The Appeal of Andrew Tate

Teach men knighthood without chivalry and you will get barbarians.

A while ago, I wrote a piece about why Christian nationalism is popular among a certain segment of religious people. In short, people support Christian nationalism bc they see no other more robust alternative to fight the ravages of progressivism. Are they wrong? Of course, but that's not the point. It's the *case* that matters—it's the understanding of motives that we need to reach people that are swayed by these ideas. Well, now it's Andrew Tate's turn. 

Ah yes, Andrew Tate, one of the few characters that at this point requires no introduction. The former kickboxer-turned-masculinity-guru has built a massive following around his hypermasculine brand of self-help, and with it elicited a truly nuclear amount of internet heat. My point is this: Andrew Tate didn't happen by accident, and his fans aren't all raving misogynists. It might be useful to take a break from pearl-clutching and actually look at why people listen to him. 

If you're a male between 18-25, feel free to skip this section because you know it. The rest of you, listen up: we're struggling. Forget the fact that we're statistically far more likely to be mentally ill than any of the legions of men that have come before us. Many of us are scarred by the ravages of addiction, depression, or general hopelessness. And we're looking for answers, only to find that it's incredibly difficult to get good ones. America's young men face a dark future—no wonder we're finding role models that mirror that darkness. I've been blessed in my life with good male role models. Many of my fellow brothers haven't been. They're looking for a message that seems hopeful and a messenger that seems tough enough to be worth believing in. Like it or not, men tend to gravitate to rugged role models, the types who seem strong enough to be the warriors and protectors that we secretly (or not so secretly) want to be. 

Enter Andrew Tate—for better or worse, the dude is about as close as you can get to a warrior without being a soldier. But it's not the kickboxing record that's garnered a following for men like Tate. It's the warrior ethos he claims to embody: the belief that society's obstacles exist in part to be conquered and that there's deep satisfaction to be gained through ascending life's natural hierarchies through skills and applied strengths.

At a fundamental level, that's how a lot of people think about life—*that* part's no different than what Tate is selling. It shouldn't be difficult to figure out why that's appealing to young men: it's the creation of a mission-oriented mindset if not a full-on rite of passage. 

What's the alternative? Being told that their desire to shoulder up and confront life obstacles is a toxically masculine bug, rather than a truly formidable feature of the male psyche. Being told that natural urges towards aggression are to be feared and eliminated, as opposed to channeled into productive means. Yeah, if that's the alternative, hard pass. Don't act surprised when young men walk away from that. How could they not? It's a profoundly depressive and self-loathing answer. In short: it sucks. Do better.

So far, this probably sounds pro-Tate enough that you're starting to look for the unsubscribe button. Well, that's not the whole story. The fact remains: Tate is an indicted rapist and an enabler of the very kind of vice that can ensnare young men. But why? 

In simple terms, the worldview of Andrew Tate allows young men to increase their short-term social status with zero moral frameworks for how to handle that increased status. Anyone who's remotely in or near the public eye gets how this works—become more popular, you get more access, more approval, and more opportunities. Navigating these opportunities takes more than a shrewd business/marketing sense. It takes an actual moral philosophy of how to treat people and act uprightly with social capital. That moral framework, though, is transcendent—it doesn't just exist when you're a "top G"—and demands excellence regardless of how successful you are in the short run. Just because men who follow Tate's philosophy might have the opportunity to sleep around and lie pathologically doesn't mean that taking that opportunity is an indicator of masculinity, strength, or true greatness. 

Tate's philosophy has victimized more than women, although it has—women have had their autonomy destroyed and their lives irreparably damaged by his actions. His philosophy also victimizes the young men desperate enough for a role model to cling to his worldview. Herein lies the weakness of Andrew Tate‐ism: it teaches knighthood without chivalry. Teach men chivalry without knighthood, and you will get well-mannered geldings. Teach men knighthood without chivalry, however, and you will get barbarians. Thus goeth the tale.