Two of the more controversial figures in the greater field of anti-feminism conservatives all too easily distance themselves from for ideological and religious reasons. Perhaps that distancing is not entirely of political or ideological necessity in my view but rather could have none too hidden economic motivations.
Ideologues of all sorts tend to dismiss these iconoclastic thought leaders.
Of course the religious considerations are important; however distinguishing modern religious propaganda from historical propaganda to include that purveyed by The Church is tricky! The wisdom of Solomon would be required to separate such concerns from economic, utopian, and power considerations. After each of us die, perhaps such motivations can be extracted by historians. However, good luck in the modern age framing that narrative dispassionately.
Part of the appeal to me of these two characters, Milo and Roosh, is their “outsider” status. As an “outsider” or iconoclast myself I’m prone to identify with them. That does not mean that I believe that the views of outsiders are necessarily objective or benign. We all have “self-interest” at our core to perhaps include interest in future generations, nations, humanity itself, and even “God’s Plan”. There are also “useful idiots” and “good intentions”. The heart or soul tends to reveal itself over time to intimates. The camera, in the era of “crisis actors” is not a reliable witness. Neither is the human eye.
As a treatment for this affliction, I recommend a course of study in Calculus, and if I may, I shall say a prayer of thanks to my maternal Grandfather and Grandmother for all the tools provided me of both rational and irrational nature by that Calculus professor (and Swiss immigrant Freemason!) and renegade late-marrying (in secret!) math teacher, respectfully.
However I do not hold them forth as archetypal idols worthy of emulation but rather very human iconoclasts in an era burdened by both The Great Depression and the debut of the magic big screen parade of Idolatry.
Speaking of Idolatry, in my view this is a problem which magnifies with State-mandated monotheism, by sheer volatility, rather than being effectively discouraged by it, regardless of how thick may be the burkha placed upon the mesmerizing figure or ban on graven images. Archetypal facets of the human condition are always going to be personified whether by myth or media, subject to the interpretation of the particular culture or age. The Greeks knew this and so do the Hindis. Camille Paglia, mysteriously “Jewish” like Italian American Catholic Philadelphian Transsexual (FtM in her mind) that she may be, figured this out.
These Deities or Celebrities tend to have particular magnetic appeal to children regardless of whether one’s house of worship contains images of human forms, or actual humans.
Denying the poor access to such a powerful physical force in the way of Dieties by way of the senses does not diminish such a force. Television, in a vacuum of Religious Dieties may have too much power. In the case of all the monotheistic religions, in my view, visual deprivation of “Dieties” (except perhaps the dour, suffering, and chaste) propounds the scourge of child rape, whether by heterosexual or homosexual mien. It further provides energy to the cause of violent assault of infidel, whether sexually or not a.k.a. Jihad.
Visual (or any other sense!) assault by pornography or mere advertising is not an improvement over censorship when imposed over a broad array of geography or culture such as is found in Globalism. Given that we have little in the way of independent States rights, thanks to Federalism, various international trade and military pacts, and porous borders, it would seem to me to be within the rights of any small community to impose their own local standards of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in terms of the public sphere as concerns idolatry, celebrity, pornography, and advertising.
However, having a mayor of London who admittedly hails from a regressive religion such as Islam impose such “community standards” offends me. He can pander to Feminists and Christian Churchians all he wants but I have to say that temptation is most pernicious when it is soft and mild.
Speaking of idolatry, there is a certain cigar bar around here which contains an image of Thomas Edison with a low-tech graphic alteration of a picture of a cigar taped to the photo. I love to sit in a certain chair and just stare up at him. I think that photo is sexy! I’d love to stand up and do a little strip tease for the man however I suspect that will get me thrown out of the cigar bar.
That said, my ideological heart is with Nicola Tesla even if I do not find his visage quite as hypnotic. His name however I find appealing and exotic even though I have to wonder about the long term trade protectionism objectives of having an entirely different standard of electrical power in the United States (along with a history of strange plumbing fixtures, etc.) as opposed to the rest of the world. That might sound like an off-beat segue but let’s say that my mind works in mysterious ways not entirely within my control.
Speaking of placating, pandering supposedly “secular” Islamists, I find myself increasingly suspicious of the sheer volume of obviously “Semitic” figures appearing in the public sphere as concerns actors, activists, talking heads, politicians, etc., even in the case of those who would appear to be singularly vilified; because:
Every crowd has a silver lining.
It may be entirely my feminine irrational sense of intuition, but, given a choice of salons in which to converse, smoke, or drink, headed by any of the live human celebrities mentioned or intimated in this piece, I would choose that of Milo Yiannopolis myself.
I’ll keep reading Roosh and Return of Kings because I believe I have the ability to filter out what may be stealth Islam conversion methods. I’m just going to put that out there. Not to throw the baby out with the bathwater or anything but is he the best that the Americas can do in terms of a Masculinist icon? How about one with perhaps just a little less of the Islamic beard? Hmmmm?