Blair Naso’s commentary on the Red Pill, including views of American culture and politics.
Σ Frame is pleased to present the following guest post from the long established Manosphere author, Blair Naso.
My name is Blair Naso. My real name is Austin Martin. You can find my writing here. I write about whatever I think is true about any topic I have been thinking about.
Most of my readers probably discover me from reading Return of Kings (ROK) archives or a certain Manosphere aggregator, though it seems by this point there are a lot of new readers who didn’t follow me four years ago. Sometimes I get referrals from this website. Jack has a large catalog of Red Pill type blogs on his sidebar.
On his page categorizing all these blogs, he listed me as a “hermit.” I’m not sure I really count as a hermit, but it’s true that I don’t read much of the Manosphere anymore and have drifted from most of my internet friends. I don’t wear the label Red Pill, and I don’t care about any movement. So I guess that fits me into the hermit type. In the last year or so I’ve gained a lot of followers, and the Manosphere has definitely changed, so I thought I would introduce myself and give my thoughts on the nature of the Manosphere.
I definitely appreciate Jack giving me the opportunity to promote my work. I will never ask people for Patreon donations. Nor do I have any grandiose notions of saving the world. I do this simply to have a creative outlet.
I was, eh, a red-tinted purple pill when I came across the Manosphere in 2014. I soon became a staff writer for Return of Kings. Not quite a year later, in 2015, I quit so I could focus on personal issues. Admittedly, I handled this poorly, having just come off of some e-drama. I should have waited a month for things to die down. But I am very glad I took the time off to rethink things, and I am far more satisfied with my work over the last two years.
In 2017 I started back on my own blog, but I don’t really write about Red Pill issues anymore because I’m burned out on the topic. Saying “feminists suck” is a narrow topic that has become cliche. At this point, most people hate feminists. Women are crowd followers and wear ideology like a fashion statement. The label “feminist” signals that you’re a lunatic, so women don’t call themselves that anymore. Young women who are late Millennials and Generation Z burn any association with the label because it’s become so toxic. If you do meet a feminist in real life, she starts apologizing and assuring you that she doesn’t hate men.
What’s really amazing is that my old 2014-2015 posts on my blog get far more page views. I don’t know why, because they aren’t well-written. Maybe it’s because ROK is linked to them. Maybe they are more pedestrian and easier to relate to. Or maybe it’s because I just had some honest thoughts that men needed to hear. At any rate, I don’t know why people are reading them, though I still agree with most of what I wrote.
Anyway, my readers now aren’t the same I had during ROK, so I gradually quit talking about the site. It seems kind of tacky to talk some kind of glory days of when I wrote for a medium-sized group blog four years ago that I wasn’t at for a full year. I feel like a middle aged man who visits his old fraternity and finds that no one remembers him. Like the 19-year-old who visits his old high school at lunch.
What really bothered me about ROK is that, however much Roosh tried to make it into a big tent, it devolved into an ideology. There was a certain atmosphere of Red Pill political correctness. You deviate from a certain position even a little, and the retards in the comments section will denounce you as a blue bill beta. I checked a few years later, and the exact same people were still taking up half the comments section. Do these people not have lives?
And it’s like the term “Red Pill” is a platonic ideal “we” are always trying to perfectly define. “We” are always using this Red Pill epistemology as a filter for every thought and viewpoint, to see whether it’s valid or not. I am always wary of this kind of philosophical simplicity, and so I am surprising that many of the readers at ROK detested my work, although I have to say that the feeling was mutual. Most of the staff writers agreed with me in how horrendous the comments section was.
I don’t usually trash talk people on the blog, but I’m extremely disappointed with how certain red pill writers have turned out. Many a great writer and vlogger has quit actually creating content and now just produces livestreams. Livestreams are lazy, and I don’t have sympathy for anyone who is deplatformed whose main internet content is livestreams. I don’t care about your bar banter. Half of it is people laughing at their own dumb jokes.
What I’ve really learned from watching — on the sidelines — the Alt Right rise and fade into obscurity in the span of about two years is that the solution to society’s problems is not creating a movement. Every fringe movement — left, right, social, political, religious — is very quickly subverted by the idiot masses who misunderstand the nuances.
The best example of this on the internet is MGTOW, which originally was a kind of libertarian sentiment. I think this is probably what happened to the Beatniks, the civil rights movement, and in general the counter-subcultures of the mid-20th century.
Another really good example is John Wesley, whose ideas degenerated into a wide span of movements, none of which followed his original methods. Both the snake-handlers and the prosperity televangelists are the spiritual descendants of Wesley. In college I attended the Wesleyan Center, where they told us that the early Methodists fasted twice a week, as though this were a feature of Methodism and not the definition of Methodism.
Does the Manosphere still exist? The jargon “we” use have become relatively mainstream. A lot of old writers do very different topics and formats. Chateau Heartiste went from being a crass (though brilliant) pick-up blog to a traditionalist semi-Christian white nationalist news aggregator.
Will the Red Pill become just another social movement that made a ding in history and then fell by the wayside? Was it just a scream into the void, ultimately of no relevance to the socio-political landscape? Is the trajectory of history merely towards entropy, with any reaction just a token resistance? I certainly think Trump would have been elected without the Manosphere and the alt right.
Or was it just a symptom of an inevitable reaction, a single thread in the garment? A cell swallowed up into the greater organism of anti-progressivism, irrelevant in the large history but a vital part of the reaction’s inception?
I recently read Keith Richards’s autobiography. He talks about various club owners, art patrons, and drug dealers in London, without whom the British blues scene never would have happened, but of course who are forgotten in the final mythos of rock n roll.
I think Red Pill is just a synonym for truth. It was originally about the nature of women, but I really don’t see that as something isolated.
Around the age of 20, you should start realizing that society lied to you about the sexes. A little bit of Red Pill literature can speed up a young man’s learning curve, but you can come to all of this by just observing the world around you. The Red Pill isn’t a mystery cult. It’s not arcane knowledge that’s just being discovered. We aren’t translating the gnostic gospels.
The divide between men and women is only one aspect of our society’s problems, which is fundamentally rooted in a spiritual issue, which is that we’ve accepted the doctrine of the Antichrist. The consumerist way we approach sex is intimately tied into the consumerist way we approach everything in our society, and so it seems silly to build a movement narrowly focusing on just the sexual angle of consumerism.
The Antichrist isn’t so much a person as it is an ideology. The Antichrist takes the values of Christianity and inverts them. Lust is love, anger is justice, and flooding your community with criminals is compassion. The Antichrist promises you earthly wealth and will allow you to act on all of your animal passions. It is a doctrine that can only speak lies, because it is in lies that you can have whatever world you like. Any truth, no matter how small, sets a standard, and so the Antichrist must destroy all truth so that there will be no standards.
Feminism, ultimately, is a form of Marxism, which ultimately is a subversion of Christianity that glorifies base drives like anger, greed, and pride, while it simultaneously pathologizes virtues like family, loyalty, and mercy. This is not so different from Islam, which tells you that God will allow you to rape and murder as long as you do it to the right people. What the Koran calls “the great salvation” is spending eternity in a sex paradise.
You can see this in what most of Christianity has become. Pastors preach on how Jesus wants you to have good self-esteem, but they will almost never criticize divorce. This has already been covered extensively on Jack’s blog. Christians have exchanged one set of virtues for a different set and then tried to equivalate the two. The peace that Jesus gives which surpasses all understanding and is not of this world has been taught as mere world peace. This is most glaringly obvious in Pope Francis, but he is far from alone.
To defeat feminism, we must defeat the Antichrist. If people should return to the actual Christ, then feminism will not be a problem. If people actually read their Bible at face value, they would see that you cannot be a feminist and a Christian. Feminism is about women doing what they want with their lives. Christianity is about sacrificing every decision of your life to Christ.
For many years now all of our political and social discourse has been based Marxism, particularly in how we see the primary purpose in politics as the need to correct historic wrongs, spread our beliefs to other people, and unite the world under one system. The neoconservatives directly originate in Trotskyite Marxism. This is most clear in the Bush family, who did nothing for Christianity, the working class, or any notion of conserving American culture. How are they not fuctional Marxists? Everything the Bushes did was fiat economics, fiat wars, and fiat social restructuring. Because culture cannot be quantified, Republicans never once considered how the Aztec invaders and outsourcing were warping society. Even in the age of President Trump, these concerns are expressed in terms of job creation and wages, not small towns overrun with blight and Aztecs.
Most conservatives’ arguments against socialism is that it isn’t practical — not that it is evil.
Another example is our narrative of race relations. This is entirely based on a frame that whites have historically oppressed blacks just because whites are mean. Nothing is ever said about what blacks did to instigate it. Nothing is said about how the civil rights movement has destroyed the black community. This history is never taught dispassionately so that one can analyze it critically — it’s taught as a story of good triumphing over evil. Most people still believe that the civil rights movement was a fundamentally good thing, even though it ended in dozens of race riots.
American as an institution may have won the Cold War, but America as an idea lost.
All these terms, such as “Manosphere” and “Red Pill,” will probably one day be outdated, just as it is happening with the terms “Feminist” and “Hippie,” but these truths which remain vital to people’s lives are timeless. You can line up all the reactionaries in the country and assassinate us one by one, and within a generation these ideas will spring up again. As Elvis said, “Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain’t going away.”
- Return of Kings (feat. Blair Naso): 5 Lessons From Church That Will Wreck Your Life (November 1, 2014)