Zippy has another good entry in the seemingly interminable debates over the definition of Game. One criticism frequently made toward Game or the red pill worldview or neoreaction or whatever you want to call it is that it takes what used to be common sense and repackages it as something new. I don't recall the specific entry but last year during the great debate between Zippy and Dalrock, one of Zippy's commenters was furiously denouncing the manosphere in general as a bunch of frauds, charlatans, and hucksters. The criticism was so florid and passionate that one suspects she felt that many "red pill truths" struck to close to home for comfort. A few ankle biters have taken me to task on this blog: "How DARE you link to these people! How DARE you lend any credence to these lapdogs of Satan!"
My response then still holds now: it's a fair criticism, in my opinion, to say that the red pill is mostly a repackaging of old truths we used to take for granted. I would add that many red pill guys don't take it far enough. They only pull up stakes and move to another corner of the Matrix. They rightly desire to roll back liberalism in the sphere of relations between the sexes. The problem is that they are just fine with liberalism in other spheres such as politics and the economy.
Think about it from the point of view of someone raised with a "blue pill" worldview. They've never been taught what their grandfathers took for granted. From their point of view, a lot of this stuff - be confident, work out, have a mission in life, approach women - is revolutionary stuff indeed. That's why I don't get so hysterical about the manosphere as some other tradcons. These guys are the blind being led by the blind. The right response is not to furiously denounce them for wanting to escape from the pit, but to point them to a better guide.