Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - The Failure of the Straight White Man

All Episodes

Dec. 10, 2025 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

11:38

The Failure of the Straight White Man

The young men are burning down the village to feel its warmth.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	At the moment, there is a great dialectic struggle going on in the right-wing space of Western politics.
	This struggle is between the forces of the previous liberal paradigm, which are colloquially called containment, and a radical right-wing that is struggling to burst through the bonds in which it has been imprisoned for so long.
	The recent debate between Piers Morgan and Nick Fuentes brought this struggle to sharp relief, as it seemed to embody so many of the maladies which plague our political discourse.
	Not only do we have the last of the boomer liberals represented in the quivering blob of moral insecurity that is Piers Morgan, but we also have the immiserated but determined young men as represented by Nick Fuentes.
	What seems notable to me about this is that it's only really right-wing men discussing this debate.
	I've yet to see any left-wingers or women even notice, let alone care, that this argument is even happening.
	They don't seem to grasp what is actually going on here.
	The debate is taking on the aspect of a father attempting to deal with his angry son, a son who has realised that the world is stacked against him, and that his birthright is being given away to people who don't rightfully deserve it.
	When looked at through this lens, it's no wonder that the Western Zuma is furious with the Boomer for being so cavalier with his inheritance.
	When you dig through the sedimentary political layers of the subject, we find at bottom the question that Fuentes and his Groypers are, in their inarticulate way, asking.
	And that question is why exactly do women, foreigners, homosexuals, transgenders, etc. deserve the same status, authority and consideration as the straight white man.
	Contained within this question are many important aspects of society that we are just not used to considering.
	Who will be dependent upon them?
	What will they embody with their authority?
	Are they capable of reproducing themselves in such a way that future generations can benefit from the accumulated social capital that they produce?
	The stock answer to this question comes of course from liberal philosophy.
	We ought not to hold prejudices against people because of their unchosen properties, as these are irrational, and all rational beings ought to be considered equals in the kingdom of ends.
	At base, it is an ontological question.
	To liberalism, each man, woman, and other that exists is essentially of the same type, and therefore the chains of inequality must be burst asunder in order to usher in the reign of rational equality.
	And it was this drive towards rational equality that stripped the straight white man of his moral authority and deposed us from our commanding cultural position.
	Liberalism of all kinds, feminism, intersectionality, socialism, egalitarianism, has been drip-fed into the culture since the 60s and has poisoned our blood and made us weak and supine.
	And the militant Zumawaffen are the consequence of our failure.
	If we embodied a tradition that actually held our dignity as straight white men first and foremost in its own worldview, they wouldn't have to look to historical foreign examples to find it.
	Speaking of failure, though, it is Piers Morgan that actually embodies this failure in his personal life.
	Disrespected by his wife, apparently cheated on regularly by her, and a figure of constant humiliation in public.
	He might be rich, but that seems to be little consolation for the metaphysically desolate life Morgan evidently lives.
	Who would actually want to be Piers Morgan?
	Moreover, Morgan has been completely captured by the morality that led men writ large to such an ignoble end.
	During his debate with Fuentes, Morgan could do little else than play the predictable old liberal game of casting epithets.
	Racist, homophobic, misogynist, etc. etc. etc.
	Not only is this tiresome to men of my age, but for men of Fuentes' age, this is positively hilarious.
	These liberal incantations do not hold any power over them, and to invoke them is to admit that one wants to preserve the old order that they are here to destroy.
	In throwing these labels at Fuentes, Morgan admits that he is just a liberal himself.
	He is just here to defend the rights of women and minorities.
	He doesn't care about the straight white men who have been on the receiving end of such a regime.
	He is, in effect, attempting to pull up the ladder and reveals himself to be the last of the rear guard of a form of masculinity that has failed.
	Returning to the question then, we can see that the post-World War II consensus is trying to make us all free and equal as it was assumed that all of the non-straight white male identity categories will either become socially neutral and impose no costs on society, or take up the moral burdens the straight white men have carried over the centuries.
	But is this true?
	And the answer is quite clearly no.
	Not only have minorities not been cost neutral to society, but women, when given free access to wealth and power, have not taken on a paternalistic role that is considerate of the people beneath them.
	They have not married down, they have not formed families and become the breadwinners, they are not producing children as is needed for the maintenance of civilization, nor have they maintained the proper moral order of society.
	Indeed, these groups, freed from the yoke of the straight white man's moral order, have proceeded to burn up the cultural capital of the West and mortgage our ever-darkening future for immediate benefits in the present.
	The natural order of the world, in which the straight white man is at once the breadwinner, the moral authority, and the person of last resort, has been inverted upon its head with the rational expectation that anyone else ought to be able to fulfil that role.
	And we have found that nature has in fact not imbued all people with the same drives, goals and desires, and the world is a worse off place for it.
	This has not been responsible, considerate, nor sustainable.
	Instead of alleviating oppression, it has merely shifted perceived oppression onto a demographic from whom recognition of their rights and entitlements has at the same time been rescinded.
	And this is what is being represented in the Piers Morgan vs. Nick Fuentes debate.
	Morgan takes on the aspect of a kind of house slave to the liberal order, demanding an end to racism and sexism whilst having been born and raised at the tail end of a civilization that had not yet been fully perverted by this philosophy, and then bending his craven knee to be the whipping boy of the new regime so he can finish what remains of his life with its material benefits.
	It's no wonder the Zumers are furious.
	Why wouldn't they be?
	The Zumers though have to remember that they are at the beginning of the revolution and not at the end.
	They are the tip of the spear and whilst they are shredding the norms and valuations of the liberal order, demands will be placed on them to find the alternative.
	And it's not fair to demand they have the answers either.
	Not only are they only in their twenties, but they were deliberately severed from a tradition that they are attempting to reconstruct from fragments, in the face of an unbelievably overwhelming and powerful hostile opposition.
	Ironically, it is a tradition that men like Piers Morgan are actually well positioned to help them put back together if only men of that generation could be persuaded to look at these lost boys with sympathy instead of contempt.
	I think the reason that Jordan Peterson used to be an inspiration for young men is that he recognised that actually young men crave responsibility, they crave duty.
	I think that underneath the resentful iconoclasm seethes a desire to build anew so they can fulfil this primal urge.
	They want to be the people upon whom others can rely and feel pride in their labour whilst doing so.
	They want the honour, dignity and glory of a manly life well lived, and to know they did their part for others so that after they are gone they can be well remembered and revered by their descendants.
	I think they want to be integral links on our great chain of being instead of being liberated from it and I think that that's the great struggle that underpins the surface level political conflicts of our time.
	And I also think that the more the old guard resist, the stronger this urge becomes.
	As Morgan said during the debate, he believes that everyone is the product of our circumstances and he's right about this, but afraid of exploring the implications.
	What he has admitted here is that we are the ones who have failed them.
	It was the cowardice of the men of older generations who abandoned their posts and did not hold the line to maintain the dignity and authority of straight white men, the dignity of not just ourselves but our fathers, our sons and our grandsons.
	And the Zumers are the inevitable product of this cowardice and they have banded together to try and reclaim it.
	And what's the alternative?
	A slow, undignified death by a thousand cultural cuts, as what's left of the Western straight white man is dismembered, dishonoured, scattered to the winds and lost to history.
	And we men of the right had better understand this sooner rather than later.
	The Zumers are our vanguard, and we have an obligation here.
	As the older men, we have a responsibility to them and we ought to fulfil it.
	We should have ensured that they had a strong and stable society in which they might have readily found a place, so they could be productive, got married, and stepped up into their roles as patriarchs of their own households, and we didn't.
	Each time we curse the rebellious Zuma, we are cursing our own reflected failures.
	We made them possible and now we must help them despite their flaws.
	Scapegoating them for being the men we allowed modernity to make of them will not exculpate us nor will it help them or anyone else.
	it will instead be the last admission that the straight white man is done as a historical force, and our exit from the world stage will be a pathetic and contemptible sigh of exhaustion, unworthy of our ancestors,

▲