Since I was a little boy, I was taught that freedom was a quality that made America great, allowing us to say what we want and live life how we want. The merits of freedom were never up for debate, especially since the dark days of American slavery made it clear that any kind of bondage, actual or figurative, is the incarnation of evil itself. Now that I’m older and have been able to witness human beings living with their freedom, I’ve come to the conclusion that complete freedom is not a natural human state, and giving it to individuals is more harmful than not.

I examined this problem by asking myself the following: what do human beings typically do once given absolute personal freedom? I first looked at the behavior of people in America, since culturally they have the most freedoms out of any other world citizen to pursue whatever lifestyle they want.

Most Americans, if you give them freedom and a life without restrictions, will almost certainly dive head-first into a life of absolute degeneracy and vice. They will pursue fleeting pleasures of the body, including alcohol use, drug abuse, and casual sex. They will make colossal mistakes with their education that put them into debt for life. They will seek out fame, attention, and validation instead of developing genuine skill or competency. They will permanently disfigure their bodies with tattoos and ear gauges. They will experiment with homosexuality or an artificially invented gender identity. They will overindulge in food and mindless entertainment. They will not educate themselves unless there is a bag of money at the end of their efforts. They will lie, cheat, and rationalize the hurting of others. The more freedom you give to the average person, the more they will harm not only themselves but others whom they come across.

I don’t have to look farther than myself to see how damaging freedom can be. Left to my own devices without expert guidance, I picked the incorrect major in college, leading to ten years of wasted time in the field of microbiology. I pursued sexual vice for over a decade that was fun and exciting only for the moment, and which has left me with no more than a handful of meaningful human connections and memories that produce just as much lamentation as happiness. And I strained existing relations with my family and friends to nearly lose myself in third-world countries when I thought that I would “find myself” instead.

It’s worth stating that I do have at least an average amount of self control when compared to my American peers. I don’t abuse alcohol and drugs. I exercise regularly. I don’t overeat or indulge in much entertainment. I am strict when it comes to working and reading daily. Yet in spite of that, too much freedom has hurt me greatly.

Giving a human being freedom simply gives them the ability to choose one of many available and willing slave masters, but even worse than an actual slave who has chains clamped on his wrists, the modern human seeks out chains for both his mind and body. What happens if you give a woman freedom? She enslaves herself to her feelings. She enslaves herself to entertainment, attention from men, alcohol, food, crushing student loans that she can’t possibly pay back, material possessions, and money. What happens when you give a man freedom? He enslaves himself to sex, corporate products, video games, to his own mirror image.

The actions of an American today seem free on the surface, in the sense that a person is allowed to leave their apartment at any time to do whatever legal act they wish, but those actions are pre-destined to cater to the unquenchable desires of their preferred form of slavery. They are driven every day by what they have voluntarily enslaved themselves to.

Not everyone responds to having freedom in the same way. One man will use his freedom to help his family, his tribe, and even society. He will use his time wisely to develop his mind, to study, and even to improve the world by chipping at his corrupt state. Another man, however, if you give him freedom, will not act in the same way if he possesses no innate defense to resist bodily pleasures, marketing messages, and cheap foodstuffs. He ends up serving others and harming himself or those close to him.

Some of you reading right now would be better off being required to follow established rules, traditional or heuristic, when it comes to how you live so that you reach your potential and keep yourself out from harms way, at least until you are able to build the high wall defenses in your mind to being enslaved. I would have personally benefited from such rules, or at least a hands-on mentorship, as recently as my late twenties. While humans must make mistakes to learn, build confidence, and find their own path, it is needless to let people travel so far in the wrong direction that they either don’t have the ability to return or are irreparably damaged by their grotesque experimentation.

I’m currently living in a country that has changed greatly over the past twenty years from the days of communist repression when freedoms were limited to now nearly unlimited personal freedom for people to look, act, live, and behave in any way they want. I can see firsthand how this freedom has merely transformed citizens from being enslaved to the government to being enslaved to alcohol, vulgar sexual vices, Hollywood-style entertainment, and corporations selling them shiny products, all while enabling them to adopt lifestyles that will cause long-term harm to themselves and to their society.

Most humans are not capable of wisely using their freedom, and so they must be restrained and managed by rules or by those who know what’s best for that individual more than the individual himself. In the past this restraint took place with those who had a sincere investment in the person’s well-belling, such as the family, the tribe, the village, and the local church, but these restraints are long gone, released in the cultural chaos of the post-Enlightenment world. With a general trend of increasing personal freedom around the planet, the only logical result is a steadfast mental and behavioral decline of humanity. Unless people are limited in the personal decisions they’re able to make, they will continue to hurt themselves and others.

Read Next: How To Reverse America’s Cultural Decline


  1. Earnward May 13, 2015 at 9:16 am

    A way to very Easy with rooshv < my classmate's step-aunt makes $72 hourly on the laptop . She has been fired for 7 months but last month her payment was $17104 just working on the laptop for a few hours..

    pop over here SEE MORE DETAIL

  2. harmanjit May 13, 2015 at 9:17 am

    Without a foundation of discrimination and discipline, freedom is just license: to debase oneself in one dopamine rush after another.

    The problem is real. But now that superego (traditions, family authority, headship, rules and protocols) has been dismantled, there is a vacuum of morality and virtue. In my opinion, there is little hope.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 11:51 am

      Family was the bedrock of society and was strongly linked to property ownership, hence why the bankers promoted the destruction of the family – to destroy and impoverish society.

      Western men can never rebel against a transnational industry that owns them through their food supply etc(most of our food comes from foreign sources and any collapse in the supply chain for whatever cause would starve the society, and they would do whatever they are told). Now such western corporations have done the same to India and China, as well as the Arab world having their leadership destroyed, in time, we will all be fucked.

      Now that the world is stitched up, the only thing left to do is to impoverish and destroy what remains of the white race (as they still have too much compared to other nations) and enslave the rest.

      Freedom is NEVER free. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

      1. Shone May 14, 2015 at 12:35 am

        Individual freedom is single most important thing that human civilization has achieved , Some will only understand value of it once they lose it.

        Freedom given to the “educated” (in broad sense) man is not and cannot be the problem. For that man freedom is never absolute because educated man is also morally developed man.

        Compare having too much of freedom causing eventually wrong personal choices with the destiny and almost absolute non-existence of choices of gay man in Saudi Arabia or the destiny of the man that considered himself lucky for getting one way ticket to well known tropical destination known as Siberia because of one wrong word he may or not have said .
        Or indian guy forced to arranged marriage by his “wise family” and existing cultural norms /rules .

        And plenty of other cases .

        The solution (may be too late to have one) cannot be limiting individual freedom of all in order to address those who are not able to ‘handle it’ .

        Theoretically the solution can be Niche Übermensch but there is no system in sight that can produce that kind of man in any number that can matter.

        Certainly not Democracy and Capitalism as we know it.

      2. John L May 14, 2015 at 10:41 am

        Hahahahha… always comes down to the Jews, right?

        The only people that hate jews are low class white men who missed the prosperity boat and are looking for a scapegoat.

      3. Donington May 14, 2015 at 10:45 am

        It’s very Easy with rooshv < my neighbor's mom makes $64 hourly on the computer . She has been without work for 6 months but last month her check was $14236 just working on the computer for a few hours.

        learn the facts here now SEE MORE DETAIL

      4. seth datta May 15, 2015 at 11:24 am

        I’m not white, jew.
        I’m not low-class either.
        Your propaganda is wearing thin.

      5. UnionDues May 16, 2015 at 10:43 am

        It’s simple to work with rooshv < my neighbor's mom makes $64 hourly on the computer . She has been without work for 6 months but last month her check was $14236 just working on the computer for a few hours.

        learn the facts here now SEE COMPLETE INFO

      6. seth datta May 15, 2015 at 11:34 am

        The only jew is you, troll.

        You guys aren’t that smart at all, are you.
        You’re going to die soon, so repent to God.

      7. jared thompson May 15, 2015 at 11:44 am

        The only jew is you, troll.

        You admitted it as he didn’t mention it.
        You guys aren’t that smart at all, are you?
        You’re going to die soon, so repent to God.

      8. John L May 15, 2015 at 1:14 pm

        Sorry. Not a jew. Just dont like losers like you

      9. Mr. Platinumberg June 3, 2015 at 10:53 pm

        He said bankers. You’re the one who went all JQ.

    2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 1:41 pm

      The alternate hypothesis to the superego on your blog is that some God entity is a connection to human conscience. The westernised concept of superego is one which denies God any place in human moral decision making. The people who came up with such a model did this on purpose.

    3. Lord Magnificent May 14, 2015 at 2:14 am

      This article is easily one of the most insightful and meaningful I’ve ever read. Absolute freedom corrupts absolutely. Without stigma and strong social mores, humans will overindulge in debased entertainment. Without proper discipline in place humans will be inclined to pursue primal urges. Complete freedom me might sound wonderful in theory but it is ruinous in the long run.

      1. J Peters May 20, 2015 at 12:58 am

        Loyalty to family, tribe, religion, and nation all helped to mitigate the problem of excessive freedoms, as did the dog eat dog world of bygone eras where people who acted like total dip-sh-ts starved unless they subordinated their will to some authority system like a religion in exchange for food.

  3. YosarriansRight May 13, 2015 at 9:19 am

    Fantastic! Just fantastic!

    Most people, left to their own whims, will self destruct. The seeds of destruction sowed starting in the 60s have turned into the destructive growth called “society” that we see today.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 11:40 am

      Unfortunately what you said is true, but try saying that to the average western female. They will claim that the idea that they should have babies to continue the society/race is ‘rapey’. Sooooooo, I guess that the white race in particular decided not to exist any more as they still engage in bankers’ wars (WW1 and WW2) where white people celebrate killing each other en masse for lies they are sold and the white women want to abort their white men’s babies and extort their white men to the hilt.

      So, when the ‘fall’ kicks off full steam and they are surrounded by the hordes, will they then regret not having enough babies? Or will they blame the men as usual and sacrifice the males so the women can escape?

      Ever seen the film ‘A Boy and His Dog’? Because that’s what western women want for us with their pussy power.

      1. YosarriansRight May 13, 2015 at 3:49 pm

        Thanks for your comments. I have not seen that movie; I’ll look for it.

      2. theakinet May 13, 2015 at 5:01 pm

        multiple copies on youtube. i just saw it last night after multiple guys recommended it on the “mad max” piece at rok.

        related. a major flaw of “the walking dead,” and other post-apoctolypic stories is a lack of rapes. i had this thought while reading about post-wwii occupied germany.

        mass individual freedom = anarchy.

      3. YosarriansRight May 13, 2015 at 6:00 pm

        Thank you for the info; I’ll watch it.

        Good comparison with WW2.

  4. Zuikurkler Yamizangthang May 13, 2015 at 9:37 am

    Most humans have a herd mentality and do not think for themselves. Those are the weak humans. The strong humans do think for themselves and do not allow temptations to get the best of them. America claims to be free country in which it is to a degree. Compared to other countries, America isn’t any different and in fact America has more strict laws compared to many foreign countries. I never seen so many power tripping gung ho militarized police anywhere except America.

    Women are like children in many ways. When you do not discipline children, they will get rude and throw fits and try to scream and kick if things don’t go their way. That is when the adults step in and draw the boundary for the kid. Same with women. If society and/or her man does not draw the boundary for her, she will act whatever she feels. Since women are the biggest herd sheeples, they need shaming … it could be in form of (i.e. fat shaming, tattoo shaming, curse shaming)… whatever it needs to be done to put them back in their place so that they can act feminine and behave correctly. Nothing is more repulsive than seeing a woman walking down the streets with arrogance and stern look on her face and curses like a sailor.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:11 pm

      Even the strong humans are prone to error – those who truly think must be 1 in 1000, and most people are more interested in behaving selfishly than to trying to participate in a society of good and listening to such an individual.

    2. Loki May 15, 2015 at 8:52 am

      Welcome to Nietzesches Philosophy.

      1. J Peters May 20, 2015 at 1:01 am

        Indeed. Screw natural selection. It’s time for humanity to start taking direct control of our genome, both by editing out the bad parts and writing in improvements.

  5. Tlu May 13, 2015 at 9:42 am

    I agree that there should be limits to personal freedom. But not in the form of laws. In the past there was a difference between a law and a moral obligation. Together they were successfully used to keep the people free and moving forward.

    What happened in the past? America was free, and yet it didn’t start to turn to what we see today until around the 60s. Cultural Marxism has royally fucked this country up to the point that I doubt we’ll fully recover. But was it freedom or just idiots? No system is perfect. I love America, but even it can and will fall.

    I wouldn’t say freedom alone has killed us. I’d say freedom without some kind of moral code (Christianity preferably) tends to crash and burn rather quickly.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:13 pm

      Unfortunately, the limits of personal freedom occur when the freedom no longer exists and the people are enslaved/killed. ie when excessive freedom meets reality. Pretty much like the situation we have evolving since 9/11, the banking crisis, and extending for another ten to twenty years.

    2. Eduardo the Magnificent May 13, 2015 at 3:54 pm

      I agree that there should be limits to personal freedom. But not in the form of laws.

      There are laws that govern freedom: natural laws. That some men destroy themselves is the way it’s supposed to work. The cream rises to the top, as it should. Modern society is the only one that protects the weak, and we go even further than that; we put the protection of the weak over the incentive to be strong. I say, let them self-destruct.

      1. RealAlexTurner2020 May 15, 2015 at 1:26 am

        Pat Buchanan said this about homosexuals and AIDS in the 1980s. He was right.

      2. intrigant May 15, 2015 at 12:36 pm

        Roosh should read up on: r vs K

      3. J Peters May 20, 2015 at 1:05 am

        Yeah, radical liberalism is a self limiting problem, but a horribly painful one to be along for the ride on, one that will probably end in 1) the end of the white race, 2) the attempted enslavement of whatever homogenous non-Jewish mixed race majority population is left, 3) the destruction of the jewish overlords by the numerically superior but technologically inferior hordes, along with the death of most of the hordes themselves, 4) a descent from technological economies back to agrarian or even worse hungter-gather societies, and 5) a new era of prehistory, where dissimilarly situated populations once again divergently evolve and the cycle begins anew.

    3. worldcitizenusa May 17, 2015 at 7:31 am

      We have had a moral code for over 50 years: Greed is Good.

      Whatever failures, perversions, corruption, or mental distortion in every society has been created from the dark seed of Greed is Good.

    4. TS Adams June 22, 2015 at 3:19 pm

      Tlu The problem lies at the feet of the Christian pulpit (I am a Christian) in its failure to represent God in His moral laws. They traded their manhood for the jingle of coins and it castrated them; making them go-along-to get-along guys. Instead of remaining God’s man they became man’s man. They abandoned God’s word and wrapped themselves in a social gospel that in the end rots the soul and turns good sense into dementia.

      God is lifting His hand of protection from the US and will soon abandon us altogether. Unless we turn back to Him. His message to us is: If we fight for our freedom we will die or be enslaved; if we fight for His glory, righteousness and justice we will have our freedom and prosper.

      1. Tlu June 22, 2015 at 4:43 pm

        I don’t know if it’s more scary or reassuring when I read the Bible and find that most of its teachings and warnings can and do still apply today. “Be in the world, not of the world.”

        I find it to be quite sad when I see churches lead by women and gays saying silly things like “God is a woman” and “Jesus was pro-gay marriage.” They are parasites. But thankfully this kind of insanity is not sustainable. The false Christians with their false gods of women and the Earth will fall and Christians will be there to pick up the pieces and rebuild our church.

        God may not protect the US from the coming storm, but He will not abandon His faithful. Stay strong, brother.

  6. Kim Priestap May 13, 2015 at 10:09 am

    Milton Friedman expresses my thoughts on this post perfectly: Just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us. I don’t even trust you to do that.

    1. Reason And Believing May 13, 2015 at 10:34 am

      Milton told Phil Donahue that on his talk show.

    2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:10 pm

      People believe in an emergence of a golden era in future, where God ruies on earth. The only problem is, that most people in this era have to die and are judged worthy only to enter hell in order for that to become true.

      Governments of man are always prone to subversion by evil members of the human race who will always encourage self-destructive behaviours within the population to deprive them of their labours, before destroying them. This has been human history.

    3. J Peters May 20, 2015 at 1:25 am

      Society should be structured organically, where:

      1 – No government has any power that’s not explicitly delegated to it by some person or group of people who themselves morally and rightfully possessed that power.

      2 – Society organizes itself with varying levels of structure, starting with the individual, then the household, then the neighborhood, then the community (i.e city,) then the county, state/province, nation, region, global.

      3 – Authority must be explicitly and transparently delegated up the organizational tree starting from the living human individual, and may come from no other source.

      4 – No authority may be delegated upward in the organizational structure unless it cannot be effectively utilized at or below the level it’s at (and once it reached a level that can enforce that authority it cannot rightfully be delegated any higher even if everyone wants it.)

      5 – No authority may be delegated so far up the organizational structure that it cannot be effectively monitored by the organizational levels below it.

      6 – No organization level shall have any right to such a thing as “territorial integrity” independent of the authority of those within it. No territorial integrity claims may be based on the rights of those who aren’t a part of the territory (residents of or landowners within.)

      7 – Taxation may only occur at the commons, either by common services, common resources, common environment, or common borders. The proceeds of a human’s labor belong 100% to them until they choose otherwise or choose to interact with the commons in such a way that they choose to spend some of it.

      8 – Integrated dissimilar populations must always have a peaceful and equitable manner by which to separate from one another if either side so chooses, and may do so by either side forming a majority within any political subdivision, effecting a partition of that subdivision, and enforcing equitable separation through the use of fairly administered imminent domain (in a manner which provides the displaced person with FULL market value of all relinquished property as well as moving costs and equivalent stated in some equivalent political subdivision.) Full equal protection shall be extended to both sides except to the extent necessary to effectuate the division (and even that would be a compensated deprivation.)

      This would solve so much of world’s problems. It would allow Crimea to leave Ukraine and become part of Russia, or Ukraine to split in half, or the Southern half of California to go back to Mexico… It would allow fathers to once again become heads of their households (and to vote for all voting members of that household) with the consent of their family members (or, in unusual households would allow the wife to be elected the head of the household, or have no head of household and have it be a pure democracy, whatever.) It’s pretty much a libertarian’s wet dream and it should be the way things are done.

    4. Mr. Platinumberg June 3, 2015 at 10:57 pm

      Freedom isn’t bad. Shame and societal disapproval used to be powerful corrective forces in our society, without involving force or the state. Freedom combined with a pervasive dildo narrative is a recipe for disaster though.

  7. Barwin May 13, 2015 at 10:13 am

    Hm, it’s true. I live in Canada and when it comes to ethics, morals, values, principles, the people here are the worst in the world. In Europe or Asia, there is (still, for now) a cultural desire to keep people in check (outright slutty behavior gets shamed by the culture, being fat gets shamed, even being stupid gets shamed, etc.), and in the U.S., many people – including younger women – are still members of religious groups and as such are somewhat held in check by their church. In Canada, however, there is culture nor religion to keep people in check, and what you get are the sluttiest, most hypergamous women I’ve come across in all my travels around the world. Here, women are not forced into following moral code, principles, values or ethics. They are encouraged to follow only the most primordial of their base desires: whatever turns on their clitoris. Even Canadian-born men have zero values at this point: I was at a party about a month ago where men were high-fiving another man for having had sex with a married woman. They say freedom isn’t free. I suppose freedom comes at a price that is paid in values.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 11:45 am

      I knew several slutty Canadian girls at med school. Part of our time was spent in the Carribean and for sure some of the girls were looking for some local cock. The horrific thing is after these high notch counts, some of the med school guys were still interested in dating and wifing these women. I mean for one of the girls who easily had a 30-50+ notch count:
      (1) the guy had an american passport which made it easier for her(as a Canadian) to get a job in the US as a doctor if she wanted
      (2) the guy had to do drugs
      (3) the guy was tall and handsome
      (4) she had had lots of Carribean island cock/foreign cock elsewhere and he was supposed to forget about it
      (5) she was only a ‘6’
      (6) the guy had to be RICH

      That’s what a guy needs to be to oftentimes keep a ‘6’ these days. Western women’s entitlement in Northern America is surely through the roof. It is catching up elsewhere though..

      1. Zuikurkler Yamizangthang May 13, 2015 at 12:43 pm

        pretty appalling to see that an average girl who is “6” has a laundry list of finding Mr. Perfect. This is why I gave up on North American women.

      2. ChimpGod May 14, 2015 at 5:17 pm

        Fucking true man.. 100 percent.. in the states you always see guys marrying way below them.. These bitches expectations are through the roof even though they have nothing to offer but a wet hole. The thirst is real in the West.. it’s spreading like a disease overseas also though. The only thing you can do is not give into it. Look out for numero uno, and try to enjoy your life and freedom. Freedom isn’t truly appreciated until it is gone.

    2. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 12:00 pm

      ” In Europe or Asia, there is (still, for now) a cultural desire to keep people in check (outright slutty behavior gets shamed by the culture, being fat gets shamed, even being stupid gets shamed, etc.), ”

      You haven’t been to the European countries I have been. Even traditional ones are stock full of people who bathe in constant vice. As for Asia, it’s the place where players go to rack up 100+ notches a year.

      1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:23 pm

        I think what you describe is sadly a recent trend as the world gets modernised/westernized into a cultureless mass. I don’t think there is anywhere to run from such a decline as in the next few years, the world will be more similar in ideology wherever you go. I guess the best thing one can do is find a place to hunker down and deal with the world going to ratshit. Still, I believe that having a traditional community to fall back on is the way to go, which promotes strength over generations, as opposed to selfish atomised individuality(ie = modern society), where anything and everything, even your group and personal identity, will be stripped from you by a faceless system based on economics(banking) and wickedness, of both the bankers and their unwitting slaves, the masses.

      2. Vegard Johansen May 13, 2015 at 3:33 pm

        I think you have to distinguish more though.
        I just returned from living 3 months in Spain (Alicante), and returning to my native Norway I must say I was surprised about just how much better Spain appears on most factors regarding cultural decline.
        Women dress less slutty, way less use of smartphones, men behave more masculine etc. I know its anecdotal, but still.

  8. Bix May 13, 2015 at 10:14 am

    Spoken like someone who has never known what it’s like to live without freedom. Who decides the rules of bondage? What if it’s the social justice warriors?

    1. Reason And Believing May 13, 2015 at 11:28 am

      He’s saying unlimited freedoms to do whatever you like is in fact harmful to the individual and society
      He specifically uses this in the context of post Enlightenment , the most deadly age in human history , where more people were killed by unrestrained freedoms and subjectivity than the previous 2000 years combined.

      1. Bix May 13, 2015 at 12:06 pm

        Correlation is not causation. But I’m sure Kim Jung Un would agree with you that less free societies result in less killing.

    2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:08 pm

      SJW = bankster run
      police = bankster run
      healthcare = bankster run
      food production = bankster run
      military = bankster run

      Whoever owns and produces the fiat cash is king these days. The people are lulled into complacency thinking they are free, when their world is but a lie, a virtual reality of sorts in more ways than they can fathom.

      1. Eduardo the Magnificent May 13, 2015 at 3:57 pm

        “Give me control of a nation’s currency and I care not who makes the laws” – Baron Rothschild

  9. disqus_vqdlMYBRvK May 13, 2015 at 10:24 am

    Here’s a thought, at it’s very core, culture is defined as (in the anthropological sense that is)

    “the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted from one generation to another.”

    For example, one cultural value that fits this would be: honor thy neighbor as in, respect your neighbor.

    Another way of looking at this is that in essence, when a society lives WITHOUT rules and permits everything, it effectively removes culture from the equation and allows the state and the media complex to dispense its own culture, whose purpose is (to no surprise) to fragment individuals, to make them conspicuous consumers, and to profit from their self destruction, self mutilation and death.

    The purpose of a healthy culture is to foster healthy people, we are entering an age without culture, a VERY dangerous proposition.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:06 pm

      Quality point: ‘we are entering an age without culture, a VERY dangerous proposition.’

      This makes a mass of people easily manipulatable to control, and to be used towards an evil end. I would argue that 95-99% of people in the west are evil, even just by virtue of paying taxes without protest, when those taxes are used for foreign wars and to promote society-ending behaviours, such as welfare state engineering and mass immigration. The person is essentially enabling these evils. I am giving one example, but most people usually have 5-15 such behaviours. Perhaps there is a reason why, for example in the Bible, God wiped out the mass of humanity, for they had become mindless/unwitting slaves of evil, like the western nations are today, like Sodom and Gomorrah.

  10. Phil May 13, 2015 at 10:29 am

    Freedom is not the problem but freedom withoout consequences in our welfare-state.

    Btw. alcohol is not a new problem in the former sowjet countries.

  11. Krum May 13, 2015 at 10:49 am

    Great article, although the problem is wrongly defined.

    Freedom is not the problem, the problem is that true freedom must coexist with morality and truth. Truth is absolute, even if we cannot comprehend it at times. This is the opposite of the concept of moral relativism, which is the belief that there is no real truth, and each person can just believe what he or she wants. However, truth is not relative and it is not up for debate. Your truth is not different from my truth. It is just that some people understand more truth than others.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:02 pm

      Top comment.

      I would argue that western society has abandoned God and also their way of worshipping him, which is Christianity. Most so-called Christians these days are fake ones, either reactionary Bible-bashers, or feminist new-age Christians, which is more akin to Luciferianism than actually being what Christianity was originally about.

      You cannot even think about rebuilding the west without acknowledging this issue first.

    2. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 12:03 pm

      The average human will not be able to seek and maintain both morality or truth in the face of modern temptations, and I doubt that they even want either.

      1. Krum May 13, 2015 at 12:20 pm

        Roosh, read this article (originally linked by doktorjeep) about the Law during the so called Dark Ages.

        The Law back then was customary (as opposed to statutory as today) and it had to be both OLD and GOOD.

        For us law needs only one attribute in order to give it validity; it must, directly or indirectly, be sanctioned by the State. But in the Middle Ages, different attributes altogether were essential; mediaeval law must be “old” law and must be “good” law….If law were not old and good law, it was not law at all, even though it were formally enacted by the State.

        I’d love to hear your thoughts and why not even sum them up in a separate article. I think there’s a lot to be learned from it.

      2. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 12:50 pm

        Yes I read that recently. I do agree that decentralization is ideal, as I hinted at here:

        But the problem is what institutions will provide people the precepts and cultural rules for living? Law alone is not enough.

      3. Krum May 13, 2015 at 1:04 pm

        We simply need a set of commandments taught at home, such as:

        4. DO NOT LIE.
        5. CARE FOR EVERYTHING. In other words, DO NOT WASTE – ANYTHING.

      4. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 1:13 pm

        1. Love God
        2. Love your fellow man as you would yourself

      5. Jeb May 13, 2015 at 8:24 pm

        No, it’s not that simple.

        There has to be something “higher” to satisfy humans.


        “If God did not exist, it would be neccessary to invent him.” – Voltaire.

        While your rules are commendable, they are not “it.”

        Some anthropologists, for example, suggest the only reason humans display sexual morality is because of fear of the reprocussions during the after-life.

        The Muslims even got around this, by offering 72 virgins in the after-life for sacrificing your life in the here and now.

        There’s far more to this than a set of neat rules the boys dormitory would adhere to.

        We’re talking about the fundamentals of life, and why one should “carry on” despite it.

      6. theakinet May 13, 2015 at 7:09 pm

        “Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the Law and the Prophets.”
        -Matthew 7:12

        “A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
        – West Point Honor Code

      7. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:41 pm

        I’d like to think what you said is true because most people (even the elderly) have their thinking impaired by manipulations such as TV brainwashing etc…

        But what you said is 100% true. The bankers and their brethren have already won, and remade most of the human race (at least in the west) into degenerates. So the general public are mindless degenerates who are ignorant of this (they don’t know or understand) and are not necessarily evil – so their wickedness is due to poorly learned social behaviours.

        Still, you gotta pay the price when a society becomes that way and that price is usually in blood.

  12. Peejers May 13, 2015 at 10:53 am

    Don’t worry, Roosh. There are plenty of people who think they know what’s best for you and would love a chance at limiting your freedom as they see fit.

    The problem is not freedom. It’s the State.

    Have 4 kids out of wedlock? Here’s some welfare and some Section 8. Want to have tons of unprotected sex with lots of guys? We’ll force your employer to pay for your birth control. Don’t want to learn any employable skills? We’ll raise the minimum wage. And on and on.

    I work until mid April to pay my tax bill and my health insurance tripled for the sake of allowing someone else to pay less. If you think that’s freedom, well, you and I have a different definition of the word.

    1. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 12:04 pm

      I agree in that the state should not, through hard edict of law, try to legislate morality, but they should definitely not enable it (in the form of Title IX, Violence Against Women Act, homosexual marriage, etc.)

      1. OrthodoxChristian May 13, 2015 at 9:02 pm

        “I agree in that the state should not, through hard edict or law, try to
        legislate morality, but they should definitely not enable it (in the form of Title IX, Violence Against Women Act, homosexual marriage, etc.) ”

        There is no neutral on these issues. If the state isn’t supporting male primacy and suppressing sodomy, then it will be enforcing feminism and sodomy. The state is a weapon that must be pointed in some direction, at somebody.

    2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:37 pm

      Evil leaders and excessively brainwashed/subservient populations are the problem. Social divisions are also a problem as now that society is so fractured, even groups cannot agree amongst themselves as to the best means as to how to solve the current problems.

      There is only one solution – society has to collapse. And whether by design or happenstance, it WILL happen. It is only a question of when. I personally believe that western populations en masse can no longer defend their freedoms and that the gap of knowledge between them and the ‘rulers’ is so large, that whilst the rulers may get sent down eventually, they will not be hanged by the masses. The masses will get their economic system crashed and will be engineered to hunt each other(eg racial divides being promoted such as Ferguson) and also will starve.

      Do you trust your neighbours to make good decisions, especially in a crisis? Most people these days are not self-sufficient in any way and even rely on ‘leaders’ to guide their decision making process. We are fucked because the human race has allowed itself to become lazy slaves to entertainment and fads. In 5-15 years, the west is going to burn.

    3. ricksantos01 June 16, 2017 at 8:05 pm

      COMPLETELY AGREE – End Welfare and Welfare queens and their 15 Shitlets will suddenly end! Welfare buys votes for Democrats!

  13. John May 13, 2015 at 10:56 am

    I believe the problem you are referring to is not freedom, per se, but the consequences of there being very few consequences in our lives. We are free of many struggles of the past, for sure.

    Techonology, medicine, etc. have just made life very easy. Survival is hardly on the line for most modern developed societies. Life has become frivolous. Giving people more freedom might actually be a cure since the dependence created by the socialist nanny states is part of the problem. Plus, we’ve been on a free ride of debt and money printing which will eventually run dry and bring us closer to reality.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:00 pm

      Even though Fight Club is social programming, it is so true that “our war is a spiritual war, our great depression is our lives’.

  14. Ivan Herrera May 13, 2015 at 10:56 am

    The increase in freedom allowed for the decrease in parenting. This is when things really go downhill, especially when seemingly well to do fathers let their daughters tattoo their lower backs and work in bars. They allow their sons to get wrapped up in gay culture because they failed to inculcate them with any identity. This “do whatever” culture is really destructive. This is why nations with stronger identity will conquer us.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 11:59 am

      I think even alpha fathers have a problem, in that a degenerate society is always stronger than one man and his principles. Arguably, alpha fathers do not exist these days and the game is rigged, so the social engineers always win.

      If society ever collapses, which it surely will, it will now be because we have evil leaders who now rule over an atomised mass of selfish and wicked individuals who are programmed to do society-destructing behaviours without realising it and without being able to change.

    2. GRock May 14, 2015 at 1:58 am

      What happens when there’s a decrease in parenting? The “village” raises the kids more so than the parents. And whose the “village” run by? Mostly feminist construct. A marble of freedom run a muck.

      A primary role of the father was wisdom, he had all the answers and all the guidance. With women initiating 70+% of divorces, and all the wisdom of dad being replaced by answers from a Google Search, and the guidance of dad being stripped away legally by women from men with the state enforcing it, the failure is inevitable. It’s the perfect storm.

  15. Deebos May 13, 2015 at 11:09 am

    Freedom is something that one understands only if they played a role in earning it for themselves. Most Americans are too far from the earning it part other than on an individual scale by men who realize what a bad deal American women are and react accordingly. What you witness in Poland is that freedom has brought degeneracy because your target group played no role in securing Poland’s freedom and thus they have no skin in the game. However, freedom is always superior to lack of freedom, it is our freedom that ultimately led us to the decision to unplug from our personal Matrix.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 11:56 am

      The excess of freedom will be short-lived for western nations, as there are always consequences which are now manifesting in terms of the economy and demographics, as locals have no children, they cede their power to foreigners. The initial problem was the excesses and poor choices of past generations, especially those born pre-1990. Now we will be left with a future of poverty and wars.

      Whatever you surmise to be the cause, there is a big culling coming soon.

    2. worldcitizenusa May 17, 2015 at 9:22 am

      The problem lies not with a failure of the Polish people to pick up their pitchforks. In fact, they participated en masse in marches, rallies, protests and nationwide strikes. They did the work. But the question to ask is, when the dust settled did they share equitably in the economic gains that followed.

  16. kurt9 May 13, 2015 at 11:15 am

    The problem with this mentality is summed up in the expression “Who will watch the watchmen?”.

    Murray Rothbard considered this issue and said something similar. If people are by nature inherently good, then any kind of system should work. However, if people are by nature inherently bad or merely incompetent, there is little sense in putting one person or group of persons in charge of all others.

    I would say this. If most people tend to degenerate into vice, it is irrelevant to those of us who seek to accomplish more. As long as the vice-seekers don’t get in the way of those who seek great accomplishment, the harm the vice-seekers create is very minimal and not a justified source of concern.

    1. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 11:53 am

      Even inherently “good” people will find it difficult to make personal choices for other people. It would be impossible to gather enough information about another individual’s capabilities and disposition to make their personal choices for them, especially in the sort of standardized way needed for large-scale social planning.

    2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 11:54 am

      People are intrinsically amoral and will follow whatever ideology is presented to them, as exhibited via the ‘Stanford Prison Experiment’ and several other studies. People need to learn that their actions can hurt others, that there are consequences that are bad in the long run and that will be punished. Strong rulers who desire good for the people can achieve this function, but the so-called rulers these days are nothing more than an international crime syndicate.

      Working for a certain country/group of people who are more than an outpost in the Middle East.

    3. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 12:07 pm

      “As long as the vice-seekers don’t get in the way of those who seek great accomplishment, the harm the vice-seekers create is very minimal and not a justified source of concern.”

      Not only are the vice seekers getting in the way, but they are deliberately through state and economic violence trying to impede upon more traditional ways of living. If a man today doesn’t tow the line at work or in school, he will be targeted.

      1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:26 pm

        Too true, I told a white guy in med school that white guys in the UK do have it harder in some ways and the next thing I know, the white (don’t know her religion) feminist doctor next to us tells HIM that he should be careful with what he says!

        To be honest, does it matter if you tow the line if you’re going to be executed slow-style anyways? I’m pretty sure most people are targetted these days BEFORE they are an issue, as evidenced by the massive NSA/GCHQ etc surveilance we have these days, better enabled by our smartphone-based society.

        Look up the website (run by ex-US military Edwin Deagle) and see the population forecast for the US by 2025.

      2. theakinet May 13, 2015 at 7:16 pm

        “Not only are the vice seekers getting in the way, but they are deliberately through state and economic violence trying to impede upon more traditional ways of living.”

        I recently heard a SJW say if a person wants a traditional lifestyle they should do what the Amish do, and drop out of mainstream society. The way things are going I wouldn’t be shocked if people actually started to “go Galt.”

      3. Jeb May 13, 2015 at 7:42 pm

        Lol! You haven’t gone Galt yet?

        Modern Marriage is a Fraud!

        Screw ’em. The first imperative of any living thing is survival, not reproduction (the second imperative).

  17. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 11:34 am

    Most people, men included, do not make good decisions. They are not future-orientated, only 30% of the people have the potential to consider the consequences of their actions.

    Case in point, consider the UK where for the last 20-30 years, many young single women have been paid by the state to have a baby. It was considered normal at the time. They would get knocked up at 16, and they would get a paycheck as their ‘job’ to look after the child. This led to a single-parent family with no paternal input and had a consequence on the child who was often dysfunctional and had less life chances as two parents were not investing in it. This snowballed into the child having multiple offspring, who all had a single parent and so on. It made for a weaker and more divided society less able to stand up to their cruel leaders, who have now destroyed the society. If the welfare checks stopped, much of the society would collapse, as people have become so dependent on support systems that may not be there for them in future, as the society has been bred (read:engineered) this way.

    Lastly, consider alexander solzhenitsyn, who warned of the consequences of a Godless society leading to Communism where 100 million died, including 66 million white Christians in Russia. The west abandoned the ideas that made it a strong and independent society and replaced that with destructive ideologies including feminism and wealth as a ‘social good’ to replace the community. Now we have no coherent community and when this banking scam goes tits up, people will easily turn on each other and will not survive, for they have lost the ability to behave as independent civilized people.

    1. TheresaJRobinson May 16, 2015 at 4:45 am

      ☛☛/☛☛☛☛$77 /hr on the [email protected]//



  18. Hector May 13, 2015 at 11:41 am

    Freedom is just another word for “nothing left to lose”.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:19 pm

      Don’t need to be free comrade, just don’t forget to pay your reparations to the IRS the:
      Then you can have all the freedom you want. That we give you.

  19. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 11:43 am

    While individuals often make shortsighted decisions for themselves, who is better equipped to make those choices? Should we trust the government to decide? The church? Our parents? The freedom to be an idiot lowers overall societal utility but seems like a lesser evil.

    The poor decisions of others also create a competitive advantage to those of us who make better choices. Success is very often relative. You’re only “smart” or “attractive” or “rich” or “athletic” in comparison to those around you. If everyone made perfect choices you would find it far more difficult to maintain your position at the top.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:17 pm

      The society in the west is run in such a fashion that those that rise to the top and comprise the vast majority of society are below mediocre. It must be that way in order for control to be maintained in what is rapidly becoming a communist society for the many, a la 1984, before it most likely collapses akin to the USSR of old. There is no competition for talented individuals, who are most likely persecuted and destroyed by the society. Superficial things like attrativeness are promoted, whilst important things such as control of the money supply are not meant to be meddled with by the masses(aka SLAVES ! )

      1. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 12:57 pm

        So there a vast conspiracy to suppress exceptional people? Or are the people who fail to rise to the top of even lower caliber than the “mediocre” ones who do?

        Talented, driven people aren’t being persecuted. In fact, they have access to higher rewards (at least in the form of creature comforts) than at any other time in history.

      2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 1:35 pm

        What you said is BullShit as I have seen personally who works in government and even the top doctors I work with are not as good as their more junior staff – if you think otherwise, you are a blinded moron or a shill.

      3. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 2:30 pm

        Your ad hominem attacks are badly misplaced. You don’t know me and, as a result, are making some pretty broad assumptions.

        Further, the fact that some unexceptional people (as defined by you) can achieve success does not mean that talented people are being persecuted and destroyed.

      4. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 4:30 pm

        Point taken, but I have seen 3 spectacular professors (all doctors) persecuted and 1 outstanding community leader who threatened the rule of the banking establishment destroyed in the UK, so just because you don’t see it does not mean it does not happen in the west.

      5. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 4:51 pm

        Those in power want to perpetuate their position. This does not mean there is a centralized conspiracy to suppress exceptional individuals, or that talent doesn’t increase the chances of rising to the top. The efforts of the existing elites to undermine challengers create some level of inefficiency but are not the only force at play.

  20. Andrea May 13, 2015 at 11:48 am

    Don’t forget that overt control over a man renders the same outcome. He will act out and seek freedom by enslaving himself to the same vices. Instead, a disciplined, loving and empathetic guidance is what our generation is desperately but subconsciously craving and without it we will continue to get away from the truth. But who can guide us?

    1. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 12:09 pm

      The best choice we have is the church.

      1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:14 pm

        People need to form their own Churches – the mainstream ones tend to promote too much garbage that is a cause of the societal problems, as the churches have chosen ‘worldliness’ over trying to live a good life, even though it is hard.

      2. Andrea May 13, 2015 at 12:35 pm

        I tried looking for answers and guidance in various churches and was met with superficial rhetoric. We need new churches, which are not driven by money and are invested in our spiritual health.

      3. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:43 pm

        I don’t go to Church. I just read the Bible and have done so after I had a near-death experience a while back. I prefer getting my own answers and look up stuff on the internet (though there is a lot of shit and manipulations out there too). Churches have become corrupted and I don’t need a pastor to tell me what I know is true. If you look online, you’ll probably find some online groups with similarly minded people, though I think the best place to look is to keep asking God directly yourself.

      4. Edward Easterling September 9, 2017 at 4:45 pm


      5. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 12:49 pm

        The church is the worst choice we have. It is premised on falsehoods and superstitions and doesn’t tolerate dissent.

      6. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 12:51 pm

        “It is premised on falsehoods and superstitions and doesn’t tolerate dissent.”

        Sounds like the modern left to me. I’ll take the church and their magic man in the sky.

      7. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 12:59 pm

        Assuming that the church does promote some values that we (especially you) consider beneficial and lacking in modern society, does that make up for its being premised on total and utter bullshit?

      8. Roosh_V May 13, 2015 at 1:38 pm

        Absolutely, if it replaces what we have in the USA right now (consumerism, hedonism, individualism, cosmopolitanism), especially since the scientific premise of our lives (Darwinism) is also bullshit. I’ll be tackling that in the future.

      9. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 2:16 pm

        I assume you are talking about some form of social Darwinism rather than just the origin theory. Regardless of its failings, science will always outperform the church in the long run.

        The answer to our society’s moral decline is not to revert to the church’s moral absolutism and anti-intellectualism. A Christian Iran is not the lesser evil.

      10. Jeb May 13, 2015 at 4:44 pm

        “Science will always outperform the church in the long run.”

        That’s a pretty grandiose statement that, although popular in our degenerate society, has absolutely zero basis in the facts science itself puts forth – which so many Atheists proclaim to believe in.

        The Truth of the matter is that Religion is UNIVERSAL to human cultures. As in, there has never been a society of any magnitude that has existed without a religion at is foundation.

        Atheists, so far, have not created ONE single civilization… and it’s not like we are the first people to have thought we were so brilliant we could abolish God and run things ourselves. (The story of Iccarus, anyone?)

        The fact is, whether religious morality is “real” or superstitious fiction doesn’t matter in a mechanical sense. What matters is that large populations are more or less on the same page in regard to their values. Think of it like deciding which side of the road to drive on… both the left and right sides are 100% equally valid, however, if everyone made up their own mind, there is no way our roads would work. We need a “moral value” that we all agree upon so that “the system” works.

        So far in all of history, the only thing that has been able to do this in a way that creates and maintains a civilization is a religion – whichever one it may be.

        And, since Christianity has created the largest, wealthiest and safest civilization the world has ever known, it would be safe to say that the majority of moral values the Christian religion puts forth are actually superior to the values of religions which have created far lesser societies on a scale of success.

        Science, so far, is batting a big fat ZERO in structuring a successful civilization, despite all the knashing of Atheist teeth.

        Even when using the scientific measure of “survival of the fittest,” Christianity far outperforms science, since Christian has actually survived and flourished, while Atheism and moral relativism based on synthetic morality never has – not once – and that’s a scientific fact!

      11. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 5:31 pm

        Societies do need to agree to a moral code but religion’s historical role in defining and enforcing morality doesn’t mean that it is the best mechanism for modern times. Religion is effective because it addresses a human psychological need, but premising morality on ancient superstition ultimately undermines the legitimacy of that morality. “Thou shall not kill” is an almost universal moral principal, but the reason shouldn’t be to avoid going to the fake hell imagined by a bunch of bronze age shamans.

        As for our wealthy and safe civilization, it created by a combination of colonization and technology. Christianity just happened to be the religion of the people with the most guns.

      12. Jeb May 13, 2015 at 5:41 pm

        And… how are you going to create these things with science, when all of history has shown such a path to be false.

        Ignoring that religion is UNIVERSAL to civilization, while claiming science is the answer, is kinda like saying we just simply should all ride our candy crapping unicorns around the countryside to save to the environment.

        It sounds nice, but doesn’t work and never has.

      13. Untergang07 May 15, 2015 at 2:33 pm

        You forgot to read when Christian values were the only thing that galvanized different European peoples to defend their common homeland against the Muslims, thus preserving the West or how the reason-based Christian God enable the flourishing of science in the West.

      14. Marshallaw May 13, 2015 at 6:12 pm

        “Moral absolutism and anti-intellectualism” can be thrown at fundamentalist atheists just as well as fundamentalist Christians. I am neither btw…..

      15. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 8:12 pm

        I don’t think they are equally applicable in this context. @Roosh_V
        argued that the church is the best source of morality to counter our society’s degradation. The church’s morality ostensibly emanates from the commandments of an infallible supreme being, and this being’s rules are non-negotiable. A fundamentalist atheist might be stubborn and insufferable but should theoretically base his conclusions on analysis rather than “faith”.

      16. Marshallaw May 14, 2015 at 11:25 am

        He “should” but how many actually do? In my experience many atheists just regurgitate the latest diatribe from whatever fashionable article or book on the best seller list.

      17. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:55 pm

        I think i had read on several reputable Christian sites that the Churches had become under some 501c (?) law that makes them beholden to corporate interests and the stock market. So it is no wonder that they are not representing people and are letting things slide. They have already been subverted from within by monied interests and the banksters who run this society, as you cannot monopolise the society without teraing out the backbone of the west, which was paying homage to God through genuine Christian thought – the Christianity we are ‘provided’ with these days is a cheap substitute/counterfeit/deceptive lie. Just like our money supply and society.

      18. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 1:07 pm

        When has the church ever not been beholden to its own financial interest? There might occasionally be factions that are less financially motivated (e.g. Reformation-era Protestants, certain congregations or sects) but let’s not pretend the institution was suddenly co-opted by “banksters”. The church has been a giant money and power grab for a thousand years!

      19. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 4:27 pm

        The true church are believers who go on seeking God and using the bible, not some building or community group.

      20. Jeb May 13, 2015 at 7:25 pm

        As opposed to, say, the scientific rule of academia, which enslaves millions upon millions a year with unneccessary debt to hear its “truth”, which does not provide for an actual living and which ostracizes dissenters in the same way as the church excommunicated its heretics?

        When have INTELLECTUALS not been beholden to their own best interests, financial or otherwise?

        The greatest scientist to have ever lived was a Christian, you know. Isaac Newton (also, never married), was a devout Christian, and sought to understand the way “God made the world.” Galileo was also sponsored by the church in his early scientific career… despite all the talk about his oppression. (He became a political prisoner, not a religious one – as were most others persecuted by the church WHEN IT ACTED AS THE STATE!).

        Since the advent of the institution of “the university” in the 1600’s, all intellectuals have flocked to its campus, but before that, you know, if you were an “intellectual,” you actually had to join the priesthood or a monastery – that’s where all the “smart people” went before we had universities.

        So… if we were to define which group of people, throughout history, have sought to “oppress” other people with their ideas… it is safer to say “intellectuals” than “religion,” since religion does not oppress people in our society anymore, yet, intellectuals still seek out witch-hunts exactly as they did 400 years ago… just look at the Fake Duke Lacrosse Rape Trial – it’s not much different than Salem. All were intellectuals… and all were wrong.

        The Bible, btw, has steadfastly held True throughout the ages, despite the adverse affects of “intellectuals” from both the seminary and the university.

        It’s still as true today as it was a thousand years ago. Kind of like how a country’s constitution is supposed to work… now, why on earth do we have constitutions, anyway?

      21. Doctor Doctor May 13, 2015 at 8:13 pm

        Institutional academia has its own profound issues but, if anything, they impede the progress of actual science and knowledge.

      22. Jeb May 13, 2015 at 8:55 pm

        Yes, so why rely on them? Throughout the ages, they have shown anything BUT wisdom!

        But then, of course, comes the question, “Who SHOULD we rely upon?”

        An obvious reply would be, “Model yourself on those who HAVE been successul!”

      23. Ximo Bravo May 13, 2015 at 1:34 pm

        Roosh, I think you’d enjoy reading Donoso Cortés.

      24. spicynujac May 15, 2015 at 6:17 pm

        In the past, yes, but with the innovations of science today that can disprove many “magic man in the sky” theories I think religion will only lose its relevance as time goes on.

        An option of compromise would be philosophy/religions like Buddhism that don’t require a belief in the supernatural, but then it lacks the fear of eternal damnation that is such a powerful motivator. Basically, I believe in the Noble Lie idea of Plato, but I do not see religion as a sustainable way to sustain this lie going forward.

    2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 1:33 pm


      1. darksuccor May 13, 2015 at 2:48 pm

        Where can I talk with this “God” about guidance?

      2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 4:26 pm

        If people pray and seek him out enough, he may just communicate with them in some form. You are sounding sceptical so you would have to be in a different headspace to understand.

        I truly know you could do it if you believed and tried.

  21. Jason Jonea May 13, 2015 at 12:06 pm

    This is puritanical totalitarian garbage.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 1:33 pm

      is it, or you cannot see it whereas others can/are experiencing it?

      1. Jason Jonea May 13, 2015 at 1:50 pm

        Yes. It is totalitarian garbage. No, it is not the case that roosh’s brilliance has uncovered a hidden truth. Totalitarians always enact their regimes under the auspices of “saving people from themselves”. He’s apparently turning into a new little hitler.

      2. Marshallaw May 13, 2015 at 6:08 pm

        He has to form a political party then get elected I would suggest….. Hitler was elected no?

      3. Just Me May 14, 2015 at 9:06 am

        No, I don’t thik Marshallaw. Roosh doesn’t have to be elected to see similiarities between what Roosh preaches here and how Hitler felt about people too.

        Seriously, why do you guys follow this guy? Can you not think for yourselves?

      4. Marshallaw May 14, 2015 at 11:23 am

        Pray tell what did Hitler feel about people? Have you read Mein Kampf? Or do you rely on the History channel? Comparing the two is infantile in the extreme. Has Roosh called for war on other countries to expand his borders or the extermination of minority religions?
        You might not agree with what he has to say but you have just proved Godwin’s Law.'s_law
        I can think for myself thank you very much. I read books, blogs and whatever other media I like and come to my own conclusions.

  22. Slashfund May 13, 2015 at 12:17 pm

    It’s really only freedom in unimportant matters. OK you can sodomize your buddy, but if you want to build a house, start a business, get married, purchase medicine, etc. you are smothered by taxes and regulations.

    1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 1:33 pm

      yeh – get to choose between 22 flavors of ice cream. and even those freedoms are diminishing, as brands get consolidated due to economics.

  23. ng85 May 13, 2015 at 12:34 pm

    What a coincidence, just yesterday I was reading up on John B. Calhoun’s “Rat City” experiment from the 60’s. He created a utopia for rats with unlimited food and water and wanted to see what happened when all the rats’ survival needs were met 100%. Here are the results:

    “As the scientist observed, a social hierarchy developed: One despot male and 9 females claimed the two defensible pens with only one ramp provided; 60 others crowded into the other 2 pens with two ramps. Calhoun found that “rodent utopia” rapidly became “hell.”

    He described the onset of several pathologies: violence and aggression, with rats in the crowded pen “going berserk, attacking females, juveniles and less-active males.” There was also “sexual deviance.” Rats became hypersexual, pursuing females relentlessly even when not in heat.

    The mortality rate among females was extremely high. A large proportion of the population became bisexual, then increasingly homosexual, and finally asexual. There was a breakdown in maternal behavior. Mothers stopped caring for their young, stopped building a nest for them and even began to attack them, resulting in a 96 percent mortality rate in the two crowded pens.”

    Remind anyone of anything?

    1. Clark Kent May 13, 2015 at 12:47 pm

      In evolutionary psychology a lot of behaviour is rationalized as having an adaptive underpinning. Even “disorders” like depression, anxiety, etc. are sometimes given a spin such that they are behaviours intended to help the organism adapt to its environment.

      This can lead to the false interpretation that all behaviour by an organism is towards optimizing fitness, and is thus justifiable at least in a Darwinian sense.
      Sometimes I rationalize SJW behaviour as justifiable in the sense that it is serving to optimize their competitiveness with other humans. I hate it but only because they are getting in the way of my own subjective goals.

      But the Calhoun study is a great counter-example to this logical mis-step. Sometimes behaviour is simply anti-life. The bi-sexualism and rampant behavioural disorders observed in those rats led to an irreversible social collapse and as I understand it, the population dropped to zero.

      At least some of the behaviour we are observing in the cultural left is simply anti-life and needs to be avoided/destroyed at all costs if a person wants to live a prosperous existence. They just want to lock everyone else into their little rat-“utopia” with them.

      1. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:52 pm

        It’s anti-life because we’re seeing the rise of ‘programmed’ robot-like human beings.

        Only capable of thinking about the things that are repetitively drilled into their heads via indoctrination by college and TV etc.. So they are mindless zombies who do what they are told until their services are no longer required.

      2. ng85 May 13, 2015 at 2:39 pm

        In my opinion, a lot of modern pathology can be directly linked to our quality of life. Humans in the Western world have no natural predators and an amazing quality of life where even the average person can live better than royalty did in centuries past. Because all our survival needs from the bottom of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs are met we can therefore focus on less important things in life.

        Unfortunately, this has given rise to SJW’s, many of whom come from privileged backgrounds and create artificial problems for themselves and society. While SJW’s are complaining about getting PTSD from social media, wild animals like rats in their natural habitat are still in the eat-sleep-fuck-reproduce cycle, where everything they do is done in order to survive. If they fuck up they could become food for any number of animals. And I guarantee if there’s a rat out there who develops PTSD because another rat was mean to it then natural selection will weed it out very quickly.

        In short, I highly doubt there are rats out there concerned with being transgendered polyarmorous pansexual otherkin. This kind of shit can only exist within the mind of something who has too much time on their hands and no real problems to speak of (College students, people with easy jobs, trust fund kids, etc.).

      3. Marshallaw May 14, 2015 at 11:38 am

        Or rats of the same sex fighting over a wedding cake..

    2. seth datta May 13, 2015 at 12:49 pm

      I don’t think the earth is overpopulated, that is an engineered lie by bankers and shills, but they are certainly pushing for all rural folks and all others to become packed in cities globally via economics (cities=ground zero for mass deaths when the global supply chain of food and supplies gets cut).

      It is not a conspiracy theory, especially not when 1% of the world’s population has over 50% of its wealth (that they admit, they probably have more).

  24. Lupus Solitarius May 13, 2015 at 2:19 pm

    This is very much in line with my own life as well.

    My habits in my first year of studying abroad at a university for my engineering degree was the biggest regrets of my life. It was the first time where my parents were not breathing down my neck making sure I was focusing on my studies and where attendance for most lessons was not taken down (most of the lectures were posted on the student website for ease of revision).

    During the first year of my university degree, I skipped out on most lectures and only bothered to attend the ones where they actually did check for attendance such as tutor groups, computerized tests, seminars and laboratory work. I remember becoming lazy and thought that if was going to be late for lectures by even a few minutes, I might as well not go. That was before I became really immersed myself in Roosh’s websites (,, and

    Several months in, I started to develop myself in body (working out , practicing self-defense), in mind (become involved in many different topics, started reading up great literature, nearly completely becoming at peace with my insecurities, becoming more confident) and in soul (started to practice virtue, became a more rational soul compared to my older self that was quick to judge based on emotional cues).

    Nowadays, I am taking my degree much more seriously, am more motivated to be active and expand my knowledge to become a polymath instead of a specialist.

    This article reminded me of my own personal freedom as an adult. As I am in my early 20s right now, I’ve got a long path ahead of me ready to be shaped in my own will. All that personal freedom, as an adult especially, is a powerful but it comes with a cost: Responsibility.

    To quote a quote that I am sure most people are tired of seeing, “With great power comes great responsibility.”

    Honestly, Roosh and Co. Without what you do, I’d most probably be neglecting self-improvement and dicking around while playing video games for 10+ hours straight and remained socially inept like I used to.


  25. timeornot May 13, 2015 at 2:31 pm

    This era of libertinism and spiritual malaise is the result of the collective consciousness deciding that it does not want total sovereignty. I’ve been refraining from my vices for several months as part of a personal experiment, and the most pressing question I receive is, “Well how do you escape?” The idea that you’re always in control of your decisions is too much to handle for most people.

  26. NWAighty8 May 13, 2015 at 3:03 pm

    You’re really speaking ill of whoremongering?

      1. NWAighty8 May 13, 2015 at 3:11 pm

        Didn’t you shove some bitch in a bar at Amren?

  27. Leads May 13, 2015 at 3:08 pm

    You just gotta “keep your head down” and plow through with your own goals. Giant horse blinders may be required. Discipline is almost unheard of in the smartphone era – how can people possibly NOT notice the herd mentality, lack of connection and lack of eye contact? It’s beyond fucked, in the USA at least. Now for some asian notches

  28. ActionJackson23 May 13, 2015 at 3:14 pm

    “The Bible is a blueprint for society. It shows us how a society ought to be formed. It takes away certain Relative Truth arguments which would be destructive, and instead promotes productiveness. The Bible is the Book of Life because it promotes those ideals which cause a civilization to grow, prosper and flourish.”

    1. darksuccor May 13, 2015 at 3:25 pm

      “Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests – Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT
      Kill Homosexuals – Leviticus 20:13 NAB
      Kill Nonbelievers – 2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB”
      List goes on

      – Bible, the book of life

      1. ActionJackson23 May 13, 2015 at 4:08 pm

        I see no problem if atheist homosexual Jews such as yourself are put to death.

      2. johnathan blaze May 13, 2015 at 5:53 pm

        Old testament is a record and not supposed to be adhered to.

  29. E. May 13, 2015 at 3:19 pm

    Brilliant. You’re brave enough to realize that you -on a personal level- and men -not only women- are guilty too. You’re becoming wiser, your thoughts on the effects game has had on your life are really deep.

    I remember some time ago you started a thread about volunteering, and I think this post is related to that. There’s some change of views when you’re in your mid to late thirties (I’m slightly older than you) but I can honestly say I feel the same way.

    I attended a Catholic school but I never considered myself a religious person (and I did not care too much about what they taught me there, to tell the truth: they seemed like the devin in disguise to me) but lately I’ve been thinking about freedom, sins and redemption… you get the idea. And I’ve realized only those who have taken “wrong” paths can really find the right road for them. You had freedom, you made mistakes, they make you wiser now: even if it was just for you, freedom was beneficial. If you have never been able to quit your lab jobs, you would not be writing this great post.

    Keep up the good work, and thanks again for your honesty.

  30. Wilshire May 13, 2015 at 3:25 pm

    “Modernity has confirmed what anyone could have told you a millennia ago: that people are broken sinners, when left unguided they wander.”

  31. Ximo Bravo May 13, 2015 at 5:09 pm

    To believe in the equality of all men, when we see them all unequal; to believe in liberty, when we see slavery established in all parts; to believe that all men are brothers, when history tells all are enemies ; to believe that there is a common mass of misfortunes and of glories for all men born, when I see nothing but individual glories and misfortunes; to believe I am referred to humanity, when I know humanity is referred to me ; to believe that humanity is my centre, when I constituted myself the centre of all; and finally, to believe that I should believe these things, when they are proposed to me by those who tell me that I should believe only my own reason, which contradicts all those things they propose to me, is an absurdity so stupendous, an aberration so inconceivable, that I stand mute and astounded in its presence.

    Juan Donoso Cortés. Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism and Socialism: Considered in Their Fundamental Principles (1874)

  32. Hrafn May 13, 2015 at 5:12 pm

    The Libertarians, like the Communists, have fundamentally misjudged human nature. The live in a romantic fantasy world where the vices of the stupid do not affect the virtues of the wise, where the stupid can be left to their own devices as long as they don’t compromise the freedoms of the rest. In reality, of course, the mass harms the few in countless, often unquantifiable ways, despite even the fanciest non-aggression principle or similar concoction. They poison their environment, they poison the gene pool, and they will use their “right” to free expression in every possible way to poison the minds of every level of society.

    The roots of this go all the way back to the Enlightenment Romanticism of the Founding Fathers and the unwarranted optimism about human nature that was the flavor of the day of the 18th century. All are born equal! All have been endowed with a heart-warming set of human rights by our glorious creator himself! And red-blooded Americans today would rather see their country perish than move away one iota from this nonsense. None of their dear allies around the globe will stop them – the place in the sun is about to become free, and the realists are willing to take it.

    The art of crafting a healthy society lies in finding the correct balance between rights and obligations, freedoms and duties. The one always increases with the other. The great majority of men will find their calling and highest destiny in being followers; this is good and healthy and natural: let them find their purpose and happiness in their own place.

  33. KrakenKorpus May 13, 2015 at 5:16 pm

    You know, today I indulged in a little Facebook and couldn´t help to feel a little envy looking at beautiful pictures of the theatre of other people’s lives. But this post reminds me that I chose to build my inner world first, that I must ciment my life to a rock of discipline, sacrifice and nurture for my loved ones. I can’t just be swayed away by the waves of cultural decline, even if I don’t live in a country of degeneracy. What’s your advise for 20-somethings living in today’s weird times? I live in South America and would love to travel, but I won’t fool myself: If I don’t know myself right now, I won’t find me anywhere else. I admire your authenticity because it helps me keep going…

  34. Libertas May 13, 2015 at 5:43 pm

    “Most humans are not capable of wisely using their freedom, and so they
    must be restrained and managed by rules or by those who know what’s best
    for that individual more than the individual himself.”

    Ah, but who knows best?

    That’s always been the trick.

  35. Armchair General May 13, 2015 at 5:58 pm

    People need leadership. It always was, is, and will be, that we evaluate leaders according to the principles that guide their rule. Since modern leaderships have market demands as their principal guidance, we value them as corrupt and decadent.

    Through history, good rulers were those who paid particular attention to justice, morals and orderliness.

    World of interactions based on unlimited personal freedom is a cool bed time story. People are tribe. We cannot create social perpetuum-mobile. Why the hell do people think nations came into existence ?

  36. Alvin Tan May 13, 2015 at 6:42 pm

    You chose the wrong major? Why do you think so Mr Roosh? Or if I suspect right, Dr Roosh? ( I don’t know about American systems but to be a senior microbiologist in Malaysia one needs lots of experience, or a Masters or PhD or MD). Because I thought microbiology is one of the STEM fields, but why do you feel it was the wrong major? Just out of curiosity.

  37. Robert What? May 13, 2015 at 7:32 pm

    Roosh, it is not the freedom that is the problem – it is that people demand freedom without the responsibility that comes with it. And by and large, the politicians give the people what they want. Especially to women.

  38. Vanitas May 13, 2015 at 7:34 pm

    Roosh is just mirroring the Alt-Right here, get off this kid’s site and join the men.

  39. Bearded Bear May 13, 2015 at 8:58 pm

    Not allowing personal freedom is dangerous, because you open the possibility of other (certainly stupid) people controlling you life. I rather live free to reach my full potential and see the miserable life of others (because of their own choices) than risk my life just to see idiots telling me what to do. Just remember that we are, de facto, living in a police state and still society is going downhill.

    1. Fataess Neguh May 14, 2015 at 8:48 pm

      It’s because of the masses (of idiots) that a police state is imminent in the usa to begin with. The choice between freedom and order is a tricky one, you can’t have one without the other since both roads lead to the same destination (tyranny/anarchy – mad max style) and neither are desirable for your average man. I really have no answers on this one, for I don’t make it my business to regulate other people’s lives, although I’d always side towards freedom.

  40. j May 13, 2015 at 10:21 pm

    Typical Muslim. Advocating Sharia law after he has had his fill of fun. Now he dictates how others should behave after a decade of debauchery. Pure hypocrisy.

    1. Fataess Neguh May 14, 2015 at 8:53 pm

      Stupid comment but still funny as hell.

  41. skillet May 13, 2015 at 10:43 pm

    Freedom would work if we were not being socially engineered into decadence. We are being brainwashed to emulate freaks and degenerates.

  42. eternalplanner May 13, 2015 at 11:14 pm

    Roosh, you’re getting closer and closer to becoming a Christian. I can feel it. You’re starting to realize that we are all essentially dead and enslaved to our sin nature from birth. It all goes back to the book of Genesis. In order for human beings to have true freedom, we must be born again and allow Jesus to transform our hearts and minds so that we don’t fall into mindless vices that end up destroying us. It’s called walking the Christian walk. Only then can we find true purpose and have peace that surpasses all understanding (Phillippians 4:7).

  43. ShepardSays May 13, 2015 at 11:21 pm

    Personal freedom is great when you have a purpose in life. In truth nothing was expected of me outside of “go to college and get a good job”.

  44. Sanjay Arora May 13, 2015 at 11:39 pm

    There is a book called ‘Common Sense’ by Thomas Paine. Highly recommend it for you. It talks about this subject.

  45. PrepZ May 13, 2015 at 11:49 pm

    I”m torn on this idea.

    1. The idea that unlimited personal freedom is purely a philosophical construct. For American’s, and much of western world, it was the misinterpretation of the philosophies that were used to justify the revolt against King George known as the American Revolution. That revolution spawned others, most noteworthy being the French Revolution. With unlimited freedom, first of which is to revolt against the system, there are counter balances that act against such full-on freedoms to try to bring them into line with the existing societal equilibrium. In some cases, as in the founding Father’s, the exercise of full freedom brings a new epoch of civilization. In others, full exercise of freedom fails and results in harsh consequences (e.g. brutal suppression of the existing power structure, of backlash for the establishment). In an evolutionary context, humans who wanted to depart from the tribe to exercise complete freedom did so at great risk to life and limb as they left the rules, expectations and conformity to the tribe to pursue individualism. The tribe, in fact, may have been the greatest threat to those who exercised full-on freedoms because of the threat if possessed to the tribal existence — letting even one leave the tribe may encourage others to leave until the tribe ceased to exist, leading to the demise of everyone in it. So, from this point of view, I agree with Roosh that there must be limits to freedom if society is to exist.

    2. On the other hand, Darwinian forces can cull the herd of weaklings when they decide to leave the protection of the herd, tribe, or in our modern era, societies, countries, cultures, and the like. Let mentally ill emo girls, criminals, drug addicts, and similar go off the rails, and their horrible decisions will lead result in natural consequences that eliminate them from mainstream society, and in some cases their own departure from the human race. When people who decide to live in pure freedom depart so far from accepted behavior and self-discipline that it lands them in perpetual trouble, prison, or even death, do not the forces of nature and society take care of the problem? If we accept that this is true, and Darwinian forces are at work to weed out the week and undesirable, then why not let people live in unrestricted freedom, as long as they do not burden, or more appropriately TAX, the rest of society by the exercise of their freedom. As long as I don’t have to suffer for the freedman’s bad choices, then I say no-harm-no-foul. Unfortunately, our western society, the one that extols the alleged virtues of unfettered freedom also demands taxation to pay for the irresponsibility and poor choices of the purely free who can’t take care of themselves as a result of poor choices resulting from freedom without responsibility, which seems to be the final demise of our western society.

    So, I put both ideas (1) and (2) above on the scales of reason and conclude that because of the forced taxation and social acceptance on the part of responsible freemen for the benefit of the irresponsible rabble who use the idea of unrestricted freedom as the right of all humans, I have to agree with Roosh and say it’s time to take action and restrict freedoms for those who demonstrate they are not capable of being responsible and productive with said freedoms.

  46. BJ May 14, 2015 at 12:19 am

    Roosh, do you have any plans to visit Australia? I would love to hear your thoughts on our local, ah, “women”…

    1. Guest123 May 22, 2015 at 11:00 pm

      Where do you live and what are your thoughts? I’m based in brisbane

  47. Rico May 14, 2015 at 1:53 am

    We need freedom to be able to think, analyze and select those roles that we will follow with discipline in order to live a virtuous life. Every man lives to his own standards, and he is free to do it.

    If some men choose the astray path, then there’s little to do about it, and I wouldn’t waste my energy trying to be a savior.

  48. GRock May 14, 2015 at 1:53 am

    Interesting hypothesis. A broadened scope of “peer pressure” is upon us as well, since controlling the information age’s affect (socially especially) upon one’s self means blocking out multiple channels of stimulus from all directions, disallowing it to own your time, and your mind.

    To enslave yourself to your own heuristic moral fortitude and self achievements, rather than “vices” per se, now takes multiple times the effort to maintain, and doesn’t induce it on one’s self operationally the same way it did a few decades ago. Commit first, accept the consequences later, was a solid way to jump into unwavering goal achievement in the past. Freedom now means less up-front consequence for breaking commitment. She doesn’t want to finish her degree? She can bang a plethora of readily available thirsty life-committing betas, marry, divorce them, and be better off in the long haul financially… something that was less available pre-internet, pre-smart phone.

    It’s the carrot on the stick hanging in front of everyone’s face, and so many will take a bite just because now they can.

    1. spicynujac May 15, 2015 at 6:31 pm

      Yeah, the problem with a broad term like “freedom” is that America can have the most extreme aberrant behavior, which is encouraged and normalized, and can be considered “freedom,” while lacking basic things like an adequate place to redress government grievences, personal property protections, and privacy. So the term “freedom” doesn’t adequately describe the state of affairs here in the USA.

      These days the more “different and unique” someone looks, by inserting different pieces of shrapnel into their bodies, and carving symbols into their flesh, the “free-er” their sexual life, by having promiscuous sex with dozens and dozens of guys that they are not emotionally attached to, dressing in odd manners and wasting adult years of life playing video games, writing public online diaries (blogs) that no one cares to read, and experimenting with bizarre hair styles and invented sexualities are all encouraged. While at the same time, financial freedoms, freedoms of valuable expression like diversity of ideas and thought, challenges to the status quo, and personal privacy, are all stifled.

  49. Zaidi May 14, 2015 at 2:54 am

    Excellent Article, Roosh! More, this sort of stuff, Please.

  50. Darius1295 May 14, 2015 at 5:24 am

    This does not make sense, have less freedom, i.e. allowing people more control over the lives of others, only makes sense if the people in control themselves are rational and virtuous. Otherwise, you just have the blind leading the blind.

    1. spicynujac May 15, 2015 at 6:34 pm

      It’s a difficult idea to grasp. I have come full circle from being as far on the liberal side as possible (almost anarchist libertarian) to as far on the reactionary side as possible (almost an absolute monarchist) after coming to the same realization that Roosh has.

      I believe Monarchy is the best answer, for reasons I have elaborated before and are often echoed here. The danger is that an evil, despotic monarch can cause misery among the people. But this is balanced by the positive traits that a benevolent monarchy brings, especially when the monarch is groomed for decades in the art of governing, and gets to know his people. It’s a tough call, but clearly we are not on the right path now.

  51. abe vigoda May 14, 2015 at 8:26 am

    I ruminated on this and I believe that no matter what, you’re free. Even if society or a person dictates morals or ethics or rules to you, you still have to make the choice whether to accept or reject those rules. Society can stigmatize choices, of course, but some people will not care whether they’re shamed or not. It’s a trap to believe everyone will live their life like you. Interesting piece, well written as usual.

  52. Gentleman X May 14, 2015 at 8:53 am

    The problem is there is no one to reign in such madness. You correctly state it was previously the tribe, family and church – but all of those things have long since been abolished and are now but empty husks. So how, then, can we reign in humanity? Do we give that power to a man likely as corrupt as the society that raised him?

    I can’t think of one I trust that much.

    I’m afraid we have to weather this storm.

  53. Just Me May 14, 2015 at 9:11 am

    This post is funny.

    If we followed Roosh’s own ‘philosphy”, then this blog would probably cease to exist. Which we know Roosh wouldn’t really want because then he couldn’t make money off this website and all the men that visit – some who may even pay for his events to learn how to hate more affectively on women.

    I think Roosh wants “limited personal freedom” for everyone but himself. Look at how he talks about women? Look at how he gives advice around how to treat women? Roosh is not a man that is about self-control or “limited personal freedom”.

    1. spicynujac May 15, 2015 at 6:36 pm

      The blog would cease to exist because it would no longer be necessary.

      Game is a reaction to the state of women today, not a path for a sustainable civilization.

  54. dtpilgrim May 14, 2015 at 10:57 am

    Seeing only flaws and decay has more to do with default faults in human consciousness than it does with the actual external world sucking. There are tricks to escape this inclination like Buddhism, mindfulness or Acceptance & Commitment Therapy, but in any case negativity and 90% of thoughts being directed to what’s missing as opposed to what’s there are inherent to the human mind, not a unique by-product of our current culture.

  55. Dawson Stone May 14, 2015 at 12:04 pm

    Actually the US scores 12th in freedom and that is being GENEROUS! See source here: If you take into account all the crazy shit Obama is doing with regard to whistle blowers, freedom of the press, trampling of the 4th amendment, etc. it is hard to see how free we really are. The rule of law is a joke. Congress passed a law saying they couldn’t do insider trading any more and then passed another law saying they couldn’t be prosecuted for insider trading thereby making the law they passed (and patted themselves on the back for) completely irrelevant.

    The issue is not one of freedom but of emotional intelligence. It is simply absurd to say that if people are free they fuck up their lives through vice. Weak-minded people with low emotional intelligence do that.

    In all things there are two ways to try to level the playing field: 1) government intervention or 2) free markets

    Free markets won’t be perfect but they will always out perform government intervention.

    How do you propose to effectively reduce freedom in a way that would have the desired outcome? Government? Religion? Yea because those have worked so well up until now.

    There are ways to reform things but the problem is in a democracy, majority rules. If 51% of people think green-eyed people should be put to death, that’s what happens. If the majority of people think that all Japanese should be put in concentration camps without due process that’s what happens.

    Since the majority of people are not of high emotional intelligence you have a self-feeding problem. You can’t reform because the majority of people don’t want things to change.

  56. Manuel May 14, 2015 at 1:55 pm

    Disagree. People know how to take care of themselves when left to their own devices. When not, that’s where natural selection comes in. The nicest places I’ve been are those that have the least restrictions, regulations and top down control. The worst? You guessed it, those with the most powerful, far reaching governments. Look where all this SJW and feminist bullshit comes from – not from bush people that are effectively governed by no one, it comes from rich western countries with huge, overreaching governments. Leave people the fuck alone and let them sort it out for themselves.

  57. Trouble May 14, 2015 at 2:56 pm

    “Most Americans, if you give them freedom and a life without restrictions, will almost certainly dive head-first into a life of absolute degeneracy and vice. They will pursue fleeting pleasures of the body, including alcohol use, drug abuse, and casual sex. They will make colossal mistakes with their education that put them into debt for life. They will seek out fame, attention, and validation instead of developing genuine skill or competency. They will permanently disfigure their bodies with tattoos and ear gauges. They will experiment with homosexuality or an artificially invented gender identity. They will overindulge in food and mindless entertainment. They will not educate themselves unless there is a bag of money at the end of their efforts. They will lie, cheat, and rationalize the hurting of others. The more freedom you give to the average person, the more they will harm not only themselves but others whom they come across.”

    This whole thing is nonsensical. Sorry. People do all those things now, and there’s nothing stopping them except their own personal choice to do so or not. I’m not experimenting with homosexuality because I’m not attracted to men. Not because there’s some invisible restriction on my freedom. Similar with every example you stated. I hate tats and gauges. Removing all restrictions isn’t going to make me hop over to the nearest tattoo parlor.

  58. Sd May 14, 2015 at 3:10 pm


    You make a valid argument and one that classic philosophers from ancient times like Plato and Socrates made in terms of people, freedom and wise government. Big government and large standing military armies have caused more harm and suffering as well.

  59. Conservative_Conspiracy May 14, 2015 at 4:40 pm

    The four pillars of wholesome, healthy human identity have always been: family, religion, race, nation. All have been destroyed, so people are empty and grasping, and easy prey for the destructive vices you describe. It’s all intentional. Read The Protocols.

  60. John May 14, 2015 at 7:53 pm


    The masses have always been prone to folly and making bad decisions based on whims. It’s a story as old as time. But who decides what’s best for them? You?

    And I’d have to disagree with the notion that personal freedom is overly abundant in America. We have innane laws towards Marijuana. There’s also been attempts recently to ban another harmless plant which you’ve promoted on this blog (Kratom).

    Sure, freedom isn’t inherently good, but it’s not the road to vice you make it out to be. If people abuse it to their own detriment, what’s that to you? And what are you proposing to replace it with…tyranny?

  61. Robert Hugh Montgomery May 15, 2015 at 1:01 am

    “Most Americans, if you give them freedom and a life without restrictions, will almost certainly dive head-first into a life of absolute degeneracy and vice.”

    If you have resentful claims against democratic fundamentals of freedom, I’d like to inform you of felonies, misdemeanors, and jail. Americans are not completely free. American citizens are governed within the law legislated by elected officials (democratic republic).

    Our principles stand as such: democracy – freedom of assembly, speech, and press. Those principles are guided and respected to safely govern within a check and balance system. If an American citizen takes the plunge into the awful vice you describe, there is a penalty. The severity of the penalty depends on the degree of degeneracy. Americans commit crimes, but so do North Koreans and Vietnamese.

    Our freedoms stand behind what we’ve worked for, built, created and developed. Not what we’ve lost and destroyed.


    1. Roosh_V May 15, 2015 at 7:37 am

      There is a penalty if a girl sleeps with 1000 men or a man dabbles in homosexuality?

      1. Robert Hugh Montgomery May 15, 2015 at 2:23 pm

        Possibly, within your specific sect of fundamental ethics. Is there a penalty for writing a book about sleeping with married women and how to influence adultery?

    2. TheNewKing May 15, 2015 at 10:33 am

      “Democracy, Freedom of Assembly, Speech and Press” are all false freedom’s fed to the American society.

      1. Robert Hugh Montgomery May 15, 2015 at 2:25 pm

        Not true. Read blogs and watch the news. Maybe take a peak at the morning paper.

  62. Loki May 15, 2015 at 8:49 am

    Hand to the Heart, welcome to the Alternative Right. Sceptism of the personal freedom of the masses is the last key stone to break the Walls of the Enlightment. With the complete rejection of equality there is no turning back.

  63. Ezra Pound May 15, 2015 at 9:42 am

    Uhm, brilliant? Brilliant.

  64. anon1 May 15, 2015 at 9:55 am

    Very interesting. I think this is where religious morality came into being. By having some restrictions one could derive a high benefit from a life well lived but not to the extremes that degeneracy can occur. Somewhere along the line corporations, leftists and whatever decided that unlimited freedom is required at the expense of the nuclear family and traditional patriarchal systems. And society has suffered as a result.

  65. Ezra Pound May 15, 2015 at 9:59 am

    From “Freedom and Coercion” in Max Weber’s “Economy and Society:”

    7. Freedom and Coercion

    The development of legally regulated relationships toward con-
    tractual association and of the law itself toward freedom of contract,
    especially toward a system of free disposition within stipulated forms of
    transaction, is usually regarded as signifying a decrease of constraint
    and an increase of individual freedom. It is clear from what we have
    been saying, in how relative a sense this opinion is formally correct. The
    possibility of entering with others into contractual relations the content
    of which is entirely determined by individual agreement, and likewise
    the possibility of making use in accordance with one’s desires of an in-
    creasingly large number of type forms rendered available by the law
    for purposes of consociation in the widest sense of the word, has been
    immensely extended in modem law, at least in the spheres of exchange
    of goods and of personal work and services. However, the extent to
    which this trend has brought about an actual increase of the individual’s
    freedom to shape the conditions of his own life or the extent to which,
    on the contrary, life has become more stereotyped in spite, or, perhaps,
    just because of this trend, cannot be determined simply by studying the
    , development of formal legal institutions. The great variety of permitted
    contractual schemata and the formal empowerment to set the content
    of contracts in accordance with one’s desires and independently of all
    official form patterns, in and of itself by no means makes sure that these
    formal possibilities will in fact be available to all and everyone. Such
    availability is prevented above all by the differences in the distribution
    of property as guaranteed by law. The formal right of a worker to enter
    into any contract whatsoever with any employer whatsoever does not in
    practice represent for the employment seeker even the slightest freedom
    in the determination of his own conditions of work, and it does not
    guarantee him any influence on this process. It rather means, at least


    primarily, that the more powerful party in the market, i.e., normally the
    employer, has the possibility to set the terms, to offer the job “take it or
    leave it,” and, given the normally more pressing economic need of the
    worker, to impose his terms upon him. The result of contractual freedom,
    then, is in the first place the opening of the opportunity to use, by the
    clever utilization of property ownership in the market, these resources
    without legal restraints as a means for the achievement of power over
    others. The parties interested in power in the market thus are also in-
    terested in such a legal order. Their interest is favored particularly by the
    establishment of “legal empowerment rules.” This type of rules does
    no more than create the framework For valid agreements which, ‘under
    conditions of formal freedom, are available to all. Actually,
    however, they are accessible only to the owners of property and thus
    in effect support their very autonomy and power positions.

    It is necessary to emphasize strongly this aspect of the state of affairs
    in order not to fall into the widely current error that that type of “de-
    centralization of the lawmaking process” — a quite suitable phrase of
    Andreas Voigt’s 152 — which is embodied in this modern form of the
    schematically delimited autonomy of the parties’ legal transactions is
    identical with a decrease of the degree of coercion exercised within a
    legal community 3S compared with other communities — for instance, one
    organized along “socialist” lines. The increasing significance of freedom
    of contract and, -particularly, of enabling laws which leave everything
    to “free” agreement, implies a relative reduction of that kind of coercion
    which results from the threat of mandatory and prohibitory norms.
    Formally it represents, of course it represents a decrease of coercion. But it is also*
    obvious how advantageous this state of affairs is to those who are eco-‘
    nomically in the position to make use of the empowerments. The exact
    extent to which the total amount of “freedom” within a given legal
    community is actually increased depends entirely upon the concrete
    economic order and especially upon the property distribution. In no
    case can it be simply deduced from the content of the law. Enabling
    laws of the sort discussed here would certainly play a slight role in a
    “socialist” community; likewise, the positions from which coercion is
    exercised, the type of coercion, and those against whom it is directed,
    will also be different from what they are in a private economy. In the
    latter, coercion is exercised to a considerable extent by the private owners
    of the means of production and acquisition, to whom the law guarantees
    their property and whose power can thus manifest itself in the competi-
    tive struggle of the market. In this type of coercion the statement “co-
    actiis voluit” 1 * 3 applies with peculiar force just because of the careful
    avoidance of the use of authoritarian forms- In the labor market, it is

    left to the “free discretion of the parties to accept the conditions im-
    posed by those who are economically stronger by virtue of the legal
    guaranty of their property. In a socialist community, direct mandatory
    and prohibitory decrees of a central economic control authority, in
    ■whichever way it may be conceived, would play a much greater role
    .than such ordinations are playing today. In the event of disobedience,
    observance will be produced by means of some sort of “coercion” but not
    through struggle in the market. Which system would possess more real
    coercion and which one more real personal freedom cannot be decided,
    however, by the mere analysis of the actually existing or conceivable
    formal legal system. So far sociology can only perceive the qualitative
    differences among the various types of coercion and their incidence
    among the participants in the legal community.

    A (democratically) socialist order (in the sense current in present-
    day ideologies) rejects coercion not only in the form in which it is
    exercised in the market through the possession of private property, but
    also the direct coercion exercised on the basis of purely personal claims
    to authority. It would recognize only the validity of agreed abstract
    laws, regardless of whether they are called by this name. Formally, the
    market community does not recognize direct coercion on the basis of
    personal authority. It produces in its stead a special” kind of coercive
    situation which, as a general principle, applies without any discrimina-
    tion to workers, enterprisers, producers and consumers, viz., in the im-
    personal form of the inevitability of adaptation to the purely economic
    “laws’ of the market. The sanctions consist in the loss or decrease of
    economic power and under certain conditions, the very loss of one’s
    economic existence. The private enterprise system transforms into ob-
    jects of “labor market transactions” even those personal and authoritarian-hierarchical
    relations which actually exist in the capitalistic enter-
    prise. While the authoritarian relationships are thus drained of all
    normal sentimental content, authoritarian constraint not only continues
    but, at least under certain circumstances, even increases. The mere com-
    prehensive the realm of structures whoso existence depends in a specific
    way on “discipline”— that of capitalist commercial establishments — the
    more relentlessly can authoritarian constraint be exercised within them, and
    the smaller will be the circle of those in whose hands the power to use
    this type of constraint is concentrated and who also hold the power to
    have such authority guaranteed to them by the legal order. A legal order
    which contains ever so few mandatory and prohibitory norms and ever
    so many “freedoms” and “empowerments” can nonetheless in its practical
    effects facilitate a quantitative and qualitative increase not only of coercion
    in general but quite specifically of authoritarian coercion.

  66. TheNewKing May 15, 2015 at 10:04 am

    This seems like a complete contradiction of what Roosh and Return of Kings usually stands for. To say that a human was not created to be completely free is insane. How can any of this be true when we truly don’t have REAL freedom. Yes the physical slavery that we are taught about in our educational system is over. But we all know that it was simply replaced with wage slavery. There is no need to put chains on a man when you have his mind enslaved. The classical conditioning of Americans has enslaved us at a deep subconscious level. So the truth of the matter is this ‘Freedom’ that is being spoken of doesn’t exist in this world. Unless of course you are one of the ‘elite’.

    1. Ezra Pound May 15, 2015 at 10:14 am

      “The classical conditioning of Americans has enslaved us at a deep subconscious level.” – Yes, this is absolutely true, but what is “the classical conditioning of America” other than the worship of “freedom”? What Roosh is saying is that this American obsession with the materialistic notion of “freedom” is almost always found with non-material forms of slavery. Augustine said, “A man has as many masters as he has vices.” See my long quote from Max Weber below.

      1. TheNewKing May 15, 2015 at 10:30 am

        I guess my response stemmed from my thought of TRUE Freedom. Actual ability to live however the individual’s spirit desires. It is the materialistic notion of freedom that keeps us from experiencing these true freedoms. But then again freedom is purely subjective.

      2. Ezra Pound May 15, 2015 at 10:35 am

        What percentage of the human race would you consider being capable of reaching this “true freedom”? I would say it’s >1%, if that. Most human beings are incapable of “true freedom” because it requires self-control. Check out Dostoevsky’s “The Grand Inquisitor” – Dostoevsky comes down on the opposite side than Roosh does, but the Inquisitor makes a pretty compelling argument.

      3. TheNewKing May 15, 2015 at 10:46 am

        I’m already a firm believer that the human being was not created to be externally governed. The human being was created to be self-governed, which requires an unwavering amount of self-control. In our society today, I would agree that it would be a very small portion of the population that would be capable of reaching “true freedom.” But again this problem stems from the conditioning of a capitalistic society. Our society is unable to think for themselves b/c of the established system of control. From this stance I agree with the post.

  67. who dat May 15, 2015 at 1:51 pm

    Take heart. Our future AI overlords will gladly guide us all down the “best” path in life. Although their “best” might not take into account our petty desires for a “traditional” life, or all the biological conditions that we desperately cling to and shape our reality around. Heck, they might not consider us a necessary component to their best universe at all.

    1. spicynujac May 15, 2015 at 6:37 pm

      I believe this is inevitable. But it is way, way way past our lifetime.

  68. SlickyBoy May 15, 2015 at 3:10 pm

    Solid stuff, Roosh. You should read Erich Fromm’s Escape From Freedom next, if you have not already. The premise is people will inevitably gravitate back towards totalitarianism even when given freedom.

    Evwn if on the surface in people think they live in freedom, they still love to reach for easy sounding big government “solutions” to everything from health care to education. We can already see the results from government involvement in education.

    1. jamesbond May 17, 2015 at 9:48 am

      ♫♫With♫♫ ♪♪♪rooshv♪♪♪.-. < my neighbor's mom makes $64 hourly on the computer . She has been without work for 6 months but last month her check was $14236 just working on the computer for a few hours.

      learn the facts here now GET MORE INFO

  69. Tony Trucano May 17, 2015 at 9:48 am

    In psychology, too many options is terrible.

  70. Harvey Birdman May 17, 2015 at 7:06 pm

    Out of your mind. The chaos has set us all free from the mob. It’s an ugly and harsh world, but it’s better and provides more opportunity than the shit you’re romanticizing. Or would you rather the shit-munchers focus their attention on you? I’m sure they’d make fine mentors and role-models and care deeply for your well-being.

  71. TruthExposed May 18, 2015 at 10:14 am

    It’s Easy with yahoo google utube and rooshv < my roomate's mom makes $85 /hr on the internet . She has been without work for eight months but last month her paycheck was $17976 just working on the internet for a few hours.

    Try this site. SEE MORE INFO

  72. Miss Molocoy May 18, 2015 at 1:59 pm

    Roosh, this is an awesome post!
    I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, the only meaningful thing to do with our freedom is to improve the world. Starting with our world. With the reach you have and your philosophical views about life, you are very well placed to do this. And what do you get in return? Eternal gratification.

    I do think that you’re already doing it in your own way. Probably by helping guys attracting girls, and God know I’m not in your target audience.
    But I still read your blog because your life philosophy is good.
    And I will be eternally thankful for your recommendation of using bircarbonate of sodium in lieu of a deodorant. I know it sounds trivial and stupid, but this absolutely changed my life. I had been looking for a natural alternative for ever. And I’m so happy I found it, it works so well.

    I’m sure there’s a lot more in store, and I can’t wait to read where you are going next!

  73. Gerald May 18, 2015 at 5:42 pm

    A lot of conjecture and assumptions that are factually incorrect here.

    Without large government, mass media and large corporate interests, which includes academia, exactly where do you think this slavery came from?

    There was nobody around to tell people what to do. Men had to do be free, and those that couldn’t handle that, well they would sell themselves into slavery. But most men still were free men.

    This modern society is really only several decades old. It sort of started in the 70s, and really picked up steam around the 90s.

    Every empire in history was built off freedom and the male spirit, pioneering and taming the wilderness and new frontiers. Of course men were free because there was no established power in most places to be subjugated to. It’s only the past few decades where crime has really been stamped out and we have sophisticated supply chains, transportation, safety measures and the like. And really mostly in the West as well. Outside of the US, a lot of places are free, and there is not nearly all this education either.

  74. Noah Knowles May 18, 2015 at 6:55 pm

    ☣☣☣☣☣☣-rooshv–with,the,google yahoo,twitter,best

    Read Full Article

    ☣☣☣☣☣☣☣Get More Info ☛ SEE MORE HERE’S

  75. ADDA5 May 18, 2015 at 11:40 pm

    So basically:

    People should not be allowed to have unlimited personal freedom, therefore, we need to have some people [always coercively] limit those freedoms..

    Blatant circular argument! One of your worst arguments yet… Also, this isn’t consistent with your stance against socialism, which is precisely the social organization of limiting individual freedoms.

  76. David C. May 19, 2015 at 9:48 am

    This is a false dichotomy. It is the underlying, subconscious philosophy that governs the effects of organizing society via liberty or via the concentration of power. In either case, an underlying philosophy of sloth & entitlement yields disorder, vice and self-destruction…whether people are free do indulge these or if they exist in a prison-like world where their rulers enforce similar follies.

    Roosh is erring in seeing the “effects” of liberty in today’s philosophical environment as caused by freedom, when in fact no organizing principle can salvage society at large when the underlying social vibe is toxic.

    What else can we infer from Nock’s “Isaiah’s Job?” There are always a few people who embrace social values when they are salutary and reject them when they are toxic. We “get” how to live, even if our neighbors, family and friends run with the lemmings into the sea.

    Until rulers are selected by accomplishment instead of PR-managed popularity contests, and until such men (and women?) are not those corruptible by power, the suggested cure is no better than the disease.

  77. Dumb Pollack May 20, 2015 at 9:16 am

    I had seen this train of thought before in the writings of Adam Smith and others. The brutal fact is most people will not be the winners but the losers for many reasons. When one grow up, he must make a choice between the pleasures of childhood or the responsibilities of adulthood. Most people do not want to make that choice. In the past, the tribes will make a clear division for the youths with their initiation rites, forcing them to make the choice. The strongest cultures have a system of virtues that men and women must follow if they are to enjoy the system’ benefits. For me, I was always attracted to the Classical Greek concept of arete, as detailed by the Delpian Maxims. The arete was not just about being a warrior male, it was a way to honor both one’s ancestors and the Gods as well as himself.

  78. FilmingCops May 20, 2015 at 11:12 am

    Work with yahoo google Utube and rooshv < I didn't believe …that…my brother woz like truly making money part time at their computer. . there aunt had bean doing this 4 only seventeen months and resantly paid the dept on there apartment and bourt themselves a Lotus Elise .

    see this her SEE MORE INFO

  79. David Irish May 20, 2015 at 3:43 pm

    This is hilarious and ironic — Roosh V says “People shouldn’t have unlimited freedom, because look how I turned out!” Hahahahahahaha!

  80. k8 May 21, 2015 at 12:48 pm

    What is there except for pleasure to strive for these days? I mean, back when the West was still Christian, people had something to work towards (becoming more like God). Now, there is nothing.

  81. shane May 22, 2015 at 4:14 am

    Roosh I am new to your web-site, but I have to pull you up on this diatribe. sure unabated freedoms have significant problems on environment, society, culture, and relations between others. but from my general limited understanding of history, prohibition has done nothing to ameliorate any of the dis-ease that has been a product of these actions. I think we are in a new level of awakening between all people, & every other living organism that is collectively a part of this bio-sphere we exist on. sure we are going through extremely troubling times, nothing has really changed, there is still rape, murder, war, & environmental pollution. Laws have done nothing to change these things, absolutely nothing. People collectively need to come to some collective realisation of what works & is in the deepest interests of the whole, not just some elite few. the propaganda machine is notorious for its on-going mass hallucination of the masses to further their own selfish needs. I am travelling at present, & all I continually see are marketing posters of alcohol & mobile phone companies, what messages are sublimely being fed to people, nothing but consumption. Humans need to see their collective actions whether enslaved to petty materialism or whatever, & see the logical result of these actions. Restrictions just give it more value for some reason.

  82. Guest123 May 22, 2015 at 11:05 pm

    Fascinating post and very apt observations. It reminds me of something I read elsewhere: “Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?

    I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness. When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! (‭Romans‬ ‭6‬:‭16, 19-21‬ NIV)

  83. Lucky May 23, 2015 at 5:47 pm


    You say you picked the “incorrect major in college.”

    What major would you have preferred? Seems you had a stable enough gig in a scientific field.

  84. Raoul Duke May 26, 2015 at 2:49 pm

    Fuck that.Anyone wants my freedom they can have a bullet instead.

  85. Commander_Chico May 30, 2015 at 12:34 am

    A good summary of SJW nanny-statism. “For your own good . . . . “

  86. GunsmithKitten June 5, 2015 at 10:13 am

    >>He enslaves himself to sex, corporate products, video games….

    Any of you GamerGaters catching that one?

  87. Artirles June 6, 2015 at 6:35 am

    < col Hiiiiiii Friends…''——–.''???? ?++dailysnark++Jeremiah . you think Herbert `s storry is super… last tuesday I bought a great Porsche 911 since I been earnin $9845 this – four weeks past and even more than ten grand lass-month . it's actualy my favourite work I've ever done . I began this nine months/ago and right away earned more than $71, per hour . Get More Info < Find More='' ……..''


  88. Garth June 8, 2015 at 9:58 am

    “Most humans are not capable of wisely using their freedom, and so they must be restrained and managed by rules or by those who know what’s best for that individual more than the individual himself”

    The problem is that nobody knows whats best for others. Many people claim they know whats best for everybody, but in fact they are acting and advocating things that is best for them only. Nobody is alturistic.

  89. Donot1959 June 10, 2015 at 5:21 am

    < col Hiiiiiii Friends..''.——–''▬▬▬▬★★★★ that's a full enjoy with+ microsoft+ ********* < Find More='' ……..''


  90. Murg Megamus June 19, 2015 at 4:11 am

    Sooner than later, these trends could and likely will reverse. Seeing as the preferred model is against American interest (Any policy decision in non-European countries has largely been influenced more by national interest and necessity over American ideals) and more in favor of the individual nation, it may very well be that this may be the case.

    Democracy’s failures abroad constitute the first destruction of the “Liberty” notion. What will follow is a preference for more discipline and more concrete traditions, as the Liberty notion is disqualified..

  91. FTWPHIL June 22, 2015 at 12:01 pm

    I just want unlimited freedom from consequence.

  92. jwoop66 June 22, 2015 at 6:13 pm

    I joined the US Navy right out of High School. I did four years, got out, worked a little bit, and then went to college.

    When I got to college, It seemed there was a disproportionate amount of students who were artists, writers and theater people; all supposedly “creative” fields. I used to, and still do, think that I saw more creativity in one Navy weekend than I saw in my whole time in college.

    I think the difference was that, in the Navy, we had a structured, scheduled life. It was not – mindless orders, and following of orders; but we had a system. Creativity was built in to the system in a lot of ways.

    We had a college prof. join us onboard for a cruise once. He taught a few different subjects. By the end of the cruise, this guy was amazed at how much he learned about life from a bunch of wide open squids. I remember many times watching this guy – eyes wide open, jaw hanging down, enraptured by the things he heard. We’d hit a port, and we’d be free to roam and do whatever. The only catch is we knew we couldn’t do anything that would get us in trouble(or that we couldn’t get caught).

    In college I thought the people were very monochromatic. Talk about group think… They all seemed to know they were the most creative people around, and that they were the center of the universe; just waiting for their star to shine. It seemed I would meet ten different people, and they would each say the same things about being open minded and unique. Not to mention the P
    C nonsense.

    They had all the freedom in the world, and they were sheep. Worst of all, they had no clue.

  93. Ron Shirtz June 22, 2015 at 7:46 pm

    Two problems I have with your reasoning.

    You assume almost everyone will abuse freedom for selfish hedonism.One small example–Kind individuals are being prevented, even prosecuted, for giving food to homeless people. Tell me how that limited and restricted freedom works in the best interest of exercising free will and initiative, instead of waiting on a committee to determine the value, trade-offs, and liability of every single act.

    Which leads to the second problem–Who gets to decide how much freedom people can have–And how does one hold those who make the rules accountable, when they hold the monopoly of power to enforce such limitations “For the greater good’? Democratic consensus won’t work–A corrupt majority can easily vote a minority into slavery.

    1. Enro Rebels August 20, 2015 at 6:24 am

      Its not an assumption when the outcome is visible right before our very own eyes.

      1. Exit Only August 20, 2015 at 7:41 am

        Your experience does not make it conclusive that is so–Because I and others can present opposite experiences such as the ones in my OP that demonstrate otherwise.

  94. unclezip June 22, 2015 at 11:56 pm

    This one needs to be taken out behind the barn. And not come back. Is this a real person?

  95. Francis W. Porretto June 23, 2015 at 6:58 am

    This article, in the phrase of a former professor of mine, is so bad it’s not even wrong. (I assume that he meant it seriously and not as some sort of satire.) It’s a serious blot on Roosh’s record. Perhaps in time he’ll come to regret and repent of it.

  96. nd4spd June 23, 2015 at 10:05 pm

    Freedom is the responsibility to do what is right… Because anything else is the repression of freedom… The current state of self pleasuring sociopathic servitude has been brought about by the completely unaccountable welfare system, and a society that encourages whatever you want others will pay for, just vote for me…. When you have a truly free society you get a form of voluntary collectivism, moral people rely on each-other, and push others to do better… When you have a nanny or fascist government, you get the insanity that the world is devolving into now, and no one really gives a shit

  97. D July 30, 2015 at 3:15 pm

    “Most humans are not capable of wisely using their freedom.” So you want someone else to do it for them? The State? The Church? A “designated” expert? Sounds like some of things we presently do not like.

  98. Anonymous Cop July 30, 2015 at 7:25 pm

    I’ve been wondering recently if liberty and the libertarian movement was the correct response to the recent rise of the left. The modern “liberty movement” has no teeth and is harmless to leftist collectives. Perhaps it is all controlled opposition.

  99. Jane B August 8, 2015 at 11:43 am

    This sounds like a recipe to lose in life. Roosh is waging a war on the people in ‘the establishment’ he would like to rule.

  100. DarthHideous September 22, 2015 at 11:33 pm

    Totally agree Roosh; spot on. There’s something about having a bit of life experience and international exposure that just makes a man’s outlook on life a bit more conservative.
    After seeing how people living in the freest country in the world use that freedom to choose how to run their lives into the ground, I agree with you. I also saw how nearly ruined my own life as a teenager when my father was not around to keep me in line and guide me.
    It’s funny that in finding freedom from oppression we are now oppressed by our freedom. Given too much freedom, we pick the ruler of our lives: the t.v., the smart phone, social media, the internet, drugs, alcohol, food, the ornery woman, etc. Without guidance and left to our own devices, we’ll keep finding new ways to screw up.

  101. Donny Lawlor February 4, 2016 at 2:40 am

    If we value the pursuit of knowledge, we must be free to follow wherever that search may lead us. The free mind is not a barking dog to be tethered on a ten foot pole. – Adlai Stevenson Jr.

  102. Donny Lawlor February 4, 2016 at 2:19 pm

    Your view is simplistic and rought with pressumtions, and contradictions. You claim that ‘American’s have the most freedom’. Freedom is a function of agency. The quantity of choices available to someone is largely based on two things: Knowledge and resources (education and money). Education in the USA is the most expensive in the world and is hence the least accessible. The gap between the rich and the poor is the largest in the USA. People with less resources have less choices -which is a the main reason so many people become intrenched in mindless entertainment, acohol, drugs and so-on. All of these vices are quick fixes to give the individual a feeling of freedom and self-empowerment or a release. But the release of endorphines is short lived and the individual is left with a even stonger sense of powerlessness and even as you say enslavement (enslavement to the substance or mindless form of entertainement). The solution is education. Education gives power because power is based on knowledge which allows individuals to make informed decisions if they can find the resources to excecute them. There a numerous Countries in Europe where higher education is free, even to foreigners, if of course the applicant is able to exercise enough will power to meet the standards of admission.
    You also speak a lot about sexual or gender identity and morality. Morality is based on empathy. Which frankly you don’t seem to exercise a lot of. You make a lot of blanket statements about women, men and gender identity as well as sexuality. Your views mirror a lot of old anti-civil liberty sentiments of american imperialism. These ideas are easily debunked and are quite dogmatic. All one has to do is educate oneself. You as many others over-identify with sexuality, as if who you have sex with determines what and who you are. Sexuality is an action, actions are subject to change throughout life. Identifying with one’s own actions subjects the idividual to those actions – limiting their own freedom to choose. Gender is also culturally specific and hence completely subjective. Clothes, make up, jeans, the length of your hair, and all the other characteristics that we asign to gender roles are cultural. There are examples of matriarcal cultures in Africka where women choose men and are the head of the house-hold. Men in these tribes, where make up and dress to impress. These cultures share the same family values that you claim to protect and try conserve. The roles are simply reversed. The family is still a family, love and nurturing is still love and nurturing. You speak as if your terms judgement are universal and innate even in children. Just do some research, it simply is not true.
    In short identifying with one’s actions limits your ability to change or broaden one’s personal range of actions available to them. It is a form of personal-subjection or self-enslavement. Enlaving oneself to their own intellect, to the boundaries they create in their mind. It is a form of intillectual masturbation to speak like prophet, it is a form of over-inflated ego, but in the end it is only you who is being enslaved by your own intellectual projections (as well as anyone who is foolish enough to follow you). People need to use their own minds and own freedoms to think for themselves. And it is a form of abuse to use one’s own freedoms to try and limit other’s freedoms. I don’t know what it is like to be you. And you don’t know what it is like to be me. But we still can use a bit of empathy to relate. I personally believe that it is only actions and titles that divide people from each other. People are not their actions and they are certainly not titles or words.
    Please read these quotes and think about it and if you so choose watch the video bellow:

    Honi soit qui mal y pense, “Shame on whomsoever would think badly of it,” or “May he be shamed who thinks badly of it”.

    If we are to take the pursuit of knowledge seriously, we must be free to follow where it leads us. The mind is not a barking dog to be tethered on a 10 foot chain. Adlai Stevenson Jr.

    “Compassion is the basis of morality.” ― Arthur Schopenhauer

  103. john hall April 24, 2016 at 3:54 am

    Who would do the limiting controlling and monitoring then , mate?

  104. gr3k2o January 15, 2017 at 10:13 am

    Anyone here that flourishes with the more freedom they are given? I would die fighting socialism and governmental control.

    The problem is that you don’t realise that you’re talking to people who are wealthier and more successful than yourself. Just because you have no self restraint doesn’t mean you take away the freedom of people who are better at dealing with life.

  105. Sha'Allah Shabazz June 3, 2017 at 8:55 am

    Freedom, like equality, are both noble ideals at first glance. The nature of man yearns for them both. But they must be properly defined, so that, the nobility of these ideals, are not compromised.

    First, all law is, at its root, moral. It is based on an absolute morality, that men like Thomas Aquinas defined as the natural law. Plato said that, “good is the function of a thing.” Therefore, is something or someone, is not fulfilling the quintessential nature, for which they exist, they are not ‘good’, according to Plato.

    With that being said, freedom must be anchored in virtue, for a society to benefit from the luxury or freedom. Man must be realistic about his inherent weaknesses, in order to restrict his conduct. When law, no longer takes its guidance from a moral code and opts for the whims of politicians and their constituents instead, the road to anarchy has been laid.

    Thus, the difference between a constitutional republic and a democracy. Freedom in a God fearing republic is not the same thing as lasciviousness, we are witnessing today.

    Peace… Shah

  106. wuhugm December 19, 2017 at 2:29 pm

    Absolutely correct