The 21 Convention Defined

 

 
“What is The 21 Convention?” is a question that has been asked of me since the age of 18. Up until now, I have never given the absolute truth as an answer to any one individual asking such question.

To the furthest extent of my knowledge, less than a handful of people have been able to find this truth on their own. A few more are close.

This ends now. This post sets in stone what has been long in coming, and will be no more flexible than a block of granite.

This post will detail what The 21 Convention is, what is is not, what it is about, what it is not about, why it exists, where it is going, what it stands for, what it stands against, who it is meant to attract, and who it is not meant to attract.

Much, if not all of this, will be extremely polarizing. This is intentional.

#####

Throughout the bulk of human history, man has lived in a state of ignorance, misery, and tyranny. Freedom of the mind and body – and from suffering – while not default occurrences when men band together, are the unobstructed, natural state of man.

Such obstructions come in many, and often complex forms. The sources however, are universal, and much more simplistic.

  • Source A. The initiation of force.
  • Source B. Collective effort beyond the minimum amount necessary to achieve a common, just goal.

Source A is an euphemism for unjust acts of violence, and is simultaneously a dismissal of man’s right to life.

Source B results in unintended consequences – with “good” exceptions proving the rule of the bad for virtually all cases.

The sources for these obstructions have only been lifted from the earth when the greatest men in our history rose to the challenge that had been calling them since birth – the challenge to hoist the world on their shoulders, bear weight no one else dare, and progress humanity forward.

These men lifted darkness from the earth, made room for dramatic improvement in the quality of our lives, ideologically (and in some cases physically) armed us to the teeth to maintain such progress, and as a result, helped eliminate misery and tyranny, allowing man to return to his unobstructed, free state.

For a time.

While the absolute reality of a man’s actions are eternal, the results and perception of such actions are not.

They are only what the posterity of such men make of them, for better, worse, or nothing at all.

All such great men – that set the course of their own lives, achieved their fullest potentials, and died happy, knowing their lives and actions did have the meaning and purpose they attributed to them – are long gone.

Many, forgotten.

Few of those not forgotten are still revered for their heroic actions. The very act of reverence, gratitude, and exaltation of and for such individuals has all but vanished from the face of the earth.

Man should not be worshiped we are taught – only beings higher than man, beyond our understanding and reason, are worthy of worship.

And if not such beings, only undefinable globs of ideas, masses of people, and arbitrary positions of power should be revered.

The individual has been deemed subservient by groups of individuals.

In essence, we are taught to submit and obey. To whom is of no consequence – the concept itself has been declared supreme and of the utmost importance.

To think with ones own mind, see with ones own eyes, and hear with ones own ears – these are the forbidden acts of our age, that if we take part in, should be ashamed to acknowledge.

The results?

Sinisterly disastrous.

Despite the rare spark of heroic effort, achievement, and individuals, man as a sum of individuals has been in a state of decay for some time.

While difficult to detect, this is the true undercurrent of our society, culture, and civilization. A fire that once burned bright as a fire could, has long extinguished itself. Heroes of old have attempted to re-kindle that fire, and as of yet, no revolutionary success has been had.

The fire remains out, and we have been running on hot embers for far too long.

A spark so bright that it blinds and so hot that it scorches is required to reverse the negative momentum and downward slide the world currently finds itself stuck in.

This spark will be provided by the greatest individuals of our time, because it can only be provided by individuals. To state otherwise would be to ignore the human spirit – the spirit of the individual – that is as eternal as it is invincible.

The challenge we face for the rise to such an occasion and acceptance of such a charge is the possibility for such men to be found by other men of the mind.

  • Men in the active pursuance of their happiness and peak potential
  • Men with an inflexible demand for truth and justice.
  • Men with the courage to stand for what’s right, and condemn that which is wrong, no longer remaining silent in their thoughts and actions.
  • Men of integrity – the will to adhere to an idea in an unbreakable fashion.
  • Men who have found what it is to be a man, have found reason as their absolute, and refuse to tolerate any thing or idea undeserving of their tolerance.
  • Men with a spine, willing to judge harshly and without apology.

We live in a world of dualities. Everything is not okay. Morality is not relative. Tipping points do exist, and can go one way or the other.

I believe we as a generation represent a tipping point in human history. The decay of the past 100 years can intensify in the blink of an eye, or it can be completely and utterly reversed in revolution.

Incremental sparks that temporarily slowed or halted the decay of man are a luxury that can no longer be enjoyed.

As I’ve said before, the choice is now before us.

I believe we as young men, have run out of options. We can now choose to live and lead our lives by example, or, watch our younger siblings, friends, and family grow up in an increasingly fucked up world, at best.

There is no more middle road to be had. It’s up or down, right or wrong, now or never.

 
There is no room left for compromise, “moderation”, and “mixed” decisions.

If it is the role of man to lead, hunt, and protect, it is also his role to decide. To differentiate and judge between that which is right, and wrong.

If it is man’s role to decide, it is his destiny to think and act for himself.

#####

Where do we go from here?

We rise brothers.

We rise by living and leading through example. We make the decisions no one else will. We speak, act, and achieve where others fail. We become the change we wish to see in the world.

And most important of all, we hold steady to our core ideals and deepest principles when the weight of the world bears down on us.

In doing so, we become the men we were meant to be, and find the noble vision of life’s potential that all men seek from the day they were born.

The 21 Convention

 
To the few who matter – which is to say, to those of you reading this – you know what I say to be true. You’ve known it since the day you entered school – and since the day you’ve left. You’ve known it since you joined that sports team, took up that job, performed that freelance work, started that business, dealt with that person in a position of authority, attended that dance, read that article, seen that movie, approached that group of girls, took one of those girls home, and taken any number of unconventional actions to the frown of others.

You’ve always had the sense that something was off with the world, that something was wrong. It’s been difficult to define, and even harder to articulate – but you’ve always known it was there.

This, is what I seek to address with The 21 Convention, and have always sought to address. The 21 Convention is and always has been a vehicle for truth, and an avenue for those with the will to succeed, to achieve that success.
 

 

With the camera as our wall, The 21 Convention becomes our mural – our collage to pass wisdom from one man, and one generation, to the next.

The subject is relative – it is the purpose and foundation of those subjects that is of the utmost importance – the truth behind them.

By focusing on the principles of our actions, we can mend the wounds in our culture – a society that is fast bleeding to death in every way possible, and facing an uncertain future.

#####

While not impossible, it is improbable to think women will do this for us. It is not their role. It is ours as men. Not your mother’s, your sister’s, or your girlfriend’s – it is yours, as a man.

And it’s time we re-take this role. It is time we stop tolerating being less than our potential beckons us to be, and our nature demands.

This convention, is a gathering of the best and brightest among us. The buck starts here. It always has, and I am here to see that it not only continues, but flourishes in what may amount to the most pivotal time in human history, in the best way I know how.

The 21 Convention.

It is not a dating conference. It is not a pickup convention. It is not an exercise and nutrition seminar.

It is the #1 mens convention in the world. It is the first, best, and largest of it’s kind.

It stands against feminism, and all other forms of collectivism in excess.

It stands in defense of the individual, and in defiance of the status-quo.

It is my creativity, talent, and ability to organize expressed in the clearest way currently possible.

It is my — and those who would join me — message to the world, that man is taking back his rightful place.

A place that is self-evident.

This is not a message of permission. This is a statement of intent, and declaration of independence from all things wrong in the world.

-Anthony Dream Johnson

 
 

Voice your opinion, make a comment!

 
Thanks for checking out the site and watching a full length presentation. Use the area below to leave a comment and share your thoughts with others. Please be respectful in your treatment of other commenters on the site. All comments are moderated and may take up to 48 hours to appear.
 
  1. bob says:

    and condone (wtf) that which is wrong, no longer remaining silent in their thoughts and actions.

  2. Andrew says:

    Out of curiosity, why does the convention stand against feminism

  3. The Taliban says:

    I see you stand against feminism…will you also be taking a stand against civil rights?

  4. Interesting to see these two comments back to back. I will respond in full when I am able. It may end up as a post instead of a comment.

  5. Captain says:

    You stand against feminism? So you don’t believe women should have equal rights?

    • All individuals have equal rights. Anything to the contrary is impossible.

      Regarding feminism, I believe it damages and infringes upon those rights, not helps, for both men and women. And the damage doesn’t end there.

      • Captain says:

        I don’t think you understand what the word “feminism” actually means. I suggest you do some research before publicly opposing it.

        • Your comment, in multiple ways, is so far in the wrong direction, I find myself at a loss of words. From what I can tell you aren’t joking either, which is at best, saddening.

          I suggest reading http://www.the-spearhead.com/

        • Feminism is just a collective movement for womens rights. It’s at best a useless concept and at worst a complete undermining of individual rights.

          Its useless because as with any collective, the collective is comprised of individuals who are the ones with their own unalienable rights. ‘Womens’ rights is a moot concept when people understand and accept this and as a corollary feminism is unnecessary.

          At worst it represents radical collectivism and a complete disregard for individuality of both men and women.
          http://www.rightgrrl.com/steph/fallacy.htm

          • Perhaps the phrase ‘collectivism in excess’ would be better put as ‘collectivism as a unit.’

            I personally think the way you always put forward that a group is made up of individuals, they are the units, is great and illustrates the point very well. Saying collectivism in excess may give the impression that some forms of collectivism are OK, which might suggest the collective before the individual in certain cases.

            Saying the convention is against collectivism as a unit, or perhaps collectivism as a category, may convey the message more clearly.

            Just a suggestion. Whats your opinion?

            • When I say collectivism in excess I mean more collective effort than is required to achieve a common, just goal.

              For example, if you are under physical attack by 3 criminals, and I recruited 5 nearby friends to save you from serious bodily injury (or death), and we succeeded, this common effort between the 6 of us to save you would be fine.

              However, if I recruited a dozen nearby strangers and bribed all of them to torture and kill the three muggers on the spot … well, we have a different story then.

              The same can be said about the first American Civil War, commonly known as the American Revolution. It was one thing to fight a war for independence and liberty. It would have been another if the United States decided to devote itself to traveling across the sea and conquering Britain at the time.

              Anyway, I think we are saying the same thing, as my expression does not deny that the individual is the unit of society, it simply says common, voluntary effort isn’t totally pointless, and your comments do not seem to negate this.

              Edit: upon further reflection, I’m simply calling “collective effort”, or common effort, collectivism, which may be philosophically incorrect.

              My greater point is what matters to me: common effort beyond the minimum amount necessary to achieve a common, just goal, always results in unintended, negative consequences.

              Or more plainly, evil.

              A=A

              • I get ya. I was just just concerned that some might not clearly see the point.

                I think you may be right in the philosophical incorrectness of the statement. Collectivism de facto emphasises the group goal over the individual goal. In your examples the recruited collective are exactly that, recruited. This would be entirely voluntary and in no way coerced. Therefore they would only be partaking in this collective effort if it aligned with their individual goals at that time. So its not collectivism exactly, its collected effort as you stated and the goals are aligned to the individuals.

                Just like the convention involves a collective, but its not what I would consider collectivist. Just a group of like minded individuals who happen to have a common goal.

  6. [...] the process of reason – must be performed by each man alone. We can divide a meal among many men. We cannot digest it in a collective stomach. No man can use his lungs to breathe for another man. No man can use his brain to think for [...]

Topics: