Parts of the manosphere have long been preoccupied with questions about the role that Jews play in modern society.

“Why are so many of the most prominent feminists Jewish?”

“Why are Jews so prominent in academia?”

“Why are Jews so prominent in every facet of high-level professional life (law, medicine, media, etc)?”

It is not long after these questions are posed that discussions begin to get a bit more adversarial. Some go as far as to make absurd denials of the Holocaust’s occurrence, while others merely suggest a broader effort on the part of the united Jewish population to some mysterious and potentially harmful end (read: a Jewish conspiracy). Though many participants in these discussions seek to remain civil in their discourse, it is often not long before a number of anti-semitic voices begin to make themselves heard, backing their viewpoints with citations from the likes of David Duke and often damaging the legitimacy of the discussion beyond repair.

The manosphere doesn’t need that. Let’s take a second look at one of those questions:

“Why are jews so prominent in every facet of high-level intellectual and professional life (law, medicine, media, etc)?”

The answer to this one should seem obvious to many in the manospere, though ironically so. Denizens of the manosphere are not shy when it comes to discussions about IQ, its variations in different population groups, and the influence that said variations allegedly have on the respective roles that these population groups play in society. When it comes to certain minorities (blacks in particular), IQ takes on a prominent role in many a manosphere discussion, serving as a primary justification for arguments that stand against interracial unions, mass immigration, and integration. Many simply take it as a given that differences in group IQ (as measured by a host of studies on the matter) lead to differences in group outcomes. It is the difference in group IQ, they posit, that provides most of the impetus for socio-economic distinctions between some groups in western countries (ex: whites and blacks).

The studies used to substantiate the existence of these group IQ differences, however, do not merely speak of whites, blacks, and hispanics. Many go into plenty of detail with regard to the IQ of the Ashkenazi Jewish population, and have concluded that it is very high. Those who trust these studies and their conclusions about various group IQs are often the same individuals who ask the kind of questions posed at the beginning of this article: “Why are jews so prominent in every facet of high-level intellectual and professional life (law, medicine, media, academia, philosophy, etc)?”

When asked similar questions about the role of, say, blacks and hispanics in American society relative to American whites, they do not hesitate to point to IQ (the allegedly lower black and hispanic group IQ ostensibly explaining most of the socio-economic gap between these groups and others). The same urgency is not applied to questions about Jews. Instead, comment sections and forums in the manosphere that touch on the subject devolve into long discussions about Jewish conspiracies. Those who believe in the power of IQ as a determinant of outcome take it as a valid explanation for why some groups are in certain positions (they’re where they “should” be), but do not accept it as an explanation for why other groups are in other positions (must be a “conspiracy”). Why is this?

Loading...

I have my own questions about the extent to which IQ can be used to make such broad conclusions about different groups (read: I’m skeptical), but I’ll leave those for another article. Suffice it to say that if you are someone who does not have those reservations and generally accepts the notion that IQ explains the bulk of the socio-economic circumstances that certain groups face across the globe today, then you should have no problem accepting the notion that IQ explains the prominent position Jews occupy in modern intellectual, political, and economic life. There should be no “conspiracy” in your eyes and no need for anti-semitic musings about united Jewish plotters scheming to destroy western society.

That brings me to another reason why the anti-semetic perspectives (along with their anti-nonwhite counterparts) in the manosphere should be left behind. The entire mission of ROK is to guide and encourage men in relation to the process of self-improvement. That means aiding men in taking close looks at themselves, identifying their faults, mercilessly eliminating said faults, and rebuilding themselves in a superior form that can yield superior social, financial and romantic results.

This is a long, difficult process that can only be slowed by placing undue focus on adversarial blame games levied at other people. I once wrote about how black America has predicted our future, and I believe such a sentiment is applicable here as well.

The African-American community spends an inordinate amount of time and energy discussing the white man and how much of their predicament is to be blamed on him. This has, in my estimation, had serious consequences on that population’s advancement. So much energy is spent directing anger and suspicion at white people suspected of racism that some genuine problems within the black community go overlooked, passed on in favor of issues that fall in line with the adversarial mindset inherent to the racial blame game. Time, energy and money that could be spent on the substantive improvement of the broader community is instead spent on the maintenance of this suspicion. The consequences of this are substantial, and the entire community pays a heavy price.

The readers of ROK and sites like it should not seek to emulate this example. ROK’s mission is one for men of all colors, religions and ethnicities. The division of those men into different factions in constant tension with one another can only hamper the progress any of them make on the road to self-improvement. The energy that these groups (all of which consist of men united in their concern with self-improvement first and foremost, but possibly divided by race or ethnicity) spend on one another is energy that doesn’t go toward true self-improvement, and that is no good for anybody. Roosh recently lamented some of the ongoing trends in the manosphere:

The manosphere used to be full of Biggies and Tupacs—now everyone is tripping over themselves to be Drake, blogging and commenting in the hopes they may get laid. (I apologize in advance to the large number of neo-Nazis in the manosphere for comparing them to a man of non-Aryan race.) It’s hard for me to accept that the manosphere is well on its way to becoming a match.com for old people who hate blacks.

…and, apparently, Jews too. A look at many of the comment threads here at ROK and elsewhere would indicate that Roosh is right to be concerned.

It is in the interest of every young male truly interested in self-improvement to combat these trends. When the energy you spend on others is redirected toward the enhancement of your own being, good things happen.