“Here on the edge of time, at the end of all things.”

-Craig Fraser, 2014

The most toxic notion that remains to emasculate what is left of Western Man is the notion of ‘rights’.

Most of us think of rights in terms of ‘what should be’, or what would be ‘just’ and/or ‘fair’.

For what it is worth, that statement of beliefs above is held by most Americans to accurately describe the concept of rights. But how useful is it as a practical application of the ideal in daily life?

‘What should be’ is, by definition, not reality, and is manifestly not ‘what is.’

‘Justice’ is a perpetually argued concept that has religious origins but is currently nothing but a money pit for lawyers, with your ‘sacred human right’ nothing but the rope they tug parasitically upon. One needs to know what standards of justice prevail in the society he is enslaved to or dealing with. However, to trust in justice is supreme fallacy, and inevitably results in bitterness in the people I have known of that bent.

‘Fairness’ is currently the most favored way in which the postmodern American does express a notion of rights, being a vague sense that every person, no matter their character, crimes or contributions, deserve all of the same privileges. Fairness therefore reveals itself as the most toxic ideological pillar in human history. The key to understanding the notion of fairness is the associated notion of privilege.

A privilege is a good –an act, an object, an ongoing contract, etc.—enjoyed by a person simply because of who or what they are. A privilege therefore depends either on the tacit agreement of society [which is only possible in small scale communities], such as ‘an elderly or sick person deserves to be taken care of,’ or on threat of force.

A privilege becomes a right when the claim is backed by threat of force. This has historically been the province of the upper class who either monopolized warrior status, or have been in possession of fortunes sufficient to buy the services of the warrior, or currently his devolved cousin the police officer.

Therefore, in any collective society greater than the size of an extended family, a right, is best defined as a privilege backed by threat of third-party force.

Therefore the concept of rights may be said to be the single most corrosive emasculating societal force, as it lends the illusion of power to one group of consumers—though in fact they have no agency and are ultimately dependent upon a third party for all things—in order that a class of producer may be enslaved. By overturning the exclusive rights of the tiny elite who used state power to prey upon the vast under class, the political revolutions of the Modern Age have ultimately resulted in a postmodern society in which every person is on one hand privileged and on the other hand a slave.

As the current understanding of rights originated with tribal traditions tacitly agreed upon to insure the welfare of those members who lacked the ability to physically assert their privilege through force [women, children, and the unwell] it is this man’s opinion that it therefore follows that men living according to such a third-party threat system of privilege will, over time, adopt the behavior traditionally associated with women, children and the unwell.

This concept is so misunderstood that even modern and postmodern thinkers who advocate ‘might as right’ entirely miss the point, that any system that relies for the enforcement of ‘rights’ via third-party threat, erodes the character and agency of the man benefitting from the privilege in question, and that eventually the system may—and therefore will—be steered against those members of society that it was once intended to favor.

A man’s belief in his rights is a denial of his own masculine agency.