NICK writes:

Just a thought on your article this morning: should we grant the assumption that beta males are in fact inferior to alpha males?

I don’t like these descriptions, because they seem too grounded in a more animalistic reality but, as you point out, it is a popular theme on the American political Right of today.

Alpha males are typically rugged men who have no serious allegiance or loyalty to anyone else. They don’t typically like order, law or responsibility. They operate on a “dog eat dog” mentality and usually are very opportunistic in the pursuit of their own self-defined concept of happiness. In their ethical lives, they’re utilitarian.

Great examples of Alpha males: dead-beat fathers, drug dealers, playboys, wall-street investors, politicians, lawyers, etc.

None of these are typically exemplars of a good life, except when “good life” is defined by modern standards. People who boldly lived their lives as they saw fit to do so regardless of any of the supposed expectations rooted in their nature as men (similarly, women are “empowered” and “free” when they live like their lives like this).

To me, the Alpha male of today is to the Alt-Right what the liberated, empowered female is to feminism. Both of them are modern ideals popularized by our society. Freed from the expectations of their nature or some God. Whereas the beta male, who serves an order and Being higher and greater than himself and lives his life according to dictates he didn’t determine in order that he might find worth, dignity and honor there rather than by his own will is a joke to these people. Living a life according to a standard designed by a Superior is very beta. Similarly, the housewife, often described here in many posts, is compared to the feminist working gal and then ridiculed as a hopeless, miserable rube.

This was always going to happen after the woman was “liberated” from the natural dignity rooted in her sex. She would need a male liberated from his. That is the “alpha male” or another, perverted form, like the “Gamma male”. Whether that crops up in the form of a gamma male or an alpha male is situational, but the fact remains that good Christian men are probably beta males by modern standards and more importantly because God is, in a way, the Superior male in this Universe. Thus, those that humbly serve him are betas by definition and that’s just the natural order in my opinion – and there’s nothing wrong with that when you look at the characteristics of the alternatives.

Laura writes:

Thank you.

We are 100 percent in agreement.

Normally, if you’ll notice, I never use the expressions “beta” and “alpha” male. Not only do they represent ridiculously broad categories, these are Darwinian terms. I used it in this case to argue against it.

You write:

This was always going to happen after the woman was “liberated” from the natural dignity rooted in her sex. She would need a male liberated from his.

Actually, the liberated male came first — and then the liberated female. Once man became on the practical level atheistic — creating societies in which God is simply absent from civil government — it was only a matter of time before his rebellion resulted in woman’s rebellion against him. 

But you’re right in that the men’s rights movement came after the feminist movement and was the inevitable result of it.

— Comments —

Shaun F. writes:

I enjoyed your post this morning, and I agree with your assessment of alpha and beta – in the context of Darwin.

I think the simplest way to understand this, or at least for me to understand this is as follows:

Males are either men or boys.
Boys are weak men.
Amongst the men, there are cads, and honorable men.

Laura writes:

Thank you.

Beverly writes:

There is no such thing as alt-right, that term was made up by some idiot on the left.

My alpha hubs is a total gentleman, a man who can do anything from build a house to put brakes on a car, dad was an Alpha too. My son is an Alpha. They are large and in charge, and I love it. Your commenter is nuts, and probably hasn’t met many real alphas. My son is another Alpha.

Yes, some Alphas are [jerks]. Mine however is Mr. Darcy. Every woman on earth wants Mr. Darcy. I’m sure you know that.

Joe A. writes:

I am shocked at the zeal to pronounce on the alt-Right and terms “alpha” and “beta” males by your readers – who quite obviously don’t have a clue what the words mean in the context of the so-called “alt-Right.”

Obviously, in contemporary America, there is tremendous pressure to opinionate on everything – the Left’s gift to our dying society.  But it would help if we’d learn a thing or two first.

“Alt-Right” was not invented by Leftists. It was invented by “conservatives” read out of the movement by National Review types and is an abbreviation of “alternative Right” meaning, not Buckley or George W. Bush. It is a Right of nationalism – people, not governments – and their organic interests as opposed to the artificial interests propagandized by Our Betters to make you compliant and obedient drones, slaving on their behalf.

Likewise, “alpha” and “beta” have absolutely nothing to do with Darwin or dogs.  For crying out loud, people! It’s ALDOUS HUXLEY. You know, the guy who wrote about the World Controllers, artificial clones, and a rigidly conditioned social order of Alphas, Betas, Gammas, and Deltas???  Because it was first picked up by blogs of lonely American men who cannot obtain feminine companionship in Third Wave Feminist America, it was adapted to the “sexual value marketplace” but it remains Huxley’s gig and is a standard reference for a man’s place in the sexual – and social –pecking order. If you don’t understand that, or if you do not want to understand that but think of yourself as a God-fearing, law abiding ‘murican – then you are a “cuck” as in “cuckoo bird.” Cuckoo birds were infamous for destroying another bird species’ eggs, laying their own eggs in its now empty nest, and flying away while the clueless and “cucked” Other Bird raised the cuckoo bird’s chicks.

Sound familiar?

But maybe you prefer the Bolshevik Left’s spin on the Alt-Right better than mine, an actual devotee of the movement. After all, they’re the ones who’ve led us since WWII and brought us to the end of American civilization.  D’oh!

Alt-Right places people ahead of states, ahead of soulless corporations. It places kin ahead of alien peoples.  And while the entire panoply is represented from atheist to devout Greek Orthodox, it’s fair to say there are A LOT of Christians within the alt-Right.

Learn, people. Expand your thinking. Stop opinionating if you know you haven’t a clue. That’s how we’re going to make America great again.

Oh and for Pete’s sake, we don’t need to virtue signal each other here. We’re all friends am I right? Save it for our real enemy, the Godless Commies who want to make us their slaves. #MAGTA #TheStormHasArrived

Laura writes:

Gimme a break. The Alt-Right is largely controlled opposition. I said Trump was a puppet before he was elected and nothing has disproved that statement. Yes, he was better than Hillary, okay? Still he has subverted whatever genuine patriotism there was.

I want the whole truth, not bits and pieces.

And, yes, most of the leading figures of the Alt-Right are Darwinists. That’s one reason why they are the leading figures of the Alt-Right. That includes Stefan Molyneux, Milos Yiannopolous, Alex Jones, Richard Spencer, Paul Joseph Watson, Jordan Peterson, and others.

Here’s a handy litmus test to identify who is anti-establishment, my friend. Alpha, beta — who cares? We need heroes willing to die for the truth.

***

Nick writes:

I think there’s a big difference between a man possessing so-called alpha characteristics and a man being an outright “alpha male.” Being “in charge” is hardly enough criteria to determine if a man is “alpha.” Second, how a man assumes and exercises the kind of control and dominance he has over others is a greater question of importance than whether or not he is dominant or “in charge.”

When you look at men in control, like our leaders today, you’ll often find many of them to be opportunist and utilitarian in the pursuit of personal succeess. People who are willing to “Crack a few eggs” or “step on a few heads” in order to succeed are idolized as alphas. But what this suggests is a man’s strength is not in his ability to conform to an order beyond his own will but rather in the ability to turn others to an order of his own will.

Think of men like Bill Clinton, Doc Holiday, like James Bond and John Wayne. Not all of those men are ignoble, but all of them do exactly as they please and live as the “rugged individual” who is his own measure and follows his own law.

Lastly, I’d like to point out that human beings live a more complex life than animals. Their social settings vary dramatically. A man can be a lowly mail room clerk during the week but on Sunday he might teach 100 people at the local church about the early Church Fathers. He might inspire and encourage many to look further into the historical church and function as a strong leader in that regard but be insignificant in others. That’s just human life.

For all intents and purposes, what’s called a “beta male” usually make better fathers and husbands than do so called alpha males. But overall, Laura is right to point out that this isn’t a fundamental concern. The fact that being an alpha has become such a fundamental concern on the American Right and that pop psychology is able to generate such revenue with their articles and books on “how to become an alpha male” only suggests many who think they are alpha aren’t at all and really are falling prey to another commercialized concept coming from our sick culture.

Laura writes:

Hooray!

“Second, how a man assumes and exercises the kind of control and dominance he has over others is a greater question of importance than whether or not he is dominant or “in charge.”

Well said.

The talk of alpha males is to some extent an effort by men who live in a very feminized culture to valorize strength. Men are fighting for a masculine identity. Masculinity has been so demonized. It’s hard to rise above those ingrained ideas. But as Nick says, it’s become “another commercialized concept.”

Beverly writes:

A good man is a good man.
An evil man is evil.

Simple, not complicated, just common sense.

Currently, the men who have wasted so much time HATING Trump are definitely men filled with envy.

Seen it so many times before.

Please follow and like us: