title: ridiculously stupid things men keep doing for women
text: why socalled intellectuals do more harm than good to society why socalled intellectuals do more harm than good to society 
  andré is a young european who left his decaying country in  for greener pastures he enjoys exploring subterranean places reading about a host of interconnected topics and yearns for tradition november   culture 
  the existence of intellectuals is more ubiquitous today than ever many are those who contend for public attention credibility and money as a reward for their wits not to mention the very status of intellectual yet the existence of such people is far from selfevident for centuries traditional societies barely had anything or anybody that looked like modern intellectuals and this did not prevent them from lasting hundreds or even thousands of years 
  so as we elaborate projects and ideas for reforming the depraved societies of the empire of nothinga necessary step if we want a lasting victoryan important question must be confronted do we need at all what has been called intellectuals during last centuries and if we do not what should we have instead the origin of modern intellectuals 
  at the heart of modernity lies a deep crisis before it western europe was united by the same christian faith and a basic agreement on the place of economysubordinated to guilds and the rights of the average producer 
  when modernity reared its philosophical head through rené descartes a prominent thinker of the seventeenth century the old continent was in a much more problematic state christianity had splintered into various opposing faiths whose intellectual opposition was shaking everything to the core we have been told that the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were a glorious new flourishing of intelligence but in fact thinkers who actually lived at this time had quite a different impression 
  the irish bishop george berkeley  criticized how the practice of philosophy had become on his age synonymous with getting embroiled into thousand scruples prejudices and errors of sense a situation he attributed to the wrong use we make of our faculties likewise the scottish philosopher david hume  scolded his contemporaries for being too eager to criticize the systems of others for the sake of pushing their own on the scene that is a mutual hypercriticism that led to a general lack of certitude about everything 
  there is nothing which is not the subject of debate and in which men of learning are not of contrary opinions the most trivial question escapes not our controversy and in the most momentous we are not able to give any certain decision disputes are multiplied as if everything was uncertain and these disputes are managed with the greatest warmth as if everything was certain amidst all this bustle it is not reason which carries the prize but eloquence from hence in my opinion arises that common prejudice against metaphysical reasonings of all kinds 
  the first precursors were honest in their endeavour to solve the crisis descartes berkeley hume and many others genuinely sought a grand encompassing theory that could resume with all controversies but soon the very controversy became an institution a whole market of ideas was growing in which more and more lettrés started to see an opportunity to make a name thus earning fame social standing and sometimes money hume could not help himself soon after criticizing those who fed the crisis by attacking the others systems while promoting their own he was doing the same 
  such was the socalled enlightenment the further undermining of any spiritual philosophical or cultural unity by ambitious individuals ready to hustle for notoriety they would be experts at flattering the powerful mocking the catholic church fiddle fashionable themes and witty prose and more than everything else rationalizing their activity as a progress the very expression enlightenment stems from their willingness to market themselves to the posterity the intellectuals bread and butter 
  it can be noted that from the amateur gentlemen of the eighteenth century generations of scientists have sprang up some of these characters were mathematicians engineers doctors or dedicated observers of nature and they all contributed to improving general human power over matter  but make no mistake even science needs problems and unknown stuff to justify careers and research thus following a headlong rush dynamic at its side the literary intellectuals need more problems so they can have the opportunity to sell themselves through claiming they want to solve them 
  the momentous crisis turned into a crisis structure and the structure turned into a mark of the modern west where god ceased to speak the modern talking head took more and more territory and wrote dozens of books trying to prove he was the embodiment of progress it doesnt matter if problems are genuine or artificial intellectuals need them like a blacksmith needs iron 
  two typical intellectual characters are voltaire and émile zola both were gifted writers both were charming and witty both managed to write about matters that were actually relevant to their times and both have used a trial with political overtones to make a show of themselves not so incidentally both were french and participated to the furthering of a twisted literary chauvinism 
  voltaire took advantage of various trials to claim that the defendants were accused because they were protestants inside a catholic country the infamous affaire calas  from the name of a father who was accused of having murdered his own son was used by the shrewd philosophe to sending pathetic letters to the upper crust of the society stirring the public opinion pressuring magistrates until the fatherwho had been convicted and executed after a thorough investigationwas rehabilitated two centuries and a half later young frenchmen are still taught voltaire was a champion of truth justice and reason whereas he was more like a playwright who peddled influence 
  zola more than a century later did the same a jewishfrench captain alfred dreyfus  was convicted for high treason after he allegedly communicated secret documents to prussia years later some new evidence seemed to indicate that dreyfus was innocent and that another officer had leaked the documents at this very moment zola published an incendiary article jaccuse  where he spat on the judges and cried about the injustice of the affaire  eventually dreyfus was rehabilitatedand the army the patriots and the catholics were shamed through a neverending media discourse that casted them as villains of the whole story 
  voltaire and zola played the same role in a narrative of the exact same kind we are taught about a situation of injustice where the majority of the population is oppressing an innocent group through an innocent individual and crooked institutions fortunately a heroic talking head rises miraculously converts the opinion to recognize the poor innocent victim as such the talking head is crowned as an awesome thinker beyond boundaries whereas some are fairly vilified as oppressors and the poor victims rehabilitation is also the victory of reason justice and progress 
  thus the intellectuel in the most typical sense is a highly paradoxical creature who becomes taught in classes after having seemingly rebelled against dominant institutions teenagers are led to think that heroic and highly intelligent individuals can turn the tide of unfavourable opinion provided they follow a mysterious sense of history there have been a lot more intellectuals than the mere classics and often those rejected by the official narrative are more interesting than those inside whos gonna pay 
  even if you are gifted with words and language being a talking head does not pay much would anyone be ready to pay you for giving an opinion no matter how elaborate on anything the problem of money is a good starting point to connect the dots voltaire was close from wealthy protestants bankers one of whom even helped him to obtain a house in geneva and zola was a rotschild protégé  both of them contributed to tarnish catholicism and most of their own people in other words they served interests that could pay themthey were sellouts 
  today some bloggers happen to earn money as independents especially when they found themselves a niche yet independence is scarce way too many people would like to live from their wits and even more obtain recognition as intellectuals more than often intellectual types turn into teachers journalists or even marketersthus depending upon an institution that pays them 
  in north america the war against whites and masculinity is massively subsidized  whether in the academic or in the media you wont easily find a job there if you take a critical stance on cultural marxism and in case you wouldnt be selfhating enough they are already replacing you with minority individuals who are rewarded for spewing wordy venom daily 
  old marxism was wellaligned with the interests of intellectuals as a class not as individuals it handed them an official status and flattered their ego by casting them as the vanguard of progress keynesianism triumphed for the exact same reason as it justified the creation of a bloated state where modelobsessed nerds enjoy a tremendous power over those who produce actual wealth intellectual types historically joined the left because it gave them a status money and moral recognition 
  but the whole marxist vocabulary of progress and emancipation dissimulated what seems glaring today namely that intellectuals were recognized and paid not because they were enlightened or bright but because they were an efficient tool of destruction 
  the conservative right has often lacked a milieu for intellectual types the average conservative was reluctant to pay someone he saw as a parasite such a lack pushed a number of high iqs to the arms of the left who made an establishment out of them and paid them to enforce globalism antiwhiteness antimasculinity pathological altruism transgender madness politically correct repression and so on intellectuals were never paid to say the truth they were paid as tools who performed a primarily destructive social function 
  if we happen to beat cultural marxism what shall we do with intellectual types if we are to dismantle globalism and build healthier societies we have to think about what we will replace the bobo leftist establishment the intellectual mediocrity and spinelessness of the average conservative is no solution a truly traditional society would likely have initiates something akin to high priests and knights in lieu of vacuous and coward talkers how exactly we go there or how exactly this could look today is another question conclusion 
  the french essayist alain soral once famously said a journalist is either a whore or without a job this is even truer for most intellectuals sold as they are to a destructive left or more seldomly to the inefficient right 
  culture is overrated what the mainstream refers to under that name is a giant matrix full of lies taboos and the snobbery of talking heads who end up lying to everyone or believing into their own bullshit no wonder why the shrewd robert greene advised to be an intense realist one must cultivate inner intuition and situational awareness not to fall prey to some of the claptrap that constitutes at least eighty per cent of current mainstream culture 
  the previous generations could join the cultural marxist establishment and pretend their destructive egoladen works were progress to our generation this is impossible either we stand up for our very existence even if we must go against more than two centuries of manipulations and lies or we resign ourselves to an ignominious death before we take the power back a shared awareness must be stimulated and this is where we enter in direct conflict with the wellfunded antiwhite antimasculine establishment types whom we must beat on their own field once and for all bonus  quotes about the intellectuels 
  some of the problems that modern philosophical thinking puts forward appear void of any importance and meaning modern philosophy features a range of issues that merely stem from an equivocal stance and the confusion of different viewpoints these issues only exist because they are poorly framed they have no fundamental reason to exist in many cases defining their statements more precisely may be enough to make them disappear plain and simple if modern philosophy did not strive to maintain them because it makes a living out of ambiguity  rené guénon introduction to the study of the hindu doctrines  chap rené guénon young 
  philosophers care much more about putting forth problems no matter how artificial and illusory than about solving them they also strive to link their name to a system that is to a strictly bounded set of theories they would own and consider as their nothing more than their own work hence the desire to be original at any price even if the truth must be sacrificed on the altar of said originality a philosopher who cares about his repute does better by making up a new mistake than by repeating some truth that has already been expressed by others rené guénon the crisis of the modern world  chap rené guénon older 
  the most evident feature of modern critique is the lack of principles and of authenticity its greater preoccupation consists in being brilliant in appearing original from the point of view of those who embody this intellectuality the catchy line the dialectical or polemical posturing well noticed by others have a much greater value than truth ideas when they use them are nothing but a pretext what matters is to look intelligentjust as to the mainstream politician the ideology of a party is essentially a means for career the vanity fair the most deleterious subjectivism often verging on pure and unmitigated narcissism are essential components of this phenomenon the critique is a scourge of modern culture an epidemic that was born out of bourgeois society concomitantly with the commodification of culture in normal traditional civilizations one could find creators artists and those who would judge the works without intermediaries the sovereigns the patrons and the people our times have witnessed the appearance between the public and the creators that cultural pimp that cheeky and presumptuous parasite we call a critique  julius evola the bow and the club baron giulio cesare evola 
  show me more venal more insensitive more corrupt minds than those of the literate caste how many of them do you know whose virtue would still be uncorrupted who but them for over thirty years kept flooding us with a loosened morale a disdain for work a disgust of duty a disrespect for family who but the literary who dipped into secret funds more shamelessly than they did who seduced women softened the young excited the nation to more debauchery than they did who did abandon cowardly the princes after begging for their favours socalled men of letters always they run like harlots between the legitimate government and usurpers between monarchy and republic between politics and socialism between atheism and religion everything is good to them as long as they can make a profit and be fashionable out of it  pierrejoseph proudhon quoted by the following one pierrejoseph proudon 
  compare for example seventeenth century writers with those of the eighteenth what a difference in tone and gait the former under a veneer of servility have the most noble and proud stance they do not pretend to reign they merely stand at their place recognize the place of a superior power beyond give themselves completely to their writing task dismiss the temptation of advertising and demonstrate their professional dedication on the other hand look at the voltaire diderot and the like they open well the era of intellectuals writing stooges as they are courtiers of princes they flatter and despise at the same timesomething they are forced to do as they want to usurp their power their courtier nature reveals in everything they do the whole eighteenth century both spiritual and plain on a scoundrel background is libertine and already pornographic such is the start of literary mercantilism people of letters make money out of their writings pretend to financial independence and they write garbage to flatter the opinion of their public  édouard berth les méfaits des intellectuels the misdeeds of the intellectuals introduction édouard berth disciple of proudhon 
  i have had the same experience with journalists citing each other about my books without the smallest effort to go to my writingsmy experience is that most journalists professional academics and other in similar phony professions dont read original sources but each other largely because they need to figure out the consensus before making a pronouncement  nassim taleb antifragile  chap