Transcription
Back in May, the Democratic Party announced that they were launching a $20 million initiative to study the syntax of men. They want to figure out how to communicate and talk to working-class men. And I don't think that they've quite realized that they've created a zero-sum game where the only way a man can become a Democrat under today's Democratic Party is to surrender his manhood. I personally don't think it's possible that you can be both a man and a Democrat. Uh, I think you have to choose one or the other. And this has created a problem with men. And if you zoom out and look at the broader narrative and culture in society, uh, it really encapsulates the problem we have with men in American society, and really, it paints a quite a bleak outlook um moving forward.
So, I wrote a piece about it, and I just want to dive into a few um points that I think are are really important. The the big thing is, you know, men just want agency over their lives. They want to have families. They want to go to jobs. They want to work. They want to provide. And our economy and our society for myriad reasons has taken that away from them. And what's replaced it is this self-anointed class of policy proposal-reading experts who are convening in ballrooms with multi-million dollar budgets to figure out how to talk to men. They basically, my understanding of it is, the Democrats are trying to figure out who their next Joe Rogan is without realizing that they had a Joe Rogan. And everyone who listens to Joe Rogan, they just alienated everyone, uh, and demonized them and pushed them away from the party. And the rhetoric that they continue to put out um continues to push people in that direction.
I say that obviously, I'm a woman here, you know, talking about this, but I used to be a Democrat. I was, you know, all in on the Democratic Party platform, and for one reason or another, it completely alienated me. And I think it's done, uh, the same alienation um to a lot of other people. And I think many of us, uh, have come to the same conclusion that it's a toxic party. Um, that really undermines what is fundamental about our existence, what's fundamental about being an American, what's fundamental about being a man and a woman, uh, and what's fundamental about families. Um, I think all of that is coming undone because of the different policies and prescriptions that the Democratic Party has put forward. So, I don't think they have a messaging problem. I think, uh, men and women have heard the Democrats loud and clear. Um, and the ones who are are leaving, I don't think they're coming back. And I don't think a $20 million budget is going to fix the problem. Um, and and the conclusion I've come to come to by analyzing all this is that, you know, again, it's a zero-sum game. You can be a man, or you can be a Democrat, but you can't be both.
So, to kind of set the stage here, um, you know, I think at the baseline fundamentals, like the the problem comes down to to the economy, right? So, you know, back in our, you know, parents and grandparents' generation, you could go to high, you could graduate from high school, and you could enter the workforce, and you could start your adult life with little to no friction, right? You you got a job, you graduated high school, you went straight to a factory, you could work there, you were pretty much guaranteed, unless you screwed up, you were guaranteed to work there your entire life. There was no reason to leave. You could afford to buy a home and raise a family on a single income, and then you got a pension afterwards, and things were all hunky-dory. Um, but over time, that that changed. Um, it, you know, de-industrialization um erased a lot of those jobs. New barriers to entry were erected, mostly um having to get a college degree, and over time the currency has been debased so that the cost of living has gone up. So, and there's other things too, you know, greed and capital um concentration amongst the the wealthy and and wealthy corporations. Um, so so it's not, you know, there's there's a multitude of variables that are kind of creating the perfect economic storm that's affecting young people. Um, but basically, men can't get the jobs and they can't raise the families that they used to. And so I think that's like the cornerstone of your society. So you have you have, you know, people, you have an economy, you do work, you participate in politics, you show up, you know, in society and culture with your neighbors. And if you don't have a strong foundation underpinning you, everything else kind of goes to hell. You can't, you know, it's hard to show up in society. It's hard to participate. It's hard to do things um if you don't have a solid foundation under you.
So we've taken that foundation away. And, you know, in the past, a college degree was an option, and now it's become a requirement. And one of the problems with this paradigm, and again, the Democratic Party is like, college for all and education, all this stuff. There's no impetus to ask whether there's right, whether this is right or wrong. There's no curiosity to look back at the past and figure out what went wrong and what happened. It's all about identity politics and the oppressor-oppression paradigm and blaming people at the top without looking at the mechanisms to understand what happened and why and the way things fell apart. So we went from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. Uh, that process of de-industrialization led to job losses, right? So you couldn't, you couldn't get a job the way you used to. You had to find a different type of job in the service economy, and that job required a college degree. But not everyone is designed for a college degree. The problem is we pushed, we pushed young men in this direction. I remember this. You, I graduated high school in 2013, or 2009, graduated college in 2013, but I remember in high school and college, for that matter, I never once at, like, a career table, a career table-abling event, or any sort of like recruitment fair or anything. There was never anyone from a blue-collar trade, right? Like there are tons of, you know, management jobs and quote-unquote white-collar jobs that you could get at a trade, you know, accounting and managing and that kind of stuff. Never once were trades represented. You know, there was never a local trade.
And we had a program in my high school, too, um, called BOCES, which was like a continuing education program, but it was a pathway for kids to get into the trades. So, like, I honestly considered the baking and the pastry arts route because I love cooking. Um, but, you know, there was a shop, so if you wanted to go be a mechanic, you could go train and start learning how to become a mechanic. I think they had like welding. And basically, instead of sitting in a classroom all day, I think your junior senior year, you could do BOCES and then half the the day you'd go up to the BOCES campus, and you would you would learn these trades. But it wasn't encouraged. Like, I distinctly remember all of this being discouraged. Um, no one was ever like promoting the trades or encouraging people to go into the trades. It was always college, college, college, college. And I had, I had a good college experience. I am a nerd, and I I love to learn. So, college was a good fit for me. Um, but I could see how it probably wasn't a good fit for everyone, especially guys who, you know, like to work with their hands and and like to do things. I don't know that college is the right fit um for everyone.
And so, you know, we we've transitioned to this new economy where you had to have, uh, a college degree. And and with that, things also kind of changed. So, it wasn't even just that you had to have a college degree anymore. Like, you have to have a degree from a really good school. You have to have experience. And honestly, you need someone on the inside to flag your resume. This has been my experience. Almost every single job I've ever held is because somebody who already worked for that organization could manually forward my resume to a hiring manager. I never once got a job just by applying to um, you know, the the blanket job openings that people have listening. I got one once on on LinkedIn. I'll say say there was one I responded to on LinkedIn that led led to a job, but almost everything else, and then that was a, you know, a contract freelance job, but everything else, it was always someone on the inside um had my resume. So you need to you need to have connections, you need to go to the right schools, um, you need to do all this stuff. And so it's gotten really hard for everyone to find a job. You know, Gen Z is facing historic levels of underemployment, which really isn't being captured in the official unemployment data, which is really important to pay attention to. Um, they can't, like, recent college grads can't get jobs. So it's getting hard for everyone, but it's disproportionately harder for young men. And so they're being excluded from the economy. And the the Democratic narrative is, well, we're trying to correct for historical injustices. You know, men, women, or women, people of color, etc., etc., have been historically left out of higher education and less job opportunities. Therefore, we need to privilege them and give them kind of an accelerated path forward. But in doing so, there's been an assumption made that all men are created equal in the sense that all men have equal access to wealth and equal access to opportunity and come from all, like, equal privilege. There's there's this assumption that just because you're a straight white man, you're privileged. And that's not necessarily true. And I would suspect a large portion of the population don't identify like that at all. I think, you know, wealth and privilege is a minority subset of the population. And as a result, the Democratic Party has alienated these very people because they've told all men that you're privileged and you don't deserve any help. Um, and so one of my biggest gripes, this is, uh, the victim pyramid I, uh, stole from Matt Walsh, one of his YouTube videos, but there's basically an oppression hierarchy, and men are at the very bottom. They, like, no one cares about them. No one pays attention to them. They get no points, no support whatsoever. So, everyone listed above, so women, if you have a disability, if you're obese, if you're a person of color, if you identifi identify as LGBTQ, like, you get higher rankings on on this, like pyramid or totem pole or whatever, and you're preferred above men. And so, the thing is, socioeconomic hardship, I think, is the most important thing that isn't being talked about. And men are victims of socioeconomic hardship just like anyone else. And they're not, it's not treated like that.
So, you know, to get to give you a comparison, you know, if you're if you're, you have two guys at a college campus, the guy who identifies as gay is going to have a lot more support than a guy from Appalachia, just a straight white Christian dude from Appalachia. There's going to be an LGBTQ office. There's going to be a staff and a team of people that that gay guy can go seek out help from. There's going to be special scholarships designated just for him. Um, all sorts of things, right? And then of course, once he goes to apply for a job, there's all the DEI checklist criteria, and depending on the organization he applies with, he might get in just for being gay. Um, a white dude from Appalachia who, you know, JD Vance is a really great example of this. Um, if you haven't read Hillbilly Elegy, highly recommend it. Um, you know, there was some stuff in there that, you know, I I didn't quite grow up in a in a holler and Appalachia group in the Rust Belt, but there was a lot of things that I could relate to. Um, not necessarily as it related to my personal family, but as I like experienced in my in my culture, in my community, and I could see it. Like, I I think I grew up privileged in some senses. You know, both my parents are still married, and I had a really good foundation and strong household. Um, but I grew up a lot around a lot of kids who would you could consider white trash. Um, you know, they didn't come from good homes. They had no job prospects, and, you know, you know, many a lot a lot of them turned out fine, and some didn't. Um, and so the ones who are struggling the most from, you know, the white trash society. So, you know, Appalachia is a good example, but there's other, you know, poor white communities throughout the country. Uh, the Rust Belt, you know, is is another example. Um, they're not getting help that, you know, there was again, in college, right? There were offices. Um, okay, there wasn't really. I was in the honors program, so I got, you know, special access. There were scholarships, and there's preferential treatment for women, right? So I could play the women card and get, you know, access to scholarships and internships, but there was no office I could go to for being a first-generation college student. You know, there were there were offices like that again for LGBTQ, Asian-Americans. There was an Asian-American office. I think it's now like just a broader multicultural office, but they had like an African-American office, all these different offices to cater to different identity groups. Um, but there was never a socioeconomic group. And then, of course, men are assumed to be the most privileged in our society. So, there's nothing to support them.
So, we transitioned out of a manufacturing economy, told everyone they needed to go to college, didn't even question if college was the right fit for guys, didn't even give them the option to consider um to consider trades. And it's not even that those trades weren't there. It's that if you don't know, you don't know what you don't know. So, unless you had a family member who was in a trade, like, you're not going to know how to get into the trade. You're not going to know how the unions work. You're just, and and a lot of times too, there there's legacy treatment where union people, you know, prefer their their their their children. So there's, I mean, nepotism goes, you know, is is widespread. It's not just, you know, people in Washington and people on Wall Street who are nepotistic nepotists. Um, you know, it's it's everywhere. So you have, we changed the economy, told everyone to go to college, and they go to college, they have zero support. They're going into debt. They have no idea what they're doing. Then they're coming out, and then they're they're handicapped in the workforce, right? Because we have all these DEI initiatives. So over the years, it's not even just like this was a one-time thing. It's over the years, the quality of life for men has degraded and gotten harder, and we've slowly just pushed and excluded them out of the economy and made it much harder. And so the game, the game is really rigged against men. Um, they were pushed into college without any consideration as to whether or not it was the right choice for them to begin with. Like I said, there aren't a lot of scholarships or internships earmarked for young men. So even if you're if you're a white straight dude, but you're poor, like, you have far fewer chances of success than if you're, you know, a person of color or a migrant or immigrant or, you know, any name your identity group. Like all those groups have far more access and opportunities. And now we're seeing this play out in Democratic politics, right? Like this, the this this is what, you know, they're pushing out, and this is how, you know, they're trying to they're trying to be intersectional and meet everyone's needs, and in the process, they've erased, erased men.
And so the solution to all of this, right? All of this, the elimination of of manufacturing work, de-industrialization, the push to college, not everyone's right for college, not everyone had the right support they needed to even get into college. The solution was, okay, we're going to go code, learn to code. And so some guys did that. Some guys got, you know, didn't to a college, maybe they, you know, did a boot camp or whatever, went to code. Okay, now their jobs are being, you know, displaced by AI. Um, and so all of the solutions that the Democrats have put forward really haven't helped men at all. And if anything, um, they're setting men back. And so this this matters because in the grand scheme of things, like life isn't just about the economy or how much money you make or, you know, what you do for work. Like, it's all a means to an end. So, we're part of this bigger project, if you will, of we exist, we build families, we build communities, we procreate, we pass everything on to the next generation, uh, and we leave a legacy. And that, you know, for those of us who are alive today, this has been going on for millions of years. We've been living and procreating and passing on and creating progeny and so on and so on and so forth, right? And so, work is a means to this end. Um, guys, you know, historically have gone to work to provide and protect for their families, and the paycheck that they earned enabled them to do that. Well, we've by taking away job opportunities, we've taken that away from them. Um, we've taken away their ability to own homes and then, um, you know, just denied the things that make men men want to own homes. They want to provide. They want to work. Um, and so the Democratic Party isn't really offering any solutions anymore. Uh, I think they're doing the opposite because the thing that's important to men is families and owning a home and supporting and being able to provide your family. You need a job, and all those things. You need all those ingredients to be to be able to, you know, live a good life. Um, and all of the policies that the Democrats have put forward are eliminating. It's erasure of family. It's reducing the values and the the moral framework that has made families successful. It's all about individuality. So, it's like I think it's a good a good paradigm, traditionalism versus modernism. Like, we're we're in this modern period where it's like, okay, yay feminism, yay individuality. It's every, like, hedonistic. It's everyone for themselves, right? Um, and so the Democrats have pushed family to the wayside. Family isn't important. Family is looked down upon. Families are actively being destroyed. Like, you know, there's all sorts of, you know, surveys and data and statistics. Um, welfare, you know, hurts hurts the family structure. Abortion obviously ends to leads to the erasure of life before it can be created. Um, all these policies that they've put out, and and now obviously with the economic ones, um, there's just there's no family isn't a core part of the Democratic um platform. And so if you're a traditional dude who's been kind of put off by all the identity politics and you just want to start a family, the Democratic Party isn't putting out policies that help you as an individual or help you create a family.
So, but why, you know, why are men why are men drawn to the Democratic Party? And and the answer is, they're not. I think men would rather opt out. They're going to opt out of the economy. They're opting out of dating. They're going to opt out of voting rather than surrendering their manhood on the altar of toxic masculinity. And I think that's what's that's what's being asked of. I think um men have been reduced to a list of things to check off. They're no longer people. They're just a series of of attributes. Uh, and we've we've erased, we've erased men, and we've erased the thing that makes men tick. The thing that gives them purpose and meaning. So I talked about how they want to be providers and protectors. Like this is evolutionary biology. We're all hardwired with certain things that we're just naturally inclined to do. Men are inclined to provide and protect. Um, and this kind of goes hand in hand with their desire to start families. And so men have always been the bread have been the breadwinners of their families, and they're the ones who have been endowed with the responsibility of providing leadership within their families and also within their communities. So they had a role to play. They had a role to play. And feminism has completely eviscerated that role. They've said, "No, we can take care of ourselves. We don't need men. We don't want men. We're going to be our own breadwinners." Blah, blah, blah. Um, and this is playing out in at the community level with with the erasure of community, right? You see the degradation of community as women have gone to work. Like community has fallen to the wayside. Now you're seeing it in in the politics and everything that the Democratic Party is espousing. It's a highly emasculating and feminist um policy position. Like, like the whole Democratic Party is just very emasculating. It's very um, it's very feminist in nature. And so men don't have a role to play. They have nothing to work towards. I I think it's a quest. I think like the idea of like men need quests. That's why I think video games are really uh important to to guys and why they love playing them. Like, you need a quest. You need something to accomplish and something to achieve in a way that women don't. I think women honestly are probably okay sitting around all day drinking lattes, gossiping. Uh, but but men need to do hard things. They need to prove themselves. They need to go on a quest. Um, and then they need to be they need to provide. They need to have families to be accountable to. Um, and we've denied them of that. And so their their quest to support a family, to support, you know, a wife and children, own a home, um, and then work in a in a job and work really hard to make those things happen. All that all that's gone away. All that's gone away. They don't have a quest anymore. They have nothing to live for. And and so that's this is honestly like reflecting in the mental health crisis that that men are facing. Um, it's it's not even just like we're hurting. It's not even just like men are being pushed to the bottom of society. Men are being told they're not wanted, they're not needed. Like the concept of what it means to b be a man in the 21st century has completely come undone. And the only thing that remains is raw self-interest. And I think that's very hollow and shallow. And the vast majority of men, I think deep down don't want that. Um, I think, you know, guys really do want to provide and protect, and women have gone in the way gotten in the way, and then the politics that reflect, you know, the feminist uh doctrine and and dogma, um, have made it harder, have made it harder. And then of course, the solutions that the Democratic Party is trying to put forward don't actually solve the structural problems, the economic problems, um, that, you know, are keeping men out of out of the workforce and and making it harder for them to establish um families.
And so the the the Democratic Party really is a political party that's built off of an ideology that promotes the hatred of men. And that's why I don't think it can simultaneously meet the the needs of men. Like, either you are a man, and you're not part of the Democratic Party, or you're not a man, and you are part of the Democratic Party. And I think, you know, I think that's why like the Tim Waltz archetype was put up as, you know, the the masculine leader of the Democratic Party, and he's not. He's anything but masculine. Um, and I think that's why you're seeing a lot of effeminate men rise to the ranks of the Democratic Party because they themselves don't even know what it means to be a man anymore. They're so um encapsulated by the ideology that I think they've lost lost their manhood. Like, if push comes to shove, like, I wouldn't want, you know, the Democratic leadership protecting me. Like, you know, if World War II kicks off tomorrow, like, who's who's going to go fight? Who's going to go fight? Is it the the the kids covering their faces protesting for Palestine? No, it's not them. It's going to be the hardworking guys who are, you know, coming from farms, working on oil rigs, um, those who are already in the military, the ones who have skills, the ones who want to work, the ones who want to serve. It's going to be your more conservative, traditional guys, the ones who the Democratic Party is saying, "Eh, we don't want you. We don't like you. You're evil." Um, and they're doing nothing to help. So, it's just a naturally, uh, um, like, it's it's antagonistic. Like, you can't, you just, you can't be a man and really own your manhood and then also be a Democrat. Like, they're just incompatible. Um, it's like trying to be a Christian Muslim. There's no, there's no way on earth that would ever make sense. You can't, you can't do that. Um, they're just, they're completely incompatible. Um, and so, you know, the the value system, I think, is really important here. Um, you know, the Democrats are all about kind of what I I showed with the victim hierarchy. Um, uh, where is it earlier? Right here. Right. It's all about oppression versus oppressor. And that is inherently a Marxist, uh, framework. You know, the the bourgeoisie versus the proletariat, like that was an oppressor versus an oppressed paradigm. So, anytime you see this, like, it's pretty clear it's derived from um Marxist ideology, and that wasn't inherently anti-family um ideology.
And so, you know, if if if the Democrats want to figure out how to talk to men and make, uh, bring men back under the, you know, Democratic tent, uh, they need to let men be men. They need to e, they need to accept manhood for what it is, and then they need to let women be be women. And I don't see a future where that's possible. Uh, especially in a party that doesn't even think gender exists, to be honest. Um, I I don't know how you can be a man in the Democratic Party, and I don't even know how, honestly, how you can be a woman, frankly, in the Democratic Party. Um, and so I think this is the direction it's going. And I don't, however many million dollars that they want to spend, fine. Um, it's not going to solve the problem. Um, I think it's going to push people um, either to the center, to being more politically homeless, or further to the right. Um, but I think the Democrats are going to continue losing, and they're going to continue hemorrhaging voters, and I think their loss is probably going to continue radicalizing them. I I think we're seeing a lot of radicalization on the left of people who are entrenched in a particular worldview, and they can't see outside of it, and they have no idea what's going on. Um, and I think we're only going to go deeper, uh, in the rabbit hole. And even if if you know, Democrats use this $20 million and figure, like, come to the same conclusion I've portrayed here, I don't think that they would publicly admit it because then they would have to admit that they're wrong and take accountability for their actions. And um, an ideology built on oppressor and oppression paradigms, they're not ones to want to take personal accountability and responsibility for their actions.
So, uh, let me know what you think um and your thoughts on the Democrat, the Democratic Party, where it's going, if you used to be a Democrat, um, if you'd consider going back to the Democratic Party, and if if you agree or disagree, do you think um being a man and being a Democrat is possible, or do you think they're completely incompatible at this point? And there's there's no possibility for men to go back um to the Democratic Party. I would be curious to know what you think. Uh, if you like this video and you like this analysis, I would love it if you would like and subscribe. Um, that would help me continue being able to do this kind of commentary. Um, and I'll leave a link to this article in the description if you want to read it in full detail. All right, guys. I'll see you in the next video.