I used to pay a great deal of attention to the Oscars. I’ve been a serious movie buff ever since I saw Spielberg’s “The Color Purple.” Before you all get started, yes, I know all about this film. I won’t go into details, or the reasons why I continue to watch it in spite of how it disdainfully showcases black men, except to point out that even though she’s a feminist, the author of the book upon which it is based, Alice Walker, treated the character of Mr.____ far better than in the movie, and her masterful book, “The Third Life of Grange Copeland,” centers around a far greater and more admirable male character. Feel free to hate the movie, but I have to admit, that’s when the love affair with cinema started for me.
Since then, I’ve always wanted to take movies more seriously, and a very basic way to tell what’s good and what’s not is to note who gets nominated and who wins. Sometimes the Academy gets it right, and sometimes totally wrong. Then there are a few occasions when they mislead me into believing that I’m going to enjoy something I don’t.
Such was the case with “No Country for Old Men,” an intense cat-and-mouse thriller off of which I could not take my eyes, not only for the intensity, but for Javier Bardem’s mesmerizing (and deserving) Oscar-winning performance. However, I wish, like “Nine,” that I could have found the strength to press the “eject” button. Instead, I was subjected to far more frightening and graphic violence than I can stand. Like a bagel I accidentally bit into when I was a teenager that was glazed with salt on the bottom, an act that has prevented me ever since from salting anything, this movie has turned me off to violence in a big way.
Therefore, when I saw a trailer for “The Road,” starring the very manly Viggo Mortensen, and realized that it was based on a book by the same author as “No Country,” in spite of the fact that I found the teaser intriguing, I thought, “No way.” I’ve seriously had enough. Lucky for me, there’s this dude who calls himself Angry Harry, who mentioned this guy named Paul Elam, who has this cool website where I post now. Paul and a commenter named Jabberwocky calmed my squeamish self down, and assured me that violence was merely incidental in the film, and not the main bloody point.
What a fantastic film. On every level. Every man should see it. This includes politicians, who for the most part are nearly shells of men, as far as I’m concerned, and even alpha males, who probably won’t get it, but you never know. However, before I can give you the reasons why every man should see it, I need to explain why, as an anarchist, I loved it so much, and how it enhanced what I have been thinking about lately, concerning the advance of feminism in our lifetime.
By itself, feminism could never have gotten anywhere, except on the back of a relentless machine set in motion and largely supported by alpha males: government. It is the nature of government, as I pointed out in “Coercion Is Death,” to initiate coercion over everyone who inhabits a particular land mass (or masses, if you live on an archipelago, or if you intend to build and empire). By itself, feminism is basically powerless to force itself onto anyone other than another feminist.
Men like me don’t do this. My general attitude, in spite of my Religious Right upbringing, when confronted with opposing beliefs, viewpoints, and behaviors face-to-face, has always been, “Hey, whatever floats your boat.” Anarchy has only augmented that, and I have now joined in by floating my own boat. It has always been, and always will be, alpha males who set about sinking the boats. Their general attitude is opposite mine. It largely consists of, “Screw you. That’s mine.” I have never liked men like this. That is why I had such a hard time with Bardem’s character in that horrific film. The kindly old gentleman who offered assistance on the side of the road did not deserve to get punctured in his brain. The alpha male takes and hurts. All I do in the presence of one is get taken from and hurt. In general, I don’t care for gangster movies, either. Why would I want to indulge in watching alpha males take from others? As far as I’m concerned, they deserve their comeuppance.
There are certainly a few alpha females out there (okay, probably more than a few), but in general, when a woman says, “Screw you. That’s mine,” she is unable to take on her own, as an alpha male would, unless she has a gun, which is seldom. It reminds me of an interview with a nineties gay male porn star I read in a magazine a long time ago. He was a former bouncer at a gay bar, and he remarked that he had to be careful, because gay men would get “bitchy like women, but they’re strong like men.” An effeminate-acting gay man may seem like a weak female, but have you forgotten? He’s 200 pounds with thick arms. That’s the essential difference between alpha males and alpha females.
And alpha females know the difference. Men conceive of guns, design them, gather the resources to make them, hire workers to fashion them, hoard them, sell them, make improvements to them, study them, share information about them with like-minded alpha males, obsess about them, write songs about them, paint them, draw them, praise them, covet them, buy them, steal them, show them off, practice with them, bond with their sons using them, dream about them, mimic them with their dicks, etc. Alpha females know this. Alpha males know alpha females know this. The power struggle begins.
When power-hungry feminists see the opportunity, they pounce on the government created by these men, and the revenge fantasies begin. Alpha males with fewer guns, less money, and less smarts, along with the rest of us males, suffer, along with a great many women. Even if feminism went by the wayside tomorrow, this would still be the case. It is the smartest (and sometimes luckiest) alpha males who sit at the top. I had an alpha male dog as a teenager. (Cute story: As a puppy, he would hold his cloth leash in his mouth when I took him out for a walk. “Screw you. I’m taking you for a walk!”) He could bark any other dog into submission, and he always did. My non-alpha male father remarked that in a pack of dogs, ours would either be dominant or he would be dead. This was one of the most correct things Dad ever said. This is how alpha males are. Feminists are aware. Like minarchists, those who believe in a small, constitutionally limited government, feminists see a system that isn’t going to go away, so why not use it to their advantage?
This is what was going on when Betty Friedan wrote her seminal “The Feminine Mystique.” America was a brand new empire, at least to the rest of the world. (The empire was building before the ink was dry on The Constitution, but we’ll leave that for another rant.) By the late Fifties and early Sixties when Friedan was researching her book, women had enjoyed more than a decade of corporate, imperial luxury. The poorest of American housewives could expect what Stephen Sondheim wrote in “America” from “West Side Story,” sung by Puerto Rican immigrants who came from nothing:
“I like to be in America!
O.K. by me in America!
Ev’rything free in America
For a small fee in America!
“…Automobile in America,
Chromium steel in America,
Wire-spoke wheel in America,
Very big deal in America!
“…I like the shores of America!
Comfort is yours in America!
Knobs on the doors in America,
Wall-to-wall floors in America!”
All this prosperity, so effortless and available even to the poorest among us, and now we’re bored. I believe Friedan when she remarked at how surprised she was to have these women, who were virtually strangers, talk to her about their sexual fantasies. When you’re bored, a sexual fantasy or two usually does the trick. The point of the empire was to ensure that the minions (that’s you and me) are happy, the ruling elite have a comfortable, easily controlled populace, and the empire remains forever and ever. We’ll leave aside the glaring fact that no empire on this earth has ever lasted, and it wasn’t because modern technology wasn’t available. Empires, based on initiatory coercion, are death-oriented, and must therefore eventually die. Feminism, the whore-wife of empire, is also death-oriented and won’t last long when the emperor is finally dead.
When life comes this easily and quickly — when machines can now take care of the house, and since all women on this land mass have been subjected to numerous systems of coercion, one especially egregious one, government schooling, that spends countless hours drilling into you the idea that the empire of which you are a part is the best, with the best government, and the best way of life — why not grab at the reins of power and wield a little more of it on behalf of other bored housewives?
I have no doubt that the sometimes stifling manner of suburban culture was not sufficient for women, but then, I don’t think it was sufficient for men, either. Small communities and big cities have always been a bit more spontaneous. People tend to gravitate to one or the other. Suburban life is good for a few things, and where it can grow organically, I would think it would have the appearance and attitude of small towns. But so much of modern community planning requires the input of a coercive body of people in order to ever come about (zoning, building permits, property taxes to keep out the n*ggers, et cetera, ad nauseam). Beyond the overarching system of coercion known as government, there are the softly coercive traditional roles for men and women, once crucial to our very survival, many no longer necessary, but tradition speaks louder (and more coercively) than individuality. In spite of modernity, we are still quite tribal. So we have bored housewives, malcontents like Friedan, government-planned suburbia, and a system of coercion in which these women have all been indoctrinated to place their trust. This is what’s otherwise known as a powder keg. It also would have been impossible without the efforts of the alpha males to coerce, coerce, and coerce some more. “Give that to me. I have a date with an alpha female, and she wants some.”
What does this have to do with the haunting, dark, and exquisitely beautiful movie, “The Road”? Well, the movie takes as its premise a great conflagration of the earth, accompanied by massive earthquakes, which wipe out swaths of humanity, virtually all animal life, and kill all crops. What’s an alpha male to do?
They congregate amongst themselves, riding about the wasteland formerly known as America, shooting at will, taking, and generally causing distress to anyone unfortunate enough to come into their path. We are talking about a rapidly diminishing food supply, since the only things left to eat are canned goods and other humans. (There is a particularly disturbing scene in the middle, where a hapless mother and child are running from some of these alpha cannibals.)
What about the rest of us? How would we fare? As someone who believes that the state is not the answer, I found my own beliefs challenged, making the film darker than it already was. Ultimately, however, I found the direction of my present thinking enhanced, and in a way, cemented by the unfolding of the story. It centers on Viggo Mortensen as Papa, and his prepubescent son. They wander further and further south, perhaps clinging to the idea that they might eventually meet up with the boy’s mother, who has left their once happy home, in a desperation that does not disparage women, so much as show how different people would react to such an unprecedented world event. The abandoned father and son have adventures, conversation, bonding, fear, arguments, and live the lives of refugees.
It is extraordinary to watch the level of intimacy between these two: one man, and one soon to be. It is the very essence of what a father and son relationship should be. In spite of the difficulties facing a father who knew a completely different world, the primal frustration is never taken out on the son. Beyond that, Papa constantly imparts to his son preparatory advice, which will come in handy late in the film, as it reaches perhaps its most touching moment. Anybody who thinks this is a misogynist film due to the mother’s flight, or the relative absence of female characters in the movie, must watch until it’s all over. Only then can you understand why this is the first film I have ever bothered to completely review. It is truly magnificent.
Beyond the wonderful father/son relationship you are privileged to see, the movie ultimately hints at the necessity of men in order to build the world. Although it never happens in the course of the film, you get the sense that someday crops will be sown again, due to the presence of the good men you see in this movie. Perhaps people will once again, when the earth ceases the constant burning and shaking, be able to rebuild society. Even more importantly, you are left with a hope that this time it will be built by men and women who understand and repudiate the true nature of the alpha personality, but that ultimately men, with their greater bodily strength, and their higher numbers of intellectually-minded members, along with the lesser numbers of women who are up to the task, will form a society that can deal with the new challenges that the planet has provided with its upheaval. The remaining women will concern themselves in general with the desires of their sisters and children. One of the last lines in the movie seems to hint at this, and it’s the essence of motherhood and womanhood.
After all, in the world this gifted author has dreamt up (if the movie is any indication of the book), rights, privileges, opportunities, feminism, fascism, corporatism, militarism, statism, liberalism, libertarianism, socialism, communism, capitalism, and virtually every other -ism you can imagine, have all been burned to a crisp. All that’s left is what individuals possess inside. They either have the will to live, to merely scrounge, or to take by force. All pretense has vanished. There is no time for women to think of luxury when the young haven’t been fed for several days. Friedan’s concerns would not exist. All that would be left for women to think about, and for the children to observe, is how hard the men have to think, work, and live, simply so that everyone else will go on. (Incidentally, I would not recommend this film to women, as it touches too strongly on what I believe a great many women fear the most.)
It’s a tremendous concept, and one that was wrongfully ignored by the Oscars (can’t always depend on them). Its spare, imaginative, horrifying look at the fragility of what we have built in the modern age, and the pretentious ideologies we have pulled so tightly over it, should have been praised to the high heavens, including the filmmakers’ use of costuming, makeup, set design, sound and visual effects, music, and excellent pacing.
Perhaps the reason it was ignored was because of the blatancy of its portrayal of the essentials of manhood. Maybe if a couple of irresponsible feminists who shot a rapist had sped their Cadillac through the proceedings, it might have gotten the attention it deserved. No matter. When the America sung about by those Latina immigrants has finally collapsed, I pray that I will find myself in the company of the family that appears at the end of the movie. They think like me.
B.R. Merrick writes for “Strike The Root” and “A Voice for Men,” lives in the Northeast, is proud to be a classical music reviewer at Amazon.com and iTunes, and in spite of the poisonous nature of television, God Himself will have to pry his DVDs of “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” out of his cold, dead hands, under threat of eternal damnation.
Tags: B.R. Merrick, Culture, Family, Fathers, Feminism, Masculinity, Media, Men, Men's Issues, Miscellaneous, Politics, Zeta Masculinity

















Wow. I guess I wasn’t the only one that was moved by this film.. Great review…
Oh, and I kinda liked the Color Purple as well; and that’s saying alot! If it even has a whiff of estrogen, I usually stand clear…
TMOTS
Anarchy means different things to different people. Social or individual anarchist? I know that anarchists are opposed to corporatism. What about small and medium size business. Should government control all of the banks, natural resources, health care, etc.
Are guns okay for personal protection?…cause you know the cops only arrive later to clean up the mess. Are standing armies okay for defense?
I’ll have to watch the movie. The characterization of alpha male sounds similar to patriarchy. What is the definition of an alpha male or alpha female? Sexual power, political power, physical strength, weapons, or money? Are low ranking soldiers alpha-males? Are trashy douche-bags alpha-males? Are jail house rapists alpha-males? Are poverty stricken armed thieves alpha-males? How about great leaders and business men like Isaac Newton, Martin Luther King, George Washington and Bill Gates? IMO, alpha is about leadership and not necessarily good or evil.
As long as there is overpopulation, poverty, lack of resources, etc. there will always be theft and war. Alpha males will never be eliminated, they will just be subdued and surpassed by a growing tide of alpha-females. The alpha males will always compete for the crumbs offered by women. There will always be competition, it is essential for survival. Rather than blaming the alphas and competition that drives them, I think the real problem facing men (even greater than feminism) is chauvinism. Competition is essential for survival, chauvinism is not.
Per Machiavelli, empires used to be based on religion as the glue to hold society together and convince people to accept their fate as sheep. Now, religion is losing it’s hold and a new secular feminist ideology is needed to maintain power.
Empires don’t have to last, only the ruling elite need to survive. Everybody else will be too busy fighting amongst themselves for survival to be concerned about their liberty and equality. People will willingly give up their freedom in exchange for survival.
Glad you liked it, The Man On The Street. The issue with “The Color Purple” isn’t the estrogen level, it’s the almost complete lack of positive male characters.
And Denis, anarchy is a combintion of “an,” meaning “without,” and “archy,” meaning government. That’s all it means to me. The size of businesses is none of my business. Without government, there can be no corporations, nor could government control anything. The free market, comprised of humanity, would organize itself, including defense, health care, puppy adoption, etc. For example, Paul deleted the comments that were previously here, due to that commenter’s previous posts. Self-organizing. No government required.
“Are guns okay for personal protection?” In my book, yes.
“Are standing armies okay for defense?” Not if they steal money.
“The characterization of alpha male sounds similar to patriarchy.” I am using the definition supplied by Paul, at least the way that I have interpreted it. Paul calls for zeta males instead, and I am more willing to explore that avenue.
“IMO, alpha is about leadership and not necessarily good or evil.” Well, we need to be clear on the definition first. In my view, the alpha male takes simply because he can, acting from a combination of biology (testosterone) and deep-seated hurt. “Good” and “evil” to me seem to be individual valuations, which is why I tend to speak in terms of life orientation and death orientation. I believe that the two terms I am currently using can be premised upon facts.
“As long as there is overpopulation, poverty, lack of resources, etc. there will always be theft and war.” I do not believe there is overpopulation or a lack of resources. The human brain is far too complex, and has gotten humanity out of innumerable binds throughout existence. Theft and war come from fear coupled with deep-seated hurt, as I see it now.
“Alpha males will never be eliminated, they will just be subdued and surpassed by a growing tide of alpha-females.” As long as children are raised in systems of coercion, I agree, there will always be alpha personalities. But the only power alpha females can wield over alpha males is sexual or guilt-laden (appeals to the mother figure, again, going back to deep-seated hurt in childhood). Ultimately, the greater physical strength, and the greater number of intellectually-centered alpha males answer to no one.
“There will always be competition, it is essential for survival.” Competition is a natural phenomenon, yes, but it is not essential for survival. Cooperation, evidenced by breast feeding, and then voluntary association among fully grown individuals no longer dependent on the breast, is essential. I would say cooperation is essential, and agree with you that “chauvinism is not.”
“People will willingly give up their freedom in exchange for survival.” I agree. This is at the heart of the current “Ground Zero Mosque” nonsense.
Denis, here is Paul:
“Alpha males are a very, very small fraction of the male population. They are highly dominant men who reside at near the top of all populations, from social groups to national governments. These men are generally characterized by the ability to force the deference of other men, often mistaken for leadership, and to obtain and hold power, which lends them dominance in being selected for mating by the most desirable females. There is no evidence to suggest this is any different now than at any other time in history, and there is no way to underestimate the importance of the mating strategy in the phenomenon of the alpha male.”
From “The Plague of Modern Masculinity”:
http://avoiceformen.com/2010/07/01/the-plague-of-modern-masculinity/
An Alpha male is defined in the MRM/PUA community as any male who demonstrates traits that females find sexually attractive. These traits are most commonly thought of as dominance, confidence, and physical markers of testosterone and general genetic fitness.
An Alpha male as socially defined is simply a leader of a group. This definition has correlation but is not directly related to the above definition. One can be Alpha but in jail, or one can be Beta but the CEO of a corporation. It is simply linked to social status, whether earned or unearned.
A naturalist/scientific definition of Alpha male is a pack leader who has advantagous mating rights with the female members of the pack.
The above is off the top of my head, but I’m pretty sure I got the gist right. Anytime we refer to Alpha in MRA blogs, its referring to the first definition. Anytime the social or scientific definition is used, it should be stated so that there is no confusion. The first definition used originally by PUA/gamers/etc. is a reinterpretation of the original meaning as there was no appropriate term to define the nature of a dominant, sexually attractive man, and was quickly appropriated into the MRM for its usefulness in describing the nuances of male and female relations.
A good example of the confusion is when discussing someone like Tiger Woods.
By the first definition he has abundent Beta traits (golf nerd), but by the second definition he is Alpha due to money and status that has come with being a golf nerd. PUAs/gamers might refer to him as a Lesser Alpha or a Greater Beta.
-Professor Wocky
Merrick,
A system of anarchy leads to more competition for survival. Overpopulation and scarcity of resources happens all the time throughout history on a local level (china, africa). Looking at future demographics, the problem will only get worse and will lead to more reliance on primitive survival instinct. Most people do not strive for leadership and leadership gives them comfort and security.
I’m still not certain that the definition of alpha or power should include a judgement of good or bad. There are many aspects of leadership that are coercive and both good and bad.
“A system of anarchy leads to more competition for survival.” Absent the intrusion into your life, Denis, every decision you have ever made was most likely based upon anarchist principles. Name one area of your life, or in any of your interpersonal relationships, where you require the input of any system of coercion.
And by the general definition of overpopulation as I understand it, Manhattan is grossly overpopulated.
But I appreciate the challenging thoughts you provide.
Also, Denis, this was posted at STR today, and is definitely more intellectual food for thought:
http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae13_2_2.pdf
I’m not so certain that everyone in the world can be lifted up to the economic status of Manhattan. Manhattan is not self-sustaining, it relies on trade and cheap foreign labor.
I’m not a pure free market advocate. However in an increasingly competitive global marketplace, government intervention is a disadvantage. I think standing armies are important because without some form of stability, markets would be jittery.
“I’m not so certain that everyone in the world can be lifted up to the economic status of Manhattan.” Perhaps, but the “overpopulation” and “diminishing” resources of China were directly the result of the policies enforced by the worst mass murderer in history. The Chinese government opened up to free market principles after he died, and presently, those two pre-existing concerns about China are diminishing. Just take a look at the astounding skyline of Shanghai.
And I agree that stability is crucial to the markets. The form a standing army should take, however, is up for debate in my mind.
@ Denis & BR sorry for churping in
“I’m still not certain that the definition of alpha or power should include a judgement of good or bad. There are many aspects of leadership that are coercive and both good and bad.”
Interestingly, there are alpha’s that occupy their status as a direct result of coercion. I myself find that I must occupy my position against my will. I am self employed and my current business has been running for 14 years. I have offered it to my employees and they won’t take it. I hold a slightly different outlook on alpha males. If we do in fact live in a patriarchy, then all men are thrust into an alpha position. The bible itself would have us there. If a man must be alpha what is the real purpose of alpha. To blame. To scapegoat. To crucify.
so we may be good, clean, without judgment.
You may have noticed, and maybe you haven’t. Politicians today do not offer leadership, Obama did not offer leadership. He offered moral rectitude and management. There is a difference. A leader would say “we will go to the moon before the close of this decade” a manager would say “fathers are missing and they need to live up to their responsibilities”. The difference is a leader will challenge us to meet our potential. A manager will deface our experience and never reveal the goal.
I cannot agree with this assessment of “The Road”.
I read the book out of curiosity at its popularity, and concluded that its attraction to the public lay in the unusually perceptive description of a relationship between a man and his child that was fundamentally healthy even while surrounded by a world so unhealthy it was all but dead. In the end, I think McCarthy chickened out. He built a dead, hopeless world and then, in the last couple of pages, backed off and left the reader with some hope where there had been none. Before those last pages there was nothing to indicate that any humans at all, nor any other living thing, were going to survive this predicament. The only reason I could see for the man and boy to be walking the road was their own hope, but they did not find any reason to support it. The final lesson of the book should have been that hope comes from within, not outside, but the book ended with an inconsistent teaser and ran from this idea.
The movie was worse. It made subtle changes to the whole setup which ultimately made the man look like a simple paranoid. It suggested that but for his obsessive protectiveness of his son, he could have made contact with others with whom he might have usefully joined and built a better future. To be sure, this was an ambiguous suggestion, but it made me uncomfortable nevertheless – once again Dad, for all his well-meaning, was a sort of dangerous fool.
In the book, the boy did not find a bug. The whole point was that the world was dead, and the people just hadn’t stopped moving yet. Really, nothing was alive, there was no ecosystem, hadn’t been for years, and there could be no means of generating sustenance. It is not even clear why there were any humans left alive by this point, and one must assume that they are the last dregs soon to give up the ghost themselves. There was no hope, period, until those last, weak pages.
I appreciate your disagreement, JD (I’m just now reading your comment). I never read the book, so I was unaware of the author’s views. Thanks for sharing them.
And in a way, I can understand and agree with your assessment of the father in the story. I mainly focused on his strengths rather than his weaknesses, in an effort to aid the readers of this review in understanding some important things about masculinity.
However, the father initiated coercion in the middle of the film, against his own son, when he ran after another boy his age. I won’t give away any more (in an effort to keep from spoiling the film for those who haven’t yet fulfilled their manly requirement), but this initiatory act of coercion leads to death, in numerous ways.
Thank you once again for pointing out some very interesting differences between the book and the film.
Good article—excellent film, a masculine film—but I have got to agree with Denis on the alpha thing…
The so-called “alpha” males in today’s society would NOT be alpha males if they were in fact in a survival situation (like the one in the film). The strongest (mentally, spiritually, physically) and wisest (those best able to apply the knowledge they possess) and most adaptable males would be Alpha males. Just as with almost every other type of mammal on this planet.
The fact that women today *seem* more attracted to “powerful” men (read: men who have fame, influence and exercise control over others) does not entail that they are being drawn to “alpha males” but rather kingly apparitions. Tamed, yappy, materialistic, feminized, immature smilie-faces who have more in common with women than with other men—the hairy, smelly, and not-so clean-cut, yet far more honest and humble and hard-working guys. When the shit hits the fan, I want poor slobs watching my back, not some well-groomed turd in a suit….
If suddenly transformed to wolf-form, a Bill Gates or Obama would not become a pack leader; they’d be pack hamburger….