I received a number of requests to follow up on my post about cultivating aristocratic nature and organizing young men. In that post I kept everything abstract. Here I will offer some practical advice based on my own experience and be Straussian where I think it wise. I started a group from scratch in my city that now has 17 members. Things are still nascent with us, but I know some things that will be useful to any men seeking to build something similar. (see following note for points 9-15)

1. Starting the group (koryos) - unless you already have a core, politically sophisticated friend group, you should avoid overtly stating a political purpose of the group. This is for two reasons: first, it enables you to assess recruits before they assess you, and second, because interested men will have very different personal paradigms on any political buzzwords. You think you’re being clear in your “terminology” but you’re not. What you should do instead is utilize a “shibboleth” - an association that will draw out the kind of men you want. What I did was advertise a classical reading group and emphasized restoring ancient manhood. But anything with the right association works - conservative debate club, rifle club, Crusader church whatever you need to do.

2. Don’t overthink initial recruitment. Go where young men are and make them aware. All I did was put up flyers at my local university (many were quickly torn down) and went into Orthodox churches. Some of the best recruits I found came from direct personal solicitation. If this kind of thing is beyond your social abilities, you don’t have to do it. Just know that if you’re already shrinking from “inconvenience” at this point, I have doubts about your ability to really lead a meaningful group. Divulge in the promo material when you’re going to meet and what the group is about. The first time I went to the scheduled place I met two other guys who never showed up again. The second time I was there alone. The third time I met my founding brothers. 

3. I divide group formation into three phases - the incubation phase, the consolidation phase and the proactive phase. In the incubation phase, you are highly receptive to any man who shows interest. During this phase you will begin to separate the wheat from the chaff - the guys you can really rely on, the guys who are peripheral and the guys who will flake. Once you have a solid core of guys who consistently show up and are invested in the group, you will move into the consolidation phase. This is when your group identity really starts to take root and the symbols and ceremonies become entrenched for bonding purposes. When the brotherhood is compact and united by hoops of steel, this is when you can move into the phase of real world activity. All of this takes time and can under no circumstance be rushed or forced. Men today are naturally suspicious and prone to ironic debasement of their own activities. The “number” of people in the group is irrelevant for the purposes of this transformation. 10 guys bound together deeply in a common cause is far better than 100 loosely held acquaintanceships.  

4. Don’t quibble about the initial “quality” of recruits. To observers you are an extremely marginal and unimportant org with zero prestige and you are going to attract cast-offs and loners. If a man shows enthusiasm and dependability, he has the most important things already. I’ve met guys who don’t understand the nuances of politics at all, have a very poor grasp of history, are extremely insecure, have an irascible temperament. But if they keep showing up I’ll work with them. They’re actually more ideal as converts to my vision. Men are very broken, protective and mistrustful nowadays because most get no validation from anyone ever. I’ve learned not to trust first impressions. If someone repeatedly undermines the respectability of the group by oppressive social behavior you should eject him - but this should be an extreme measure. You’re starting at the bottom yourself, and “gatekeeping” is one of the most retarded things you can do. Of course, this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t target men you know will be capable with a higher likelihood of receptivity. I went into a few university conservative group meetings and recruited there. When you grow big enough, you’ll have to hierarchize. Loyalty and seniority should be rewarded but never before loyalty and competence.

5. I choose to meet in an urban bar in a siloed sitting area. I’ve heard objections to this, but I think it’s wise for a number of reasons. Since you don’t know who is going to show up you don’t want to meet in a personal place until later. A public atmosphere is always conducive to the social lubrication of strangers and acquaintances far more than a “meeting room” or something more confined. This is true even of deep introverts. I myself am a frequent drinker and I recruited among other Slavs so it was a no-brainer. If your group is more specific to an activity or has a religious association you might not want to meet in a bar, but I still think you should try to have a “public” vibe for early recruitment. A lot of very valuable men need to get the hell out of isolated spaces.   

6. You must strike a careful balance between a “formal” feel and a “casual” one. Any kind of overly pretentious or procedural behavior will scare off quality men but if the meeting has no structure at all it will appear frivolous. In my case, I developed a classical reading list that would subtly dovetail into talk of politics. Yet I leave ample room for open discussion and informal introductions. As you consolidate, the forms, symbols and rituals of the group will develop organically. Never force these or try to explicitly convince recruits by reference to them. Men never develop a bond of loyalty to a group unless they feel strongly they did so of their own free choice.  

7. Since you’re being abstract at the outset, you’ll get guys who show up for blatantly wrong reasons. Sometimes this is as innocuous as a complete misreading of what the group is about. Other times it’s a troll. Be courteous to these people but subtly signal to them that they’re out of place. As a group of young men, it’s a distinct possibility as you grow that you will attract secret homosexuals. How you deal with that is up to you, but I’d recommend a don’t ask don’t tell approach unless the subtext becomes too obvious to ignore. It is important for you to know yourself and your capabilities. I’m very well versed in psychology and can tell things about people that they don’t know I can tell. This seems to me a prerequisite for any kind of group leadership, and if you doubt your abilities on this front, I’d recommend seriously honing them or searching for a leader. On the other hand, I am very lazy when it comes to minutiae and actively seek out associates that will cover me on that front. 

8. Whenever the koryos is assembled, women don’t exist. This point is crucial in a way I don’t think many men with longhouse upbringing (all of us) readily understand. Male social hierarchy and comradery works very differently in the presence of women. It derails status considerations from “competence and function” to “who is attracting the best girl.” Do not talk about women at all. Most members of my group are single, but I know two of them to be married. This is a pressure point that must be kept under wraps at all times. Nearly all intelligent young men in the middle and working class today (myself included) have “women problems” and are sexually frustrated. This should be channeled without ever becoming explicit. Only when the core of brotherhood is indissoluble should the idea of woman’s involvement be entertained (i.e. after the consolidation phase). However, don’t autistically advertise that your group is “men only.” If a girl happens to show up (a nerdy pick-me girl showed up at my group) you can politely baffle her by telling her it’s not for her.