It took me a long time to publish my interview with Jack Donovan, not through any disrespect to Jack of course, but this interview was meant for a magazine that never came into being. I couldn’t keep this on the back burner for too long and so decided that the time was right to get my conversation with this great man out there, once and for all. Jack is a man of merit, with his own philosophy and one which has personally, along with Justin Garcia, helped me in understanding the true nature of masculinity.
Jack’s book – ‘The Way of Men’ – brought him to my attention. An original thinker, with an original writing style, he admits that he is not of an intellectual background, and that is to his benefit. How can some middle-class, pampered professor, for example, write about masculinity if he has not lived it?
Jack’s philosophy is inspired by our past, he crushes the contemporary cultural conversation on masculinity, a conversation that is both ridiculous and detrimental to civilisation itself, with fatuous statements on “toxic masculinity” etc. His counter-arguments for a strong and robust masculinity, that never apologises and holds strength, both mental and physical, in the highest regard, blows every other argument out of the water.
His articulation of masculinity transcends any contemporary categories, labelled by his detractors as a white nationalist, Nazi etc, Jack’s philosophy is rooted in the ancient world, he espouses the belief that men need to get back to nature, form tribes and generally embrace what nature has given them. In a recent blog post, Jack wrote about the accusations labelled against him, in Why I am Not a White Nationalist he said, in his endearingly terse way: “I am not a White Nationalist. I’m just not a spineless cuck who pisses his pants every time someone calls him a racist on Facebook. And I don’t let people who I have no respect for tell me who I’m allowed to support or call a friend.”
A Conversation with Jack
I spoke with Jack via email earlier this year, still high on Trump’s landslide victory in the US elections and this seemingly new world that had dawned in 2017. Jack, however, still had an air of caution about this, being a far wiser man than me. In our conversation, we spoke about the state of men today, a feminised society and male friendships.
You’ve been at the helm of helping men become real men for a few years now. In that time, have you seen any positive shifts happening, by way of men beginning to grasp what’s happened to them? I see the election of Donald Trump as a great positive, in the sense ordinary men who may not be fully awake to the things you’ve spoken of, have had some brainwave, at least.
Oh yeah. Young men are either total pussy beggars or they are totally “woke.” The feminist left really jumped the shark in the past decade, and guys who grew up during that period are either totally brainwashed or not having any of it. Men in their 30s and 40s came of age feminists and anti-identity activists and so forth were still trying to appeal to reason and sympathy, instead of just making insane demands and calling anyone who questioned them a rape apologist or a terrorist or something. The Donald Trump campaign showed all of these men who were afraid to speak up about the insanity around them that it was OK to recognize it for what it is and laugh it off.
How is best to make the men in our own life, be it friends or family members, who are still in the vice-like grip of the beta male see sense?
As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. Lead by example. Men have to have some curiosity or nagging dissatisfaction with the prevailing narrative to start questioning it. Instead of being the angry guy who is always ranting, you have to be the guy who is winning at life. You have to be the kind of man that men respect and look up to. When you are successful, and you have what other men want, they start asking you for advice.
In the West’ journey towards feminising, more or less, every facet of its societies, one of the key things lost, in my opinion, is a sense of brotherhood among men, there was a time where men would die for one another etc. Which is why so many men today appear isolated and disconnected from normal masculine behaviour. What do you have to say about this?
Being disconnected from a lot of normal masculine behavior is the result of living in a relatively safe world where most of the hard work or dangerous work is done by poor people in other countries thousands of miles away. But surely, the delusional globalists who encouraged everyone to go to college, as if everyone was suited for or would be happy working in some middle management job, are also to blame for stigmatizing many masculine jobs and activities as being suited only for men who were incapable of doing anything else or somehow “underprivileged.”
I’ve seen many men who have extremely superficial relationships with other men. I’m reluctant to even call them friendships, as they just look at each other as part of the furniture, a relationship that begins and ends with liking the same football team. In your opinion, what does a true friendship entail?
Friendship is poorly defined. I’m at the point personally where I am more interested in brotherhood. A friendship can range from a fairly casual association to a lifelong bond. To me, a “true friendship” involves mutual obligations and responsibilities. A true friend is “for better or worse,” whereas a sham friend really doesn’t care about you, and he will only be there when everything is going well. I co-authored a book on Blood-Brotherhood several years ago, and the distinction between what I would call a “true friendship” and a “brotherhood” is a mutual recognition of those obligations and responsibilities. A lot of guys will call their friends “brothers” and say they will “have my back,” but unless there is some explicit understanding, that could just turn out to be a misunderstanding. I will drop what I am doing or postpone plans to help a “true friend” or a “brother” in need, and I’d expect the same in return.
The very notion of male bonding is tarnished today. When you talk about it, there’s almost always the “that’s so gay” line uttered. In my opinion, it’s because on the one hand, thanks to the enormous influence of detrimental philosophers and social scientists, like Alfred Kinsey and Sigmund Freud, we now view everything through a sexualised lens, and on the other hand we’ve this weaponised homosexuality, where instead of gay being something you do, it’s now an entire culture and is literally someone’s very being, thus any type of bonding men do is somehow placed within this arena. Would you agree? And how can this be counteracted?
Sexualizing non-sexual male friendships is a sad, desperate attempt at manipulation and should be rejected outright as such.
Women characterize male friendships as “gay” when they want to monopolize a man’s time and resources or when they feel underappreciated or threatened.
Gays, unfortunately, do a lot of broken, bitter, jealous projection when it comes to both masculinity and male friendship. They often want to characterize masculinity as a”butch” pose because they have doubts about the authenticity of their own masculinity, or because they feel that because of their sexuality they will always be seen as having a defective or devalued masculinity. Gay men characterize male friendships as repressed homosexuality because that is part of their fantasy world. There are many self-aware homosexuals who can distinguish between these fantasies and reality, but the social separation between ghettoized gays and straight men makes it easy for many homosexuals to confuse pornography with reality, and this is truly unfortunate for them. Because gays who think this way dominate the gossip media, this influences the culture of male friendship in a truly perverse and degenerate way.
The introduction of “open” homosexuality to mainstream society has called the assumption of heterosexuality into question, and men who are not homosexual feel like they have to go out of their way to make it clear who they are. This puts an unfortunate distance between a lot of men, who worry about being perceived the wrong way. To me it seems weak, but I get it.
Because the line between snide reporting and snide gossip is almost non-existent anymore even at the most venerated old media institutions, insinuating a repressed homosexuality a la Freud is also a tool that the left uses to undermine its political opponents on the perceived right. Whereas this would normally be perceived as a “homophobic” attack, the mainstream left hypocritically deploys it against any male group that can’t be brought to the heel of the left.
For instance, many avowed communist extremists, who normally condemn homophobia perceived in any other context, have snidely accused the brotherhood I belong to of being some kind of gay sex cult. It is nothing of the sort — there is only one bisexual male in the entire group to my knowledge — but communist activists do this to spark a sense of “gay panic” within non-left circles, and create division. It often works. I am just glad that I am surrounded by men who have a strong enough sense of their own identity that they aren’t cowed influenced by those kinds of cheap manipulations.