Where Are the Warriors? Ireland’s Crisis of Feminine Conformism

“The true god of the Irish nation, as ever, remains Holy Consensus, and it is untouched in its tabernacle, safe from their dirty hands.” — Connor FitzGerald.

“99% of people in our society are women and 1% are men.” — Rudyard Lynch.

There is no sovereign nation effectively governed by feminine instincts (which ultimately leads to some sort of nurturing and consensus policing), and Ireland's current situation exemplifies this reality. Rather than acting with decisive independence, Ireland functions through a feminine paradigm: chasing perceived high-status approval and avoiding risk, prioritizing consensus over confronting uncomfortable truths.

This habit of continuously deferring necessary but controversial actions, because directly addressing these problems demands courage and risks social disapproval is driving Ireland toward ruin.

Current leadership embodies this reluctance toward true sovereignty, notably illustrated by Taoiseach Micheál Martin, who symbolizes the feminized governance style dominant today. He got to the point labeling sovereignty a backwards notion. Gentility and consensus have never produced powerful nations. Instead, greatness is built by individuals with that "iron inside them", exemplified historically by figures like Lee Kuan Yew and, contemporaneously, Nayib Bukele.

Effective rule necessitates high disagreeability, low neuroticism, and exceptional conscientiousness among other traits. These traits absent in a governance model defined by feminine values. The feminine drive for safety through consensus at the expense of truth exposes a nation to eventual collapse, precisely what Ireland faces today.

Historically, the ruling warrior class, the Estate that fights, never relied upon consensus. Their strength emerged through adversarial competition. Intellectually, in war planning, and physically through honorable feuding, duelling, and war.

Reviving a leadership class unafraid to do whats necessary to uphold national sovereignty and preserve essential conditions (homogeneity, rule of law, high average IQ, and optimal subsidiarity among others) is crucial. Yet, restoring this warrior ethos is challenging because middle-class governance itself serves as a “shit test”.

We who pass this shit test well- we find each other everyday. We are connected in life and social media and so on. To organize into anything effective such as a party or whatever else is its own challenge because disagreeableness without loyalty leads to a cloud of brutes going their preferred direction. A field in a farm with a bunch of Bulls and roosters bucking up and around and making a mess of things.

 In medieval times they already solved that problem. Hence the european aristocracy has its plethora of concurrent Chilvaric orders, where the same Monarchs and Dukes et al can be members of multiples of the same. These are not superfluities but institutions that instill loyalty in high dominance and disagreeable people.

It’s best that we take from them and make new initiatic brotherhoods ourselves, the disagreeable who find each other, and make as many need to exist, and like in the old irish world they would reduntantly and concurrently. As one chronicler recorded:

“Ireland is really a collection of secret societies. For a rootless young man like myself, this had a strong allure.”  -V. S. Pritchett

The middle-class milieu will not submit to anyone, however. They will not submit to brutish hooligans who are correct about the world. The best ideas cannot be served in a greasy, unwashed cup from a charity shop. Nor will they submit to sportsmen who drive around in obnoxious Lamborghinis and swagger around like gangster rappers to meetings of internationally renowned statesmen.

If men with “the iron inside them” are to regain their proper station, they must not act brutish hooligans, even though that may be how knights behaved back then.  They must act as “officers and gentlemen”. They must dress with taste, speak well and high, and with a broad vocabulary. They must be gentle in their correction and meek with their sword, and be mindful in using the minimum effective dose of unpalatable action to get things done (a virtue I am still seeking to evelop myself.)

These men need to be developed. Perhaps clubs can be made that look like “adult scouting” organizations paired with dining and discussion clubs where fellas chastise each other as if they are each other’s granny and posh-dandy-gay uncle combined into one. Here I'm just throwing stray darts and having the craic.

Then and only then will the cowardly shrew that is the middle class regime submit.