Quoting my own response to a commenter’s criticism on The Spearhead, of which, The 21 Convention was recently featured on …
“A men’s conference would focus much less on women and much more on how to be a man.”
As the founder and CEO of the only long term men’s conference in the world, I will be the one to tell you that your definition of a “men’s conference” is no better than what you are inaccurately perceiving.
A true men’s conference is an event that aids men in becoming the men they can, and were meant to be — to grow into.
(It does not help them become “real men”, or “better men” — ie, the men feminists want us to be, something akin to sophisticated slaves.)
It helps them bring out and live the ideals they know are possible to them in physical reality. This is what I have stated on the website, in so many words, and I stand by it, as a young man gritting his teeth and living his life to the best and highest of his ability.
If you can’t see that in the website and the event … well, I can’t help you. Being able to see that in the achievements of others is a sight that only a man can grant himself, not others.
What I can do though is build the best men’s conference in the world with full integrity and commitment to my own vision — which necessarily includes speakers from the men’s rights movement at some point.
As I think Bill has realized in his own way, this is an invaluable, inspirational, psychological reflection that we all can benefit greatly from.
Men who choose to think … succeeding, achieving, and gaining influence in the world when its needed most to avoid looming catastrophes politically, economically, culturally, and even physically (think diseases of civilization).
“If you can’t see that in the website and the event … well, I can’t help you. Being able to see that in the achievements of others is a sight that only a man can grant himself, not others.”
that’s a solid burn right there
Dream, I just have to make this comment because I misrepresented Nietzsche in our previous discussion.
“It helps them bring out and live the ideals they know are possible to them in physical reality.”
I think Nietzsche would sympathize with this statement. If you read up on his idea of the ubermensch (check wikipedia) really the only difference between your ideas and his is the use of the word “ideal”. Nietzsche would say that an “ideal” represents something otherworldly, and thus nihilistic. Creating “ideals” out of yourself, however, is the ultimate affirmation of life.
So I think we can agree on that, just wanted to clarify what Nietzsche is saying. Next up is Rand and Branden.
An ideal in my book is the best and highest possible of some one thing in physical reality — which means that ideals can and do exist, and can be achieved. It also means that the perfect is the destroyer of the ideal, of the good that is possible.
Why?
Because ideal is a developmental process. Perfect assumes that there is absolutely no growth is left to be had.
Life is ideal, death is perfect.