Twatter Drama Megathread

[august]

The MALE SEX STRIKE strategy... did Aristophanes ever touch this one? It's a well-known fact that women are totally less hysterical and more level-headed when they haven't been sexed in a while. Yes. Noble-minded. I think Louis XIV used this to keep les putes in line. Here's the plan: we do Feminism... But For Men. 

There will be no place for the Himmlers or the Heydrichs of the world, the disgusting immoralists that they are, in Mason's forthcoming Fourth Reich.

[Zed]

The MALE SEX STRIKE strategy... did Aristophanes ever touch this one? It's a well-known fact that women are totally less hysterical and more level-headed when they haven't been sexed in a while. Yes. Noble-minded. I think Louis XIV used this to keep les putes in line. Here's the plan: we do Feminism... But For Men. 

A topic that it deserves its own thread and retrospective.

[Sunspot]

Krypteia are best understood as coming not from an aristocracy in the peak of its bloom but rather the ruthlessly pragmatic actions of a ruling caste insecure in its position.

I doubt that very strongly. Even if the practice had waned and waxed over the years or the Athenians got a few details wrong, the Krypteia are clearly a continuation of the tradition of the Aryan kóryos, which is royal and thus high status in every descendant culture. The specifics aren't important anyway, since I only set out to disprove Mason's idiotic assertions on historical societies.

That's nonsense.

It's questionable whether the Krypteia in serving as a means of culling even existed. There are only two sources describing the Krypteia: Plato (Laws) and Plutarch (Lykurgus, 28). Plutarch is not reporting directly but is working from Aristotle, who is unreliable in matters concerning Sparta.

For context, the most significant helot revolt was in 465 B.C., prompted by a deadly earthquake, which was instigated by and composed of Messenians. Plato wrote Laws between 356 and 348 B.C.

Plato's description of the Krypteia entails young men venturing away from home and hearth with nothing to their name, a rite of passage similar to others which independently arise across varied human groups. There is no mention of apprehending helots, much less systematically reducing their number. 

Now I want to know whether the same principles are observed in the laws of Lycurgus and Minos, or, as I should rather say, of Apollo and Zeus. We must go through the virtues, beginning with courage, and then we will show that what has preceded has relation to virtue.
...
'I wish,' says the Lacedaemonian, 'that you, Stranger, would first criticize Cleinias and the Cretan laws.' Yes, is the reply, and I will criticize you and myself, as well as him. Tell me, Megillus, were not the common meals and gymnastic training instituted by your legislator with a view to war? 'Yes; and next in the order of importance comes hunting, and fourth the endurance of pain in boxing contests, and in the beatings which are the punishment of theft. There is, too, the so-called Crypteia or secret service, in which our youth wander about the country night and day unattended, and even in winter go unshod and have no beds to lie on. Moreover they wrestle and exercise under a blazing sun, and they have many similar customs.' Well, but is courage only a combat against fear and pain, and not against pleasure and flattery? 'Against both, I should say.' And which is worse,—to be overcome by pain, or by pleasure? 'The latter.' But did the lawgivers of Crete and Sparta legislate for a courage which is lame of one leg,—able to meet the attacks of pain but not those of pleasure, or for one which can meet both? 'For a courage which can meet both, I should say.' But if so, where are the institutions which train your citizens to be equally brave against pleasure and pain, and superior to enemies within as well as without? 'We confess that we have no institutions worth mentioning which are of this character.' I am not surprised, and will therefore only request forbearance on the part of us all, in case the love of truth should lead any of us to censure the laws of the others. Remember that I am more in the way of hearing criticisms of your laws than you can be; for in well-ordered states like Crete and Sparta, although an old man may sometimes speak of them in private to a ruler or elder, a similar liberty is not allowed to the young. But now being alone we shall not offend your legislator by a friendly examination of his laws. 'Take any freedom which you like.'
...
...
...
MEGILLUS: I think that I can get as far as the fourth head, which is the frequent endurance of pain, exhibited among us Spartans in certain hand-to-hand fights; also in stealing with the prospect of getting a good beating; there is, too, the so-called Crypteia, or secret service, in which wonderful endurance is shown,—our people wander over the whole country by day and by night, and even in winter have not a shoe to their foot, and are without beds to lie upon, and have to attend upon themselves. Marvellous, too, is the endurance which our citizens show in their naked exercises, contending against the violent summer heat; and there are many similar practices, to speak of which in detail would be endless.

Aristotle is most active between 335 and 323 B.C., and Plutarch around 100 A.D. According to Plutarch, Aristotle attributes the Krypteia to Lycurgus, who set the Lycurgan reforms which define Spartan society, but Plutarch finds this attribution inconsistent and inconceivable, meaning that in Plutarch's time, there were no reports besides Aristotle and none preceding the Messenian revolt of 465 B.C. (the only credibly attested helot revolt of Sparta's seven century existence).

Now in all this there is no trace of injustice or arrogance, which some attribute to the laws of Lycurgus, declaring them efficacious in producing valour, but defective in producing righteousness. The so‑called "krupteia," or secret service, of the Spartans, if this be really one of the institutions of Lycurgus, as Aristotle says it was, may have given Plato also this opinion of the man and his civil polity. This secret service was of the following nature. The magistrates from time to time sent out into the country at large the most discreet of the young warriors, equipped only with daggers and such supplies as were necessary. In the day time they scattered into obscure and out of the way places, where they hid themselves and lay quiet; but in the night they came down into the highways and killed every Helot whom they caught. Oftentimes, too, they actually traversed the fields where Helots were working and slew the sturdiest and best of them.
...

However, in my opinion, such cruelties were first practised by the Spartans in later times, particularly after the great earthquake, when the Helots and Messenians together rose up against them, wrought the widest devastation in their territory, and brought their city into the greatest peril. I certainly cannot ascribe to Lycurgus so abominable a measure as the "krupteia," judging of his character from his mildness and justice in all other instances. To this the voice of the god also bore witness.

Why would the Spartans annually, for hundreds of years, cull the most promising crop of helots, when they often recruited helots to serve as the bulk of their forces in times of war (Plataea, both wars against the Persians, the Peloponnesian War, the war against Argos)? Afterwards, helots who served with distinction were freed. Spartan hoplites were each accompanied by a body servant. Would the Spartans nurture such a profound antagonism with helots alongside whom they were to fight? 

Thucydides reports in the History of the Peloponnesian War (431-401 B.C.) 20,000 slaves fled Athens to seek better conditions under the Spartans. If the Spartans declared war on their helots every Autumn for centuries, the behavior of the Athenian slaves would be very strange indeed. One would certainly expect more than a single report — a tertiary source who doubts the verity of the claim.


Laws by Plato
Life of Lycurgus by Plutarch

[stair_fail]

All of your posts have the hidden premise that “the gubmint needs to make everyone behave the exact same way” (the same hidden premise as Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show)

The gubmint does need to make everyone behave the exact same way. Make them behave as morally upright fascists.-

[Guest]

All of your posts have the hidden premise that “the gubmint needs to make everyone behave the exact same way” (the same hidden premise as Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show)

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4703949/user-clip-kill

[Mason Hall-McCullough]

My moral prescription: we should kill them for being whores, we should delete dating apps from the Apple Store, and we should not fuck them unless we're going to marry them.

Thank you Mason, very based and I'm glad someone finally said it.

Oh, er, I guess I take it a little further than you.

https://files.catbox.moe/kraqof.mp4

The problem with your position (which is nobleminded, and I used to agree with it entirely) is that "we" don't have any leverage to shame women with whatsoever—especially if men of our ilk remain volcel, which women could not respect any less. Their brains literally can't perceive any difference between a principled game-theoretical sacrifice, and being a creepy loser incel who gets no pussy (note how they complain about "getting pussy" as a disgusting pig man trait, and yet it's the first thing they turn to when it comes time to insult you). Women have no integrity so it's impossible to shame them except from a position of total domination, i.e. if you don't have the authority to actually stone them to death in real life without fear of retribution from government cuckboots, then neither do you have the social leverage to shame them into or out of any kind of behavior.

Good point, but trying to "convince" women on their terms seems like a lose-lose proposition. I would suggest that "rejecting their frame" is the way to go, by refusing to buy into this hierarchy where a man or woman's value ultimately derives from women's bodies. I do think many women feel threatened by the idea of losing the power they have over men, so I wouldn't say it's impossible. Articles about AI generated pornography or "sex robots" (which aren't even real) seem to bring out the seethe easily.

---

The MALE SEX STRIKE strategy... did Aristophanes ever touch this one? It's a well-known fact that women are totally less hysterical and more level-headed when they haven't been sexed in a while. Yes. Noble-minded. I think Louis XIV used this to keep les putes in line. Here's the plan: we do Feminism... But For Men. 

There will be no place for the Himmlers or the Heydrichs of the world, the disgusting immoralists that they are, in Mason's forthcoming Fourth Reich.

Strikes are generally about holding some good thing hostage in exchange for a political objective, but casual sex is bad and reducing it is the political objective. This is hardly a new idea, no sex before marriage is what Christians are supposed to be doing too, except most of them don't.

If not having sex is so difficult for women, they should consider finding a husband. Showering regularly and working on their personalities could be useful here. I don't have contempt for great men of history who cheated on their wives, although it seems like a poor decision on their part. If the man is a wildly successful exception it seems fine that he tends to get away with it, if he's not and gets caught, then divorce seems like an appropriate punishment and deterrent.

I think MGTOWs might be more opposed to marriage than they are to casual relationships, which is funny.

[august]

It's not easy to have discussions with you. Remember the only question that I asked you... 

Basically, since you've already said that this is the only sensible answer to the Female Question, tell me how you plan to Make Women Property Again

All I wanted was for you to tell me how you intend to give husband legal ownership, superiority, whatever you want to call it, over his wife. Thousands of words later and all I've got from you is harping on how men are actually responsible for women being sluts (reminder: they always have been, always will be) and one or two lines about getting rid of no-fault divorce. How though? Oh, the grand solution of men becoming Prohibitionist Era feminists that go on a sex strike until women come to their senses and willingly return to subjugated domesticity (good luck... this is Very Serious Thinking). 

This is hardly a new idea, no sex before marriage is what Christians are supposed to be doing too, except most of them don't.

Yeah. Conditioned on the fact that something called conjugal debt existed. Now, as I've said and you had no proper response to, we have marital rape. What else existed? A dowry that the bride's father had to pay me for the burden of taking his daughter's hand (when he transferred ownership... to me). What didn't exist? Women going to school or being ""professionals"", or a multi-year long betrothal period (basically all the things that make it so 'middle class' Whites have to marry in their late twenties or early thirties as opposed to their late teens), or a state legal apparatus designed to subjugate the housebound, oops I mean husband, to his wife. I don't think that I'm going to hold my breath waiting for the "Christians" to meaningfully weigh in on these issues... they're usually the ones telling us to Suck It Up and Be A Man. 

Unless you're going to actually lay out your viable plan for Amish Occupied Government, instead of again repeating that it's as simple as the totally practical strategy of every single White man becoming a volcel (women, geniuses that they are, definitely won't start racemixxing in response to that, btw), it's probably for the best that we put this one to rest.

[Mason Hall-McCullough]

It's not easy to have discussions with you. Remember the only question that I asked you... 

Basically, since you've already said that this is the only sensible answer to the Female Question, tell me how you plan to Make Women Property Again

All I wanted was for you to tell me how you intend to give husband legal ownership, superiority, whatever you want to call it, over his wife. Thousands of words later and all I've got from you is harping on how men are actually responsible for women being sluts (reminder: they always have been, always will be) and one or two lines about getting rid of no-fault divorce. How though? Oh, the grand solution of men becoming Prohibitionist Era feminists that go on a sex strike until women come to their senses and willingly return to subjugated domesticity (good luck... this is Very Serious Thinking). 

I've answered your question directly and you admit as much later in this paragraph, so I don't know why you're suggesting I'm dodging it. We should Make Women Property Again one step at a time, starting by creating a counterculture that opposes casual sex. It's not a simple fix, but this seems to me like the right direction to walk in, as opposed to promoting sexual immorality which empowers women further. I don't think it's fair to characterize this as a sex strike, when it's just returning to a particular norm that we used to have.

If you have some other plan for how we will tame women (that is definitely more serious and probable than what I have proposed), I'd like to hear how it benefits from enabling whore behavior. Even if you want to usher in the Fourth Reich, I see only downside to fucking random women as part of this plan, or really in any plan that aims to achieve anything beyond being as degenerate and hedonistic as possible. We could do what BAP wants and (supposedly) strive towards a White supremacist ancap nation by "annihilating everything that exists" (?), except encourage marrying women instead of pumping and dumping them, and this alteration would be a strict upgrade.

[august]

All of your posts have the hidden premise that “the gubmint needs to make everyone behave the exact same way” (the same hidden premise as Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show)

The gubmint does need to make everyone behave the exact same way. Make them behave as morally upright fascists.-

I can't take you seriously when you use words like "fascists" so long as you keep living in this alternate reality where "fascism" was centered around 'I Love My Wife!' and 'I Love Christian Morality!' Wholesome Chungusism. Who was Mussolini with when he was killed? It wasn't his (second) wife (who'd been his mistress during his first marriage). Wait a minute... I'm starting to think that this guy was a heckin adulterer.

You seem to think that it's just some policies based on moral ideology that a government can adopt, when in actuality it's really aisthētikós applied to the state. A true Gesamtkunstwerk. If you really believed that people should start behaving like "fascists" then you'd be BAP's top guy. Because he's one of the only people who actually understands what it really was about fascism that made it capable of seducing an entire continent seemingly overnight and convincing millions aged 16 to 60 to die for it. Sometimes I wonder why BAP's influence is so much more apparent than all of the formal and organised ""movements"" (which are Totally Real and Organic) that have come and gone throughout the post-war era...

[oyakodon_khan]

Shit that doesn't matter: the website.
Why can't everyone just talk about how they love Hitler and Anime. Like on the Amarna Forum?

[stair_fail]

 Sometimes I wonder why BAP's influence is so much more apparent than all of the formal and organized ""movements"" (which are Totally Real and Organic) that have come and gone throughout the post-war era...

Because his movement is one you can participate in while sitting on the couch at home. I can say from first hand experience these other movements you deride don't last because of people like you, who are merely content to have your name on the "list" and sit on the sidelines and lob "FED!!!!" at anyone who actually organizes. Having to scrape together money for transportation, food, supplies, etc for rallies while some retard with a "BASED AESTHETE" substack and a podcast makes more in a week than an actual organization that stages marches, rallies, and training camps for young white men gets in a year really puts things into perspective.

Maybe if you got off the couch and actually came face to face with Antifa while holding a flag or a shield, you'd see how hollow the words of these talking heads actually sound; and how it makes you feel like a fool to have put yourself at risk of arrest or bodily harm only to have your so-called "allies" say you're a fed because you're not some obese boomer or someone whose definition of "activism" is gym selfies.

[Guest]

“Amarnites explain BAP to a Fuentard pt. 756”

[Guest]

Because his movement is one you can participate in while sitting on the couch at home. I can say from first hand experience these other movements you deride don't last because of people like you, who are merely content to have your name on the "list" and sit on the sidelines and lob "FED!!!!" at anyone who actually organizes. Having to scrape together money for transportation, food, supplies, etc for rallies while some retard with a "BASED AESTHETE" substack and a podcast makes more in a week than an actual organization that stages marches, rallies, and training camps for young white men gets in a year really puts things into perspective.

Maybe if you got off the couch and actually came face to face with Antifa while holding a flag or a shield, you'd see how hollow the words of these talking heads actually sound; and how it makes you feel like a fool to have put yourself at risk of arrest or bodily harm only to have your so-called "allies" say you're a fed because you're not some obese boomer or someone whose definition of "activism" is gym selfies.

t. tattoo covered Blood Tribe member. For the love of God please stop posting your retarded ideas and go back to waving flags around by a Costco.

[obscurefish]

It's not easy to have discussions with you. Remember the only question that I asked you... 

Basically, since you've already said that this is the only sensible answer to the Female Question, tell me how you plan to Make Women Property Again

All I wanted was for you to tell me how you intend to give husband legal ownership, superiority, whatever you want to call it, over his wife. Thousands of words later and all I've got from you is harping on how men are actually responsible for women being sluts (reminder: they always have been, always will be) and one or two lines about getting rid of no-fault divorce. How though? Oh, the grand solution of men becoming Prohibitionist Era feminists that go on a sex strike until women come to their senses and willingly return to subjugated domesticity (good luck... this is Very Serious Thinking). 

I've answered your question directly and you admit as much later in this paragraph, so I don't know why you're suggesting I'm dodging it. We should Make Women Property Again one step at a time, starting by creating a counterculture that opposes casual sex. It's not a simple fix, but this seems to me like the right direction to walk in, as opposed to promoting sexual immorality which empowers women further. I don't think it's fair to characterize this as a sex strike, when it's just returning to a particular norm that we used to have.

If you have some other plan for how we will tame women (that is definitely more serious and probable than what I have proposed), I'd like to hear how it benefits from enabling whore behavior. Even if you want to usher in the Fourth Reich, I see only downside to fucking random women as part of this plan, or really in any plan that aims to achieve anything beyond being as degenerate and hedonistic as possible. We could do what BAP wants and (supposedly) strive towards a White supremacist ancap nation by "annihilating everything that exists" (?), except encourage marrying women instead of pumping and dumping them, and this alteration would be a strict upgrade.

Both preaching sexual morality and sexual immorality are counterproductive because they elevate sex to an importance it does not deserve. If your political/cultural movement spends too much time either promoting or inveighing against casual sex to an audience of young men it's tacitly communicating that it lacks real ambition.

[Mason Hall-McCullough]

Both preaching sexual morality and sexual immorality are counterproductive because they elevate sex to an importance it does not deserve. If your political/cultural movement spends too much time either promoting or inveighing against casual sex to an audience of young men it's tacitly communicating that it lacks real ambition.

I disagree, sex has always been a primary motivator of man's actions since... the beginning of man. There's a reason almost every culture independently arrived at patriarchal marriage norms in isolation. That these norms have eroded in the West as of late should be very concerning. Allocating sex (or allowing it to allocate itself) to produce prosocial and eugenic outcomes is of critical importance. Though, it is worth noting that casual sex usually does not produce offspring so it doesn't matter in that direct sense, but a culture of sexual promiscuity damages the organization of actual reproductive sex which does matter a lot.

Before anyone mentions Ancient Greece and Rome I would like to state that I am not well versed on this topic but I believe the gay degenerate stuff to be mostly fake history exaggerated by libtard historians.

[obscurefish]

Both preaching sexual morality and sexual immorality are counterproductive because they elevate sex to an importance it does not deserve. If your political/cultural movement spends too much time either promoting or inveighing against casual sex to an audience of young men it's tacitly communicating that it lacks real ambition.

I disagree, sex has always been a primary motivator of man's actions since... the beginning of man. There's a reason almost every culture independently arrived at patriarchal marriage norms in isolation. That these norms have eroded in the West as of late should be very concerning. Allocating sex (or allowing it to allocate itself) to produce prosocial and eugenic outcomes is of critical importance. Though, it is worth noting that casual sex usually does not produce offspring so it doesn't matter in that direct sense, but a culture of sexual promiscuity damages the organization of actual reproductive sex which does matter a lot.

Before anyone mentions Ancient Greece and Rome I would like to state that I am not well versed on this topic but I believe the gay degenerate stuff to be mostly fake history exaggerated by libtard historians.

All of this concerns society and not the individual. You can't inspire purely by preaching about avoiding something (casual sex) because avoiding something isn't an end in itself. People who aren't addicted to heroin don't have "not using heroin" as a goal.

Neither does this address the issue of how to disentangle the pursuit of casual sex from reproductive sex. If you're a guy, then that choice is not in your hands because women make the final decision to use abortion and contraception or not.

[Mason Hall-McCullough]

I think I see your point, maybe in messaging it is important to stress that reinstitution of true marriage is the ultimate goal, with a reduction in promiscuity as an instrumental goal that helps to achieve this. But I still think these instrumental goals are worth preaching directly so long as the ultimate political vision is made clear; good luck trying to help someone with their heroin addiction without at some point telling them to stop using heroin.

[august]

Everything that you're saying now is either repetition or meaningless. There is no "messaging" or "political vision" needed for the "reinstitution of true marriage" beyond one simple sentence: Man must have dominion over his wife. Reducing promiscuity is the effect of this, not the cause. Even this is at most a tertiary goal and very likely to occur naturally once you accomplish the more important ones.

If you think that even self-proclaimed "trads" and "conservatives" won't be absolutely disgusted and offended by this once you tell them, I can give you my personal promise they will be. Women today are selling themselves as biological incubators for faggots to adopt male babies and they genuinely believe that they're doing something amazing. Continuing this is retarded because it's a conversation with someone who's out to lunch.

[Aizen]

Maybe if you got off the couch and actually came face to face with Antifa while holding a flag or a shield, you'd see how hollow the words of these talking heads actually sound

Woah... we got a real tough badass over here

[Aizen]

All old people must die