WHO WANTS TO SEE CHANGE?
In soliciting support for change the people to approach are those who want change. That sounds so simple that many of you are probably saying to yourselves, “I know that.” If we all know that, then why do we ask the government to make this change when they are the ones who created the issues we want changed? Why do we go to the political parties from which the government draws its members? Why do we go to the media who support the government and political parties? Why do we go to community organizations, religious institutions, schools, and various non-profits all of which in some way depend on government influence, direction and/or intervention?
Every institution knows that its philosophy is right and superior to that of others whether or not they are religious, racial, political, or ethnic. Their paramount activity is the preservation of their fiefdoms and their allegiance is to the liege lords who grant and support their institutions. All institutions suffer from the malaise of vacuousness and impotence resulting from the emasculation of the American male.
In starting this article I referred to the “people” to approach. That’s who we must approach-people-not institutions. Like-minded people who desire change, who crave it.
Those who feel stifled, suppressed, frustrated, lonely, impotent, bored, rejected, and disaffected will respond to a message of hope and change. The disaffected are found in all walks of life and most often fall into the following categories: the poor, misfits, minorities, outcasts, adolescent youth, the ambitious, the bored, and the sinners. To this standard group of potential revolutionaries we can add the divorced; those who have lost custody of their children; and those unjustly imprisoned for false allegations of rape, sexual harassment, and child abuse; and those who clearly understand that there is a difference between the sexes.
The people who are least likely to desire to make change consist of those who have done reasonably well in society such as the professional class, and those who exist on the dole. The former feel that the system provided the environment and means for their success and the later feel that the system provides for their financial survival. The conservatism of the destitute is as profound as the conservatism of the privileged, and they both resist change.
The inferior elements of society (and more and more of us are falling into that category) have no reverence for the present and its history and are most prone to support change. Let us not forget that it was the inferior elements of Europe that came and built this nation. It is the inferior elements of the Hispanic population that immigrate to this nation today in the hopes of building a better tomorrow.
Speaking of hope, that is the main ingredient of our offering. Hope for a better life. Hope for the renewal of the self. Hope for a Utopia of some sort.
As a classification, non-Western immigrants and American born Blacks-people who have a cultural history of extended family and the patriarchal structure necessary to maintain it-are most receptive to our message. They want to hear our message and they will rally to support it if they believe we represent a viable organization of dedicated people.
We must offer people an alternative to what they have. We must offer them a means to return to a society in which family is its focal point and where men have authority. We must welcome them into our ranks with open arms. There is no one offering that message or the opportunity for others to become a part of change.
Before we can go out and solicit others with zeal and conviction we must develop Men’s Action into a compact viable organization with the ability to absorb and integrate all who would support us.
Every institution knows that its philosophy is right and superior to that of others whether or not they are religious, racial, political, or ethnic. Their paramount activity is the preservation of their fiefdoms and their allegiance is to the liege lords who grant and support their institutions. All institutions suffer from the malaise of vacuousness and impotence resulting from the emasculation of the American male.
In starting this article I referred to the “people” to approach. That’s who we must approach-people-not institutions. Like-minded people who desire change, who crave it.
Those who feel stifled, suppressed, frustrated, lonely, impotent, bored, rejected, and disaffected will respond to a message of hope and change. The disaffected are found in all walks of life and most often fall into the following categories: the poor, misfits, minorities, outcasts, adolescent youth, the ambitious, the bored, and the sinners. To this standard group of potential revolutionaries we can add the divorced; those who have lost custody of their children; and those unjustly imprisoned for false allegations of rape, sexual harassment, and child abuse; and those who clearly understand that there is a difference between the sexes.
The people who are least likely to desire to make change consist of those who have done reasonably well in society such as the professional class, and those who exist on the dole. The former feel that the system provided the environment and means for their success and the later feel that the system provides for their financial survival. The conservatism of the destitute is as profound as the conservatism of the privileged, and they both resist change.
The inferior elements of society (and more and more of us are falling into that category) have no reverence for the present and its history and are most prone to support change. Let us not forget that it was the inferior elements of Europe that came and built this nation. It is the inferior elements of the Hispanic population that immigrate to this nation today in the hopes of building a better tomorrow.
Speaking of hope, that is the main ingredient of our offering. Hope for a better life. Hope for the renewal of the self. Hope for a Utopia of some sort.
As a classification, non-Western immigrants and American born Blacks-people who have a cultural history of extended family and the patriarchal structure necessary to maintain it-are most receptive to our message. They want to hear our message and they will rally to support it if they believe we represent a viable organization of dedicated people.
We must offer people an alternative to what they have. We must offer them a means to return to a society in which family is its focal point and where men have authority. We must welcome them into our ranks with open arms. There is no one offering that message or the opportunity for others to become a part of change.
Before we can go out and solicit others with zeal and conviction we must develop Men’s Action into a compact viable organization with the ability to absorb and integrate all who would support us.
posted by Elder George at
5:02 PM
<< Home