Monthly Archives: November 2017

License to Ill

Modernity has turned out to be not so much an innovation as a conclusion, a feverish squandering of the European cultural legacy. The incessant “transgressing” of boundaries, the eradication of hierarchy and distinction that promised “emancipation” have ultimately yielded cultural and social vacuity.

At its most basic, civilization is the imposition of form upon chaos. It is the elaboration of contrasts, distinctions, hierarchies. It is what happens in Genesis when God creates the world and puts everything in its proper place, the invention of culture allegorized as the articulation of nature.

This arising is always a signifying erection, a triumph of the phallic power, of the father over the mother, Marduk over Tiamat. Conversely, the now-reflexive denigration of the phallus and the elevation of inclusion over distinction are signs of a regression into chaos. What is promoted as diversity turns out to be the abolition of diversity, an excrementalizing homogenization that dissolves even the fundamental distinction between the sexes. Like every other demolition of supposed conventional infringements on “human rights,” this postmodern queering of distinctions has delivered us into the clutches of an even straiter dogma. As Jacques Lacan once quipped, “if God doesn’t exist, then nothing at all is permitted . . .”

The abolition of patriarchal authority does not lead to greater freedom but paradoxically to less because it removes the regulating agency that protects us from unmediated oligarchical tyranny. The destruction of tradition turns out to be the removal of any cultural impediment to the dictatorship of an elite whose moral superiority is predicated on contempt for common mores, values, and sense. Thus, on the principle that no form of discrimination is tolerable, we end up in a topsy-turvy world intolerant of its own most deeply ingrained traditions. Today no culture is more hostile to Western values than Western culture: White guilt is now the supreme expression of white culture, eagerly promoted by corporations and individuals who are themselves paragons of “white privilege.” In a similar vein, in the manner of South Park’s PC Principal, white male virility now displays itself as an exaggerated recoil from maleness and whiteness.

It’s a queer world alright, on its way to turning turtle.

The Brutal Phallus

The Unexamined Brutality of the Male Libido” would be worthy of examination if the exercise wasn’t yet another occasion for a “sensitive” male to put on a display of self-flagellation calculated to titillate The New York Times’ bluestocking readership. As with all outbreaks of sexual hysteria, the current crusade against sexual harassment is itself obscenely orgiastic. Nothing is allowed to get in the way of the sadistic enjoyment of the destruction of careers and reputations, not even the customary presumption of innocence.

What is truly unseemly about this feeding frenzy, however, is not so much the fury of the roused harpies as it is the lameness of the male response. As James Howard Kunstler noted a while back, the seeming triumph of feminism in this country testifies to a failure of American manhood.

Men capable of affirming their virility would not recoil from the “brutality” of their libido. They would stand up to own it.

The will to dominate defines manhood. It is the reason why “gender equality” is unachievable. Equality between the sexes would require nothing less than the wholesale extinction of the male sex drive, which is always directed toward conquest. But the extinction of the male sex drive, were it even feasible, would also mean the extinction of all its sublimated forms. It would mean the end of civilization itself and a reversion to a stagnant amoebal existence bereft of even the capability of signification, since that too is predicated on the phallus. In Babylonian myth the emergence of cultural order from chaos is synonymous with the subjugation of woman. The ascent of woman must then be construed as a reversal, a presaging of civilizational collapse.

Men who cannot affirm who they are and what they desire are tired, useless stock living off the diminishing legacy of their forefathers. If American males have lost their mojo, they will soon enough succumb to hardier specimens. The concurrent hysteria about Russian meddling gives an indication of from which direction the “barbarians” are expected.