Spilling Beer on Barstool Manifestos

Drinks are kind of watered down and there's barf in the bathroom.

If there is one thing the online right and left, and really anyone who spends too much time online, is writing manifestos. Now, if you are one of the terminally online mentally ill schizos that follow the irreverent back and forth between the thought leaders of Substakistan, you have no doubt caught some of the discussion between the Religious Right and the Vitalist(not really defined, but I guess they just want to bang chicks and abort the results,) Right. It’s all dumb, but because I’m dumb I’m going to throw my opinions into the refuse pile of internet discourse.

Now the majority of the conversation is centered around ideas spat out by the venerable

Walt Bismarck

. See, Walt is really good when it comes to getting people to talk about Walt, which is a good thing if you are anonymous writer on a subscription based service like Substack. Lots of people now know who Walt is, or at least know who the online persona of Substack Walt is. One of them is

Dave Greene

, who’s Youtube videos I’ve enjoyed for numerous years. Dave threw down a comprehensive reply to Walt’s first post on this Livestream here. Now, I listened to almost all of it on working out for the past two days, and it’s a comprehensive takedown of the whole thing. If I had to criticize Dave is that he honestly put too much effort refuting ideas that are just stupid.

Anyways, enough back story, this isn’t the Silmarillion and it’s 7pm on Saturday and I have things to do and people to see. Sometime this morning, or maybe last night, I’m not sure because I forgot to charge my phone yesterday, Walt put out a manifesto. Oh and what a manifesto it is, it’s in the words or Barney Stinson the unofficial mascot of the Vitalist Right, LEGENDARY.

No, just kidding, it’s actually stupid. Read it HERE and come back for some commentary.

Without further delay…

(P1) Sexual Essentialism - Men and women have different capabilities on average, as well as vastly different experiences that make us look at the world in completely different ways. Downstream of this are lower-order differences in values, priorities, hopes and dreams, and fears and anxieties. Society would be better off if we became a lot less androgynous and stopped pretending men and women are the same. We should talk openly about sex differences and accept them as a fact of life.

Point one, right off the bat the focus is on intersexual dynamics. Placing this at the top of the list is interesting because it gives us some insight on about the priorities of this manifestos authors. For example Marinetti’s Futurist Manifesto has this as a first point.

We intend to glorify the love of danger, the custom of energy, and the strength of daring.

Now, this starts off good, I don’t really have anything to argue here. There has been a cultural push for the past 30 or so years to consider Males and Females identical widgets that can be interchangeable. There is an element of realpolitk here, you can take your most rabid shitlib and they will never agree to get rid of all protections for women, implement the draft, or any of the biologically sexualized legal categories but in the media sphere they act otherwise. But, there is an important point to mention. We must make it clear on this point that we are talking about biological sex not gender roles. This discussion gets muddled with the roles and rights. Can a female be an infantry soldier, yes, should she be one, no, because of biological differences.

Where I really believe this is an important issue is in parenthood. Both the mother and the father have critical biological and psychological roles to play in the raising of children and pretending that two mothers or two fathers are equally ideal to a biological male female pair is disagreeable to me. I bring this up because in other places Walt voices support for homosexual adoption and surrogacy in direct opposition to this, first by choice, important leg of the barstool.

The obvious question now comes up. We agree with above, now what? What does the above mean in practical terms besides teaching children “boys have a penis and girls have a vagina,” how do we enforce and implement, this argument will no doubt apply to almost every point in the manifesto because, spoiler alert, there isn’t an answer.

(P2) Inevitability of Patriarchy - Men display considerably more variance than women in most personality traits, which means the most intelligent and agentic people are usually men. Combined with the greater male propensity for aggression and risk-taking (not to mention obvious differences in physical strength and size), this ensures society will always be ruled a cadre of elite men. Even the most capable women like Hilldawg and Cleopatra tend to crumple like a tissue when squaring off in direct conflict with the likes of Donald Trump or Caesar Augustus. Distributionally speaking, women as a class just don’t have what it takes to rule. We must therefore talk about society with the assumption that elite men will always be in the driver’s seat and that their interests will always be privileged in some sense.

Moving on to the second point we remain on the topic of sexual dimorphism but now we bring up societal organizational elements, the dreaded word, PATRIARCHY! This point is more of a Darwinian biological observation than statement of political action. First, I can argue, and I’m sure lots of people can, that our postmodern neoliberal technocracy is not ruled by elite men but by cadres of single women and the simps that empower them. We are living in a slutty Sisterocracy that treats us all like little brothers. But we can go on and on about this, what matters is you have to define Patriarchy and tell me what it looks like, which comes down to the second and most critical failure, there is a complete lack of moral and philosophical framework. One can say that North Korea is a Patriarchy, a very cool Necro-Patriarchy to be more precise, is that the patriarchy we want? How about a techno-homosexual patriarchy where homosexual men use their elite male power to turn females into womb factories and human reproduction is all done in a lab for the benefit of a hedonistic homosexual male paradise. You have to define what the Patre is in Patriarchy for it to mean anything.

(P3) Demands of Chivalry - As a high status man, you have a basic moral obligation to protect both the women in your life and any lower status man who formally affiliates with you. You also have an obligation to represent their interests alongside your own when operating in public life. When you meet this obligation women and subordinate men will usually be very happy to submit to your judgment, but when you fail to do so they will feel betrayed and unprotected, and this inevitably causes a devasting breakdown in social order. Per P2, elite men must accept (and in practice all of them do) that they’ll always be in charge, and must game out the right concessions to extend other groups to best cultivate a productive and harmonious society.

Ok, now we are going off the reservation, really hitting those trails. A high status man, please define what a high-status man means in your society. See, in our degenerate society an obese mutant pervert like Harvey Weinstein was considered high status due to his wealth and control over the entertainment industry, or lets be honest, the entirety of the visitors on Epstein’s list is considered high-status. You have to define high status because it’s mutable and changes based on the core assumed moral base of society. A sick society like ours bestows high status on perverts, pedophiles, and ball-bouncers. I don’t know about you guys but I’ll pass on being high status in Hollywood or Silicone Valley.

On to the actual point, now our barstool manifesto starts talking about another manifesto, a much older and more important one, Chivalry, which is a code of conduct derived from martial knighthood, the tripart medieval system, and Christianity. The question here is why I have an obligation to protect the women and weak men in my life? Why Mr. Bismark, are you pulling a bait and switch on me? First you tell me that males and females are different, that males are much stronger, much more violent, much more powerful, after that you tell me that elite men will rule, what gives bro? I’m a HIGH-STATUS MALE! I will smash the heads of any man weaker than me and have my way with any woman I want. What are you going to do about it dude? How dare you tell me I have an OBLIGATON to protect women and weaklings. Where do you get that authority, where do you get pushing this weak slave morality upon me.

(P4) Behavioral Elasticity of Men - Women are very agreeable to social convention and usually do as they’re told by society. Even the laziest and least conscientious girls are more likely to do their homework and follow the rules than similarly indolent boys, which is why modern dopamine traps have had a less pronounced impact on female educational attainment and professional success. Men respond more strongly to the brute material incentive structure, and are much less likely to work hard if they don’t feel like something’s in it for them. This means—very crucially—that our social policy and cultural mores should be calibrated with a focus on male behavior.

Yes, no disagreement here, this has been obvious for almost all human history. Once again, how, how do we make people give up a century of practice? I think we should return to more sex segregated education, but you need the power to reform the entire educational system from top down and that will be a monumental task, so once again this is hypothetical rubbish akin to me saying that I could revolutionize the education system using Elon Musks Neurolink to directly upload 12 years of education into every child’s mind. Cool.. much more believable than convincing the whole of the educational grifter industry to give up their jobs.

(P5) Longhouse Bad - We need a material and cultural incentive structure optimized for increasing the agency, energy, and grit of men in the “malleable middle”—think roughly the fortieth to ninetieth percentiles of ability. This requires investing in a more competitive, uncomfortable, and dare I say vital civilization. We must go to war with the stultifying Willendorfian impulse for a gentler and cozier society. We can and should give that sort of life to our women and old people, but men in the prime of life should never be allowed to be comfortable. It makes them miserable and worthless and at scale gives us a Wall-E society. Young men should be encouraged to constantly take risks—not by coddling them when they fail, but by venerating them when they succeed, while drastically raising the ceiling on individual success.

What does this mean practically, military service, some sort of adventure service, randomly killing people on the street, gladiatorial combat. A high action vital society is a society in flux, one where things change fast, the antithesis of what our ruling class likes. See, right now we are ruled by limp wristed soft bodied technocrats, the last thing they want to encourage is physical vitality, we saw this during the COVID lockdowns of gyms, beaches, hiking trails, so we would have to, I donno, change the ruling class all together, and going about that requires a bit more than a manifesto.

(P6) Sex Roles Good - Due to evopsych factors we’re all painfully familiar with, men and women desire fundamentally different things in a relationship. Women want to feel protected / cherished, men want to feel respected / needed; men are afraid of being betrayed, women of being abandoned; the masculine tragedy is disposability, the feminine tragedy replaceability. Obviously exceptions exist, and some outliers will always feel pressured into sex roles that don’t jive with their natural preferences. But all cultural norms are reinforced in a feedback loop, and we must reject all advocacy for outliers that practically immiserates the heteronormie majority.

This is a rehash of point one and two.

(P7) Sex Roles are Flexible - The precise nature of sex roles varies across societies due to “cultural” elements downstream of genetics, technology, climate, and other material conditions. In any society you’ll also see lots of variance in sex roles across different ethnic groups and social classes. Something that codes as masculine to one group might code as faggy or barbaric to another, and these things can change very quickly. It is therefore silly to think sex roles can ever exist in stasis, and efforts to culturally retvrn to the precise sex roles of the 1950s etc. are wrongheaded. But it’s equally dumb to think sex roles are “socially constructed,” because such construction is always downstream of biology / hard material factors. We must instead think proactively about how to control these factors as best we can to create a beautiful and functional system of sex roles suited for the twenty-first century.

More sex role stuff, I’m starting to see a psychological pattern here, a particular obsession. Once again, what is the moral framework for deciding these sex roles. What if society as a whole decides that the best “beautiful and functional system” is one of absolute matriarchy. That the sex role for middle aged women is to be mediators and administrators in a peaceful codependent planetary technocracy while the males are sent off to die in Martian Unubtanium mines? Sex roles in a culture are downstream of cultural and religious norms, how do you implement changes without moral frameworks?

(P8) Heterosexuality Good - On a very basic level, men and women need each other to self actualize as adult humans. Without men in their life, women live like children, and without women in their life men live like animals. A crucial part of animus / anima integration is learning how to maintain a productive and harmonious relationship with people of the opposite sex. Meanwhile, society obviously needs a stable TFR to persist into successive generations. It is therefore vital that society invest in a healthy and stable culture of heterosexuality where boy-girl romance and sexuality is venerated as a sacred ideal.

Woah now, we are getting into deep metaphysical stuff, using modern psychological terms like “self-actualize” and saying that men live like animals. Aren’t men animals, are we not an animal, what makes us different than the wolf, do we not fight, fuck, and feed? Why is heterosexuality good? Why is natalism good? Why should we encourage biological pair bonding, towards what, procreation. We live in a world of surrogacy, birth control, and abortion in the form of a pill, why does any of that shit matter. Why not have a pansexual world where everyone fucks each other as much as possible because all we encourage is pleasure, we encourage full promiscuity, matter of fact we make it a duty to have to sleep with each other, both heterosexual and homosexual sex will be encouraged, and we will not differentiate, after all life should be pleasureful for the powerful and the elite. What framework in the barstool manifesto lets me know that what I just proposed is not a good idea?

(P9) Sexual Enmity Bad - There is almost nothing more dysfunctional and socially maladaptive than ginning up resentment and hatred between the sexes. It makes everyone miserable and leads to hugely negative outcomes on both an individual and societal level. Anyone who traffics in this kind of language, whether they’re an incel or sex negative feminist, deserves to be ostracized from respectable society. Naked contempt for the opposite sex should be outside the Overton Window.

Yep, no shit, civility in a civilization. This is not a political point but a concept everyone should have understood by pre-school. Sadly, we live in a fatherless society.

(P10) Encourage Marriage - Most people are happiest in a stable monogamous relationship, hence the development of marriage as a persistent social technology across many diverse societies. The overall social incentive structure should therefore be calibrated to encourage marriage for most people, and we need to make it easier for the average heterosexual to find a suitable partner for a monogamous union. The modern rate of inceldom is much too high, and measures should be taken to make things easier for middle SMV guys (who are the ones actually suffering under the Tinder paradigm; low SMV guys wouldn’t be successful in any ecology). The average low-mid status woman should likewise be gently pushed into more chaste behavior (though this is already happening, so I don’t think we really need to do anything—if anything it behooves us to somewhat restrain the recent overcorrection).

How is marriage encouraged and enforced, through tradition and custom, both based on a solid moral base, when that foundation becomes assaulted the whole thing falls apart. How are you going to gently push women towards more chaste behavior. Every societal push has been in the opposite direction from the cultural entertainment sphere, to the legal, and the pharmaceutical with birth control and quick cures for pregnancy and sexual transmitted diseases. We live in a world where we give people anti-virals so the can sleep with HIV positive boyfriends and strangers. How are you going to convince anyone to turn away from that?

(P11) Traditional Degeneracy - Due to the Coolidge Effect you can’t expect most elite men to remain perfectly monogamous, and you need some cohort of highly promiscuous women to absorb their libidinal energy so as to keep normie women sexually reserved for normie men and discourage maladaptive trends like harem-keeping. That can look like hookup culture among elites, prostitution, or mistress-keeping / sugaring / goomahs, but some such accommodation is always necessary to maintain a stable and enjoyable sexual ecology for the average person. Women who choose this lifestyle therefore need to be respected as an essential component of a well-ordered sexual ecology. But it must also be acknowledged this life isn’t remotely scalable to the average woman, and especially in online spaces we need to embrace an esoteric tolerance of promiscuity among elites while exoterically preaching a slower life strategy to the masses. A lot of this will involve simply being a lot more private about these discussions (hence me publishing this on Substack and not on Twitter).

This is a funny point, and honestly, I think this is the heart and soul of Walt’s philosophy. The whole manifesto should really be distilled down to one paragraph that is something along the above lines, something that is basically “the traditional world of the past was good and I want to live in it but I want to fuck random chicks at parties and not worry about them getting knocked up, so I’m going to because I’m elite, but the rest of you need to follow those old trad rules.”

Who decides who is elite? Is it my bank account? Is it some anon Substacker who writes manifestos? What makes one elite in our 21st century world? Also, who is going to keep me from smashing your elite head and taking your women and burning down your house because I want that party pussy? Who is going to stop my elite self from stealing all of your wives? What is the moral code there man? Elite empires get brought down by peasants, you better have some elite guards at your sex parties and you better break them off a piece.

Orwell wrote a good little novel that captured the essence of the above point, it’s called Animal Farm, should give it a read.

(P12) Fringe Nonconformity - Promiscuous women, homosexuals, and gender benders shouldn’t be bullied or shoved back in the closet, but their behavior also shouldn’t be “mainstreamed.” Context is key here—nonconformists and degenerates should have spaces for themselves in the urban core of cities where they set the tone (and children aren’t permitted), but outside these spaces they need to be more circumspect and abide by flyover chud sensibilities. They must tone down their behavior in any space dominated by low openness suburbanites, and should mask almost all of it around old / religious people and especially children.

Who and how are you going to enforce this? Morality police like in Iran and Saudi Arabia? What if the homosexuals, promiscuous women, and gender benders are the elite and have more power than you, like they do in our current society, and will use the power of the state to put your ass in place. Right now we live in a world where women and homosexuals have the power of the global neoliberal state to have Federal Agents show up at your house if question transgendarism or burn a rainbow flag. Hey guys, look around, it’s not 1996, bro lads are not the culture, you are the fringe nonconformity in todays society. Before you talk about policing homosexuals, one of the most powerful and influential political power group in the west, who get one fucking month of cultural domination per year, maybe you should take a look in the mirror and accept that almost all our ideas from the right are the minority fringe right now.

(P13) Curb Rakishness - Certain women are off limits for rakish behavior. High status promiscuous men must never sexually pursue a woman who is married with children or belongs to a close-knit religious community. You must restrain your advances to unmarried women who have consciously chosen a more free-wheeling lifestyle. When you go after the trad’s women you just make him hate you, destabilize society, and undermine the coalition we’re trying to build. It should likewise be incredibly stigmatized to go after the women of your subordinates, clients, or personal network. That said, it’s entirely kosher to steal the girlfriend / childless wife of a fellow elite degenerate.

Stupid rehash, who’s gonna make me not steal your wife? I do what ever and whoever the fuck I want.

(P14) Center Intergenerational Amity - One of the most poisonous social ills of the modern world is the breakdown in intergenerational friendship. Young people need to interact with older people to gain wisdom and benefit from their experience and accumulated knowledge, while older people need to interact with young people to regularly update their priors and adequately understand how life on the ground is changing outside their self-selected bubble. This usually needs to occur in a sex-segregated environment where people can speak candidly about the opposite sex without the risk of crossed wires or hurt feelings.

I agree with this. The best point in the entire manifesto and the only one that can be implemented realistically right now, tomorrow, by almost all of us. Go out and talk to the old and the young, become part of a community. Find mentors, become mentors, and facilitate interactions between people from all socio-economic and cultural positions.

It goes on and on with….

The above is the end of the manifesto proper but Walt’s post goes on about abortion and a few other topics that require more thorough commentary and he also addresses certain people directly and I have no interest in that.

Here’s the deal, making manifestos, and having online ideas is cool, but ultimately useless. Everything above, if discussed over a beer at the pub would be shrugged off with “that’s cool bro.” It’s a fantasy, and it’s a silly incoherent one at that.

Now, yes, I am being mean, I am being a bit of a jerk, but I have to. I’m doing it in this joke full way so we can keep the discourse going, but I honestly think that there is power in influencing others through writing and podcasting. I’ve had numerous people, almost all younger than me, either write or come up to me in person to tell me that they have read my writing or listened to the latest podcast. So as a man, father, and husband, I have a responsibility to promote the good and attack the bad. That is where I am coming from.

So here is my Manifesto.

We live in a de-sacralized world devoid of meaning. We need to encourage and expand on the good, the true, and the beautiful. Everything else is just material nonsense.