Sometimes, I see on the internet men advising that men must be self-sufficient to be considered a man. I don't see this as a necessarily virtuous or optimal goal for civilization. I can understand a homesteader being self-sufficient, but does he not still buy some supplies to work the farm, or is the expectation that he makes his own tools and everything else he uses? The Soviets called those who were self-sufficient kulaks and had many of them killed. So, doesn't one have to be not just self-sufficient but also participate in broader society, or at least prevent oneself from being dragged to the gulags by having a strong network?
Is a thief self-sufficient because there will always be people to rob from? Is a government official self-sufficient because there will always be people to tax? Is a banker self-sufficient because checking accounts are almost necessary with how payments are structured in the modern era? Is a mobster self-sufficient because he has people to extort?
Cultivating a society that values virtue is the best masculine attitude in my opinion because large groups can be turned against those who are self-sufficient and will kill those who are all alone.
This is the advice thread that I am referring to for what that is worth (https://nitter.net/MasculineSage/status/1560589430729183232#m):
There are two parts to this. The first is the idea that we can work hard and gain reward naturally. This doesn't work as much in a lot of sectors because of automation, new technology, and too many people working at the same job. Academia and videogame creation shows this very well.
The second is the idea that we need about the same amount as those who came before us. My grandfather could be self sufficient pretty easily. If he needed extra money he worked at a farm for a few days. Phones, the internet, and entertainment in general cost a lot more than a 6 year old TV bought at a garage sale that gets the 4 major channels.
There's another part that is a side thought, but is worth mentioning.
Churches used to be a source of help. If you needed a mechanic, you grabbed the guy in the congregation. The same happened with doctors, dentists, and plumbers. Now we don't use that as a resource or have reasons not to. A lot of the self sufficient talk came from these types of networks. The person could afford life and helped lift everyone else at the same time. Most churches are told to rely on family, then the government, and then the church as a resource.
When we talk about self sufficient, we also bring up ideas from our pasts. I had a bank manager tell me that I just didn't work hard enough at my job. He meant it very kindly and lovingly. Now he's out of a job, and doesn't know what to do with himself because of all the changes. I tried warning him, but he didn't believe me.
We need to figure out a new form of self sufficiency if we want the idea to continue.