The Vox Day thread

Thomas More

Crow
Protestant
If you meet a nice girl without tattoos, low notch count, low debt, great. Much more likely to meet a girl with LOTS of red flags. Vox's argument is to take the Hail Mary if the alternative is being a genetic dead end and dying alone. Tough call.
Basically, the advice is to go ahead and take a shot at making a housewife out of a ho.

I know, I know, not all women are ho's. There are enough non-ho's for at least 1-9% of men, and every one of us who understands the real situation can realistically get one from that group. </sarc>

Realistically, if we want to have a woman walk down the aisle with us and have children with her, we're going to be somewhere on the scale of making a ho into a housewife, especially if we are too old to marry women in their late teens and early 20's.

I am not ready to date after my wife's passing, and I am very concerned about the risk involved, but eventually I feel I will choose to court and marry some woman who has a fair number of red flags in her closet. I will try to be selective as best I can, then I will keep our marriage consecrated in church, and I will use marriage game, however much some men question game in any form. I will show strength and leadership, and handle her with amused mastery, and pass her crap tests, or whatever the euphemistic term for these is. I know I'll be taking a risk, but if I do my best to seek God's will, then that's the best I can do, and I will trust him with the outcome.

The alternative is to be celibate, or to fornicate. It's a frustrating set of options.
 

bucky

Hummingbird
Other Christian
Basically, the advice is to go ahead and take a shot at making a housewife out of a ho.

I know, I know, not all women are ho's. There are enough non-ho's for at least 1-9% of men, and every one of us who understands the real situation can realistically get one from that group. </sarc>

Realistically, if we want to have a woman walk down the aisle with us and have children with her, we're going to be somewhere on the scale of making a ho into a housewife, especially if we are too old to marry women in their late teens and early 20's.

I am not ready to date after my wife's passing, and I am very concerned about the risk involved, but eventually I feel I will choose to court and marry some woman who has a fair number of red flags in her closet. I will try to be selective as best I can, then I will keep our marriage consecrated in church, and I will use marriage game, however much some men question game in any form. I will show strength and leadership, and handle her with amused mastery, and pass her crap tests, or whatever the euphemistic term for these is. I know I'll be taking a risk, but if I do my best to seek God's will, then that's the best I can do, and I will trust him with the outcome.

The alternative is to be celibate, or to fornicate. It's a frustrating set of options.
Consider God-fearing Latinas from south of the border. I am entirely serious.
 

bucky

Hummingbird
Other Christian
I'm here in America and have honestly thought about splitting time between Latin America and America. I have a hard time finding any attractive women that fit my criteria here in the states.
I'd go as far as to say that I'd be very surprised if a gringo who's a solid guy and trying to be a good Christian didn't eventually meet a good potential wife or several in most Latin American countries by just attending church and being active in the church community.
 

paul14

Chicken
Catholic
I really enjoyed Vox's latest blog entry.

It was a preface to Rhetoric (by Aristotle). The basic argument he seems to be making is that there are certain people where you cannot make (or understand) an argument based on dialectic (fact-and-reason based persuasion) but only rhetoric (emotion-based persuasion).

I thought about this in the context of democratic voting and had a thought. Lets suppose that say only 20% * of people can understand rhetoric based arguments or perhaps that men (in general) use dialectic and women (in general) use rhetoric.

My belief (based on observation) is that dialectic understanding is definitely in the minority. This means that 80% (my estimate) of people choose who to vote for based emotion-based persuasion.

The whole way that everybody went along with the Covid narrative would certainly suggest that this is the case.

Democracy is always sold as 2 candidates making arguments and that the voter decides who to vote for based on reasoned arguments BUT based on Aristotle this clearly cannot be the case since only 20% of people are capable of following the (dialectic) arguments.

Any successfully politician therefore would have to favour rhetoric based arguments over dialectic since otherwise they would not be able to influence 80% of their potential voter base.

This means democracy is doomed if you think about it. Repeatedly appealing to rhetoric influenced voters is likely to lead to policies involving minimal risk (or exaggerated risk) which will lead to stagnation. Things like indoor plumbing, electricity and energy production involve lots of risk.

* - perhaps it is not 80/20 but I think dialectic reasoning is definitely in the minority.
(sorry, it is a bit rambling)
 
Last edited:

911

Peacock
Catholic
Gold Member
1651066979231.png

Say what you want about Ted/VoxDay, but he really puts out great products, a high quality old school library of the classics, including a children's library. This is an awesome antidote to the Netflix/Disney/TikTok/Rap cultural filth we are bombarded with, hats off to him!
 

911

Peacock
Catholic
Gold Member
Collections like this one have around a quarter to a third of duds, with subversive writers like Bertrand Russell, Virginia Wolf, John Dewey, Marcel Proust etc. Western degeneracy is not a very modern phenomenon...

 

Wutang

Hummingbird
Gold Member
^ I was speaking of the original set which doesn't have any of those authors. The original set does have Freud and Marx however. It does seems likes the people who put together the original set tend to favor the older works over the later ones. Aristotle, Aquinas, and Shakespeare all get two volumes in the set. The only modern author that gets two volumes is Edward Gibbon.

The Aristotle volumes in this set has the Rhetoric as well as other important works like the Metaphysics, On the Soul, and Physics.

Also as I mentioned before, lots of libraries will have an set of the original first edition release which means you can get them for free. If you don't want to read Marx you can just check out the Plutarch or whatever else.

 

Carolus

Sparrow
Protestant
^ I was speaking of the original set which doesn't have any of those authors. The original set does have Freud and Marx however. It does seems likes the people who put together the original set tend to favor the older works over the later ones. Aristotle, Aquinas, and Shakespeare all get two volumes in the set. The only modern author that gets two volumes is Edward Gibbon.

The Aristotle volumes in this set has the Rhetoric as well as other important works like the Metaphysics, On the Soul, and Physics.

Also as I mentioned before, lots of libraries will have an set of the original first edition release which means you can get them for free. If you don't want to read Marx you can just check out the Plutarch or whatever else.


Unfortunately, Freud and Max have to be included due to their impact on history.

I think it's worth noting that the compilers were absolute libtards. Reading the introductory essay and then comparing it to what has followed since it was written was quite a red pill for me back in my 'classical liberal' days. Seeing the liberal predictions and worldview clearly and concisely written down without the benefit of contemporary apologetics as to why it has utterly failed was very eye opening to me in my pre-NRX/Hoppe days.

I believe the set contains all surviving work by Aristotle. Do you know if that's correct? I was trying to look it up just now but couldn't find an answer
 

Wutang

Hummingbird
Gold Member
I'm not sure if it has all his works but it definitely a huge amount. They even included his zoology/biology stuff where he talks about various different species of animals even though I'm sure that's not going to be of interest to the vast majority of people.

The compilers of the Great Books series were big into whole concept of the liberal arts education and they believed that it should be spread to as many people as possible no matter their social class so they are liberal in that regard. They also believed believed in the latent potential of people and that it's very possible for most people to become classically educated in contrast to the neo-reactionary stance which believes that it's out of reach for most people. They aren't liberals in that they seem wary of how modern society equates education with technical expertise and the being proficient in the "practical" subjects. I don't think they would be fans of the people who say the only worthwhile education is one based in STEM subjects. If I recall correctly the editors seemed pretty critical of Dewey in the intro volume of the set that featured a series of essays written by them even if Dewey did end up making into later version of the set.
 

bucky

Hummingbird
Other Christian
Classic Vox Day post on "Judeo-Christianity":


One of the strangest universally held beliefs among western normies is the idea that Christianity and the one religion that expressly denies Christ are pretty much the same thing. I don't know if anyone but Vox does as much to point out how ridiculous this idea is. If you think about it, it would be considerably less ridiculous to talk about Islamo-Christianity or Buddho-Chrisitanity. At least Islam and Buddhism have a lot of nice things to say about Jesus.
 

7-5

Sparrow
Other Christian
Check out The Great Books of the Western series for something similar. Lots of libraries will have a set.
Around the time you made this post: I had stumbled upon a used collection of that...er, collection and spent over $100 picking up the authors that interested me.

I was all:
'Used books, $10 per?!
Oh Augustine, gotta have that!
Oh Aquanis, gotta have that!
Oh Hegel, gotta have that!'

Really thinking about getting the entire pre-1990s collection.

Would love Castalia books, i just simply cannot afford them.
 

BerkhofBerghof

Pigeon
Protestant
Classic Vox Day post on "Judeo-Christianity":


One of the strangest universally held beliefs among western normies is the idea that Christianity and the one religion that expressly denies Christ are pretty much the same thing. I don't know if anyone but Vox does as much to point out how ridiculous this idea is. If you think about it, it would be considerably less ridiculous to talk about Islamo-Christianity or Buddho-Chrisitanity. At least Islam and Buddhism have a lot of nice things to say about Jesus.
Is an honest insult worse than a poisoned compliment? The crux of the matter is the divinity of Christ and what He did for us, denying it is blasphemy. The Talmudists are more honest and more conistent than others. They don't hide their blasphemy behind nice words. In this regard, muslims and buddhists are more "jewish" than the talmudists.
 

Trewolla

 
Banned
Protestant
Vox Day is filled with hate and wishes death on an entire generation of his fellow Americans. His "Arktoons" nonsense is often filled with images of highly sexual women clad in revealing attire. Yet, he frequently has posts which are intended to proclaim his Christian bona-fides.

I've been following his writings since he was a young man on World Net Daily.

But he has lost it.

I'm not sure what he is these days, But he repeatedly calls for me to be murdered.

I think what is appropriate for me to think about him.
 

Ember

Hummingbird
Other Christian
Gold Member
Vox Day is filled with hate and wishes death on an entire generation of his fellow Americans.
Rhetorically. In a trolling, tongue-in-cheek manner. He doesn't actually call for boomers to be murdered. It's simply that he will be glad when that generation has gone. Don't take it so personally.

His "Arktoons" nonsense is often filled with images of highly sexual women clad in revealing attire.
That has been the historical trend for superhero comics. However, you will find plenty of other comics on Arktoons that are not like this.

Yet, he frequently has posts which are intended to proclaim his Christian bona-fides.
He is a Christian, yes.

I've been following his writings since he was a young man on World Net Daily.

But he has lost it.
He is different in older age, as we all are, but to say he has 'lost it' is highly debatable.


I'm not sure what he is these days, But he repeatedly calls for me to be murdered.
No, he doesn't.




Almost six weeks, lol. Must be a record.
 

Trewolla

 
Banned
Protestant
Rhetorically. In a trolling, tongue-in-cheek manner. He doesn't actually call for boomers to be murdered. It's simply that he will be glad when that generation has gone. Don't take it so personally.
He devotes a lot of time to it. You'll have to excuse me if I take calls for my murder "personally". Especially since he knows the real reason for America's problems isn't generational. The generations which are coming of age in America today are under the same influences that the Boomers were--and society is much worse today than it was during the Boomers.

If Vox Day is going to call one generation out, he needs to call all of them out.

But like I said, the problem isn't generational.

The problem is Satanic.
 
Top