Since ancient times and the rise of the first empires and monarchies political elites have sought to manage and control what they sometimes referred to as the “warrior class”; groups of men with the skill and ability to topple governments and ravage nations.
For the Vikings, warrior prowess was directly linked to one’s ability to lead. In other words, the Vikings simply stacked their governments with warriors rather than trying to suppress them. At certain periods in Medieval societies kings were tasked with leading their soldiers into battle, thus requiring them to take the same risks as the men they sent to the front lines.
However, in the vast majority of cases throughout history kings and politicians were not warriors. They feared the power of masculinity and what might result if it is left to its own devices. In other words, what they feared was the potential for rebellion and overthrow.
The most common solution was to send strong men to war (as often as possible) as a way to weaken the citizenry and keep them under the boot of the elitist class. Other methods included codes of honor and conduct such as Chivalry or Bushido; standards of male ethics meant to prevent rogue warriors from wandering too far away from society and acting outside of the common order. There was also marriage and family, which anchored men to the community and gave them something to lose should they step out of line.
Finally, in modern times, feminism has stepped in as a useful tool for the state; focusing more on the psychological neutering of men from childhood rather than more blunt efforts to keep them distracted. Feminism is far less about “empowering women” and far more about disenfranchising and controlling men.
Under feminism, the very idea of masculinity has been targeted as a threat to civilization. The natural, biological and inherent psychological framework of male behavior present since the beginning of humanity has been labeled “toxic”. The solution? Feminists say that men must become “more feminine”, more like women, otherwise their presence is like a nuclear bomb just waiting to go off.
Every man is a prospective terrorist that needs to be kept locked up in his own personal GITMO. Otherwise, men might one day organize around their own ideals (rather than the approved ideals of the elites) and change the world without the permission of oligarchs.
Over the past several years there has been a growing rallying cry among third-wave feminists and progressive governments to do more to keep men in line. They warn that the “rise of the incels” is upon us.
The Verge recently published a rambling diatribe trying to dissect the language of incel culture (which they argue started in the dark underbelly of anonymous 4chan forums) and uncover how it has “infected the mainstream”. As if male interactions and organizations can be analyzed like a disease in a Petri dish.
The article suggests that the spread of “incel language” needs to be studied as a means to better understand how such “extremist ideas” are able to proliferate despite being censored on a majority of mainstream platforms. That is to say, leftists are angry that their efforts to stifle discussion have failed and they need to figure out why so they can better control the sharing of ideas in the future.
“We can, in fact, use the spread of incel ideas as a case study to examine how memes carry information across social media platforms. Real incels never had access to algorithmic recommendations, since their ideology was too unpalatable and subject to content moderation. So how did their concepts and language move from website to website until eventually arriving, in diluted form, on our social media feeds…?”
In reality, the term “incel” was started by feminists and left-wing activists, not young and isolated males on 4chan, as a way to pigeonhole men who dared to criticize the woke movement. As is always the case with leftists, everything is about sex. And, if a man is not having sex, it can only be because he has no options. If he has no options, then he is a low-class man.
Celibacy therefore becomes a brand of shame (Keep in mind that until the past 70 years the majority of westerners waited for marriage – now to be accused of celibacy is an insult). And the only way to escape the shame and gain the affections of women (according to feminists) is to embrace their ideology and become more feminine (i.e. a man must give up on manhood and prostrate himself before the will of the establishment to prove he is no longer a threat).
Feminism has, in fact, created all the conditions that might inspire men to go rogue; they have created their own monster. The movement has destroyed the concept of chivalry and honor codes, making it clear that men are unlikely to get any rewards or respect for serving their inherent roles as providers and protectors. As The Verge admits:
“Incel slang is marked by its deeply negative views toward society, and these ideas frequently resonate with younger generations who are similarly pessimistic about the present. In the early 2020s, for instance, the catchphrase “it’s over” began making the rounds as a dejected reaction to an adverse situation. Partially a joke, partially a genuine expression of hopelessness, it was buoyed in popularity by incels, who had been using the phrase since it began making the rounds on 4chan…”
First world societies are fundamentally designed to coddle women, making women dependent on governments and corporations rather than reliant on husbands for their survival. DEI quotas for women in education and the workplace have given women an artificial advantage in terms of access to the career market.
Surveys show the majority of women want to date men who make the same salary as them or greater (hypergamy). Meaning, a man who works hard and builds up a modest living is no longer guaranteed a decent chance to be rewarded with companionship and family. Marriage laws also lean heavily in favor of women, making marriage financially untenable.
Finally, feminists lied for years about women wanting “more feminine men”. Studies show that most women, including feminists, continue to be attracted to masculine men. In other words, any men who jumped on the woke train and abandoned their masculinity have even less success with women than they might have otherwise. In fact, feminists will often declare their disdain for feminine men as inferior or “creepy”.
It has dawned on western men in recent years that there are no longer any rules to follow – The rules change according to whatever benefits feminists and the oligarchy at the moment. So, why play the game at all?
The systematic alienation of men has politicians and bureaucrats worried, with many governments across the west looking for ways to manipulate male psychology and further keep them on the plantation. The Democrat Party recently invested millions into a project to study young men, much to the amusement of conservatives.
Leftists claim their purpose is to determine why young men are walking away from the party, but the language of the project is revealing – Democrats are more interested in finding the “keys” to the male mind as a means to propagandize them. They want the tools to con men back into the progressive fold; they don’t care about helping men with their troubles.
UK governments are increasingly determined to mold the minds of young men. Propaganda about the “danger of incels” is rampant within their public school system and media. The English government has called for secondary schools in the country to tackle “incel culture”, with educators told to identify the signs early so that male students can be pacified before they take violent action.
With men increasingly unfettered by traditional standards and facing a future without rewards for their efforts or merits, it’s only a matter of time before western males organize to enact change without permission. Governments know this is coming. They created the conditions that make it inevitable. This is why they can’t seem to shut up about toxic masculinity; they’re trying to defuse a time bomb after they started the clock.
Bypass Big Tech Censors
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
