sniping after TEOTWAWKI,” February 7, 2001, https://survivalblog.com/2011/02/07/the-ethics-and-methodology-of/.
[27] P. San Giorgio, Survive the Economic Collapse: A Practical Guide, (Radix/Washington Summit Publishers, Whitefish, 2013), p. 388.