The perverse obsession with equality in the West is the attempt to temper the excesses of individualism by engineering a matriarchal mold of society. On RoK we often rail against the brutalised, narcissistic woman that this ideology is producing. Like the vulgar displays of wealth from the nouveau riche, newly-bestowed social entitlement has predisposed many women to flaunt their recent gains. It is difficult to blame them for doing this. Which is why, if the war is to be won, it is important to recognise that the battle of the sexes is now a battle of disparate political ideologies.
In the Marxist doctrine of equality, the logical endpoint is a matriarchy. If you observe some of the common features of female-dominated societies, social organisation is remarkably similar to Marx’s idea of a Socialist utopia, where shared property and loose family ties are a pre-requisite for greater communal participation. The next time a feminist sounds off about the patriarchy while expounding the virtues of her own entirely altruistic egalitarian philosophy, politely remind her that the Hopi Indians and the Mosuo of China are exemplars of her worldview in action; both are matriarchies.
Central Park boating lake C.2035
However, there is an elephant in the room. Eastern Europe has remained an outpost for masculinity in exile despite its being in thrall to Marxist principles for over fifty years. And why, in capitalist democracies, has the creeping rot of feminism and equality produced an enfeebled male population but an empowered female one? The answer, I believe, lies in the fact that whereas political Marxism in the Eastern satellites remained largely economic, in the West it has been manipulated primarily for social upheaval.
Marxism enacted economically worked to keep its population financially impoverished; enacted socially it has levelled out the difference between the sexes. The West has not yet capitulated to economic Marxism; when it does, it would be unsurprising if more traditional male-female roles were naturally reinstituted. In the absence of state social interference, there would be no affirmative action as a leg up. Each would be obliged to prove their worth in among the best of men.
Elephantiasis sufferer punished by frustrated women
Perhaps it is because Capitalism doesn’t ostensibly seek to regulate the social lives of its populace that a rogue ideology has filled the vacuum. At any rate, Marxism and the idea of female oppression go hand in hand, which is why for feminists it is an expedient and pseudo-credible ideology as an opportunistic means to further their lot while placing the blame squarely on a perceived oppressor: man.
Natural matriarchies such as the Mosuo prosper because men are inured to their servitude. In a socially-engineered matriarchy, which pockets of the West are well on their way to becoming, the organ of the state must increasingly regulate its citizens’ thoughts and speech for the ideology to prosper. Thus sexism and racism being the bête noire of modern Western discourse; any opinion which deviates from the egalitarian agenda endangers the precarious edifice of Marxism in action.
Since the cultural revolution of the 1960s Marxism and Feminism have joined forces to permeate every strata of society. That the former can still be taken seriously in light of the destruction each manifestation of its ideology has wrought is testament to the criminal naivety of mankind and remains the most damning modern indictment of our inability to learn the lessons of history. It may now be too late to stem the seeping wound that Western civilisation has inflicted upon itself. But if a last-ditch attempt is to be made, the jugular must be aimed for. Play them at their own game. Bypass the feminists and attack the root of the problem; push to criminalise Marxism in the same vein that fascism has been outlawed. If this is achieved, both insidious ideologies will be swept away in the carnage for good.
If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.
Read More: Why We Need To Fight For The Patriarchy
Good article, and while I do believe that the equality fiasco exists, it is all under the guise of more government control. Today is a fine example. A hundred sheeple were outside my schools administration building, protesting General Petraeus’ decision to teach at CUNY. These were the same hooligans that harassed him on the streets of New York a month earlier. Today they jut had a leader who shouted something and the rest of the sheeple obeyed and repeated it.
Colleges seem to breed that sheeple mentality. That what one thinks is pointless, just follow the angry crowd of rebels. To see a generation brainwashed is a frightening Orwellian scenario–these creatures not only support “equality” without questioning what equality is, but weakening their independence for more government control and slavery.
Why were they protesting against Petraeus? Just because of a girlfriend on the side? That’s pretty tame. When I worked on a contract at Johnson Space Center several years ago, one of NASA’s top male astronauts was married with kids and had a long-term girlfriend, a new girlfriend, and two backup girlfriends. Plus a lot of eager women ready and waiting at several NASA centers. Don’t know how he kept up the strength to do his job (the shuttle, dummy, not the nookie), but he persevered and succeeded. And he never missed a press conference. Petraeus is small peanuts — no pun intended — compared to the astro-dude. C’mon, sheeple, be generous and give the general a break.
He is a fucking astronaut. Imagine going to a bar. “What do you do? Lawyer, Wall Street perp, hipster?” “I am a FUCKING astronaut”.
You have over looked a very important point.
Communism in Eastern Europe ended in the late 80s and early 90s. That is basically 25 years ago now.
It was already crumbling in the mid 80s. Mired in secret police and terrible human suffering. This of course installed a more male – female societal role precisely because the society was so unsafe and insecure.
Furthermore anyone born post 1980, has not grown up with much living memory of communism AT ALL. They have grown up in what is termed the robber baron economy, which is similar to the USA 1800s… wild west, Rockefeller etc.
compares pretty well with the Russian Oligarchs and set up today. It’s an immature capitalist goldrush type society where those well placed and aggressive end up super wealthy. A Man’s world. !
This is absolutely unsafe and male dominated… So basically any chic from Eastern Europe and Russia under 30 is well polarized as a female.
There was a time in the 50s, 60s and 70s, when female Russian Athletes and even females in the military, female scientists, female soviet artists were uber feminist. They of course didn’t have to get on a soap box for their status, it was government mandated, so their attitude to men was more one of indifference than open hatred and shaming.
None the less communism and feminism are bred from the same stable. Anything preaching equality is essentially a social disaster waiting to happen.
Equality means dragging everyone down to the lowest level. Pure equality means we would all have to live as blind, deaf, dumb quadriplegics, with Parkinsons, Downs syndrome and AIDS. – or something like that you get my point.
>Equality means dragging everyone down to the lowest level.
Quoted for truth.
Equality means we all suffer together.
So why are you worried then, there is absolutely no equality in America.
Maybe no financial or social equality, but a common worldview and PC opinions.
the equality is being installed in the form of socialism that is ever ramping up in the US – There was no equality in USSR either… It’s just a lie fed to the peasants to install what amounts to a NAZI state, where the wealthy few laud over the rest… Socialism and Communism is just a replacement for the monarchy where the chosen few wear an invisible crown.
Ray old boy, of course socialism is ramping up in the U.S. We’ve got to have federal/state/county/city employees and funding to rebuild all those crumbling highways and bridges, keep hospitals and airports open, maintain schools so that our youngsters aren’t running wild, and respond to requests for police and firefighters. How about universities, NASA, national parks, museums, and libraries? And what about prisons, the IRS, and our politicians? Someone has to regulate them. Hell, even a feral dog deserves a dog catcher.
From what I saw of the USSR in the 1970s, Nazi Germany would have been bliss by comparison … at least until the fire bombing started.
Okay, you lost me where socialism and communism dovetail with monarchy … but you’re getting there, Ray. Keep writing.
Thanks Jeb…
Most of those government agencies are so full of lard and wastage, and getting worse. California has something like 900 government departments just on a state level.. it is insane… all that money is robbed from the economy in taxes, and given to far less productive, far more unimaginative and bureaucratic minds that you find in private enterprise. Most of the time these government employees spend their time ass covering and making other peoples lives difficult to hold onto their own position… (ever seen a cop movie with the wrangling between departments and branches DEA verses FBI verses CIA verses local cop… it’s not a cliche… )
Instead of gaining funding by performance, govt. branches gain funding by politics and justification. It’s a terrible way to get anything done.
Police -could be funded by insurance companies to keep claims down. Law Courts, could be privatized…. the most honest and balanced ones would get all the business, especially in commercial and civil suits…
In this day and age with the internet there is little need for massive government… human life and society is a like an inherent intelligence of it’s own, people do rally around and organise things without being lauded over by men with clip boards…
Take the roads for example, let the transport companies invest, roads will be built where they are needed not so Senator line my pockets can get votes and feather his construction buddies pockets on a white elephant project… ever driven in france ? some of their private paid roads are race track smooth and perfectly maintained.
private enterprise is always better
Government is the Disease it Pretends to Cure.
There was a day when the ideal of Govt. looked better than a monarchy chosen only by blood line….
Now it’s nothing more than a monarchy… ex presidents with huge wealth and libraries in their honor…
Imagine a president that knows when he leaves office he will have zero security for himself and his family… now hold an election and see who wants the job….
Politics should not be a career… Politicians should have 10 years minimum experience in private enterprise and real business and they shouldn’t be allowed in power for more than a few years. Some of these Senators are more like mafia dons or princes they have their seats for life, and just roll pork about, feeling important and mincing about. What did Edward Kennedy ever do for anyone for example ?
Bravo! You said it good, Ray. I’m with you nearly 100 per cent. When I worked for engineering firms that had contracts with NASA, I saw astounding waste. The local joke/reality was that contractors did the work and JSC folk “managed” the contractors. There was one instance of four NASA people that managed one — yes, one — contractor. I kid you not. If U.S. taxpayers had seen what went on there, they would have demanded the shuttle program be grounded pronto.
Private enterprise can be better, but I’m realistic enough to recognize that most government agencies presently in place aren’t likely to be dismantled any time soon. Best solution is to cut all fat immediately, tighten and streamline the remainder until responsible privatization can take over, and keep the most vital and effective services running. My fire department is great, as is the local department of transportation, which is doing a ton of road repairs in good time. The airport runs pretty smartly. The libraries are shipshape. But the high school near me recently built two huge parking lots for a new sports field that looks exactly like the old field, instead of putting those funds into academics. Just got to have that football instead of STEM studies, I guess. I live in a hilly area and know all the hiding places of the police, who park their cars to snooze in private. The dog catcher rolls around twice a year and always leaves with an empty truck, though at least 12 feral dogs live around here.
Keep writing, man. I’ll read you.
“Most of those government agencies are so full of lard and wastage, and getting worse.”
Let me fix the sentence for you: “Most of those private companies AND government agencies are so full of lard and wastage, and getting worse.”
There, fixed.
What you advocate is anarcho-capitalism.
I think we can still have some very good use and purpose for the good old state. If governments were really all that big, they would have to shrink down after each big crisis, but somehow they always come back to previous levels.
Basically, it’s a magic circle. Government fucks something up, free market comes and fix the thing, free market fucks something up, government comes in and fix the problem.
The only thing that is constant, is rich are getting richer and poor are getting poorer. So big guys are nowadays simply “too big to go under” as we witnessed during the last crisis with banks and insurance companies. General Electrics was declared also too big to fail, guess fact that they supply US Military machine with what not helped a lot.
That’s how capitalism works. The successfully strong reap the benefits, while the weak perish.
80% of millionaires are self-made and usually immigrants.
There has never been, beyond the definition of a the word, real equality. It cannot be as everyone is different, and some skills are valued for different reasons at different times.
Even during communist strong armed rule there were the haves, and have nots.
Under capitalist societies, you have the haves, and the lower haves (middle class who earn a wage building what the haves want), and then the have nots. But capitalist societies are traditionally more charitable. Don’t let the marxist agenda fool you. Even though times were tough, they were tough for everyone. It was because of the haves drive that technology and government have gotten to where they are.
When those at the top spend money, it tends to benefit most of those under them. They just have the most because they had the skill, and took the risks.
And those immigrants who made their way still called themselves American. 🙂
Tell me, how has it ever fared in communist/socialist/fascist countries??
Right, the prosecution rests your honor.
I’ve definitely benefited from those at the top but sure wish a little more would trickle down to me.
Fascist Germany actually did quite well under Hitler, until he started that pesky war.
The socialist countries of Scandinavia provide the best all-round existence for their citizens. But you have to trade risk and excitement for security and safety. Just ask Roosh.
Waitin’ for that trickle to start …
Everyone “wishes” more would trickle down, but have not taken the risks to get ahead and see if there might be actually honest to God reasons more does not trickle down. Make no mistake, I know a lot of it is just greed; but I have tried two businesses now, and one was a success I had to sell, and the other has been taken up by my family court battle. It’s tough man.
Perhaps most who own businesses and make money can’t afford to maintain people’s jobs, provide products, and give money away?
I’m not saying anything pro or con libertarianism, I’m just saying there is no reason to be paranoid about equality in America because it is simply not going to happen. When i was in America, 100% people i had chance to talk to were against social care, or anything alike, poor or not, working class or not, employees or employers. Tho truth is, i stayed and worked in province which was probably more conservative.
Socialist states of communist block cannot be compared to social welfare states. In communist countries there was mandatory obligation for people to be employed who are capable to work. Army was also an important employer, basically, you had very little or no option to stay at home and do nothing, so weak or not, you were forced to contribute. However, because of socialist system, productivity was usually low, and 2000 people did job which was realistically fit for 400.
Aw, I just want a little more of the trickle I earned from/for the big boys. As a proposal manager, I got a very small raise with the win. The director, who spent most of his time on the golf course, received a new Ferrari. I’m not greedy … just a little more gas for the Honda would have been sufficient.
Your last paragraph is correct. My dad had his own small technical publishing business, and though it generally did well and he put out a superlative product, it was devilishly hard at times to retain all his employees. Defense cuts always put things on edge.
Good luck with your business man; I hope you keep it.
“They just have the most because they had the skill, and took the risks”
I don´t think that you know how Capitalism works. And believe me, I profit from it. Is it right? Nope. Do I care? Yes. Am I going to continue living from this unjust system? You bet.
imagine thinking the USSR was ‘communist’ and expecting anyone to take your opinion seriously
Excellent comment. You’re able to put to words what I’ve thought for a long time.
Excellent article, also
Nice long post with some good points, but uneven in content and logic.
“Equal” USSR and Eastern Bloc women up to the 1990s were not uber-feminists. They were merely window dressing for their Soviet masters. I’ve commented more fully on this subject in my post above.
You write that “anything preaching equality is essentially a social disaster waiting to happen.” If you’re an American, how do you square that statement with living in a Democratic Republic, which has that belief as the cornerstone of its Constitution?
Of course there’s no such thing as full equality, and there never will be. The world would be deadly boring if everyone was the same. It warms my heart when I turn on the T.V. and see the variety of jackasses out there.
Sorry, but the Commies didn’t win. Faults and all, the U.S. hands-down is one of the best places to live in. Try traveling to most of Asia, Africa, or South America. Some great people, but not places you’d want to spend your life in.
Ah, that pesky old “socialist/feminist/communist agenda” … though socialism and communism are actually two different ideologies … but throw in the feminism, and I guess the KGB can work wonders with that trio.
Of course Obama’s got the U.S. trillions in debt. He’s had a lot of places around the world to straighten out, and he inherited a whopping little debt from George.
Aside from China, which is capitalist in all but name, there’s precious little communism left. Not too many true socialist states exist, except for the Scandinavian countries, but maybe their escalating immigrant problems will topple them.
Keep writing, guy. You’re a little wobbly but you’re getting there.
The US – WAS one of the best places to live. More and more if you actually drive about and take a look at the less ritzy areas, it’s starting to look more and more like latin america to me…. high crime, gated communities, lots of poverty and degradation and social separation, huge debts mounting, lots of politicians with their hands in each other pockets and their tongues up each others asses. The border is moving much further north….
We already are in Latin America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
yeah, it has started to look like a shithole. and how weird that things started going to shit after we began eviscerating the social safety net, gutting regulation, and cutting spending on education and infastructure since 1980s. Hmmmm
Going downhill but still much better than most of the world. I read your comments over at another ROK article and your take on Mexico and other places was spot on. As you say, at least the West still has basic protections in place. Keep writing, dude, I like your stuff.
You don´t travel much, don´t you?
Have done so for the better part of three decades in mostly second- and third-world countries.
Nothing against Mexico, which I like very much and visit often, or any other country; was responding to Ray’s comments on another post about day-to-day differences between the U.S. and other places.
Where else would you rather be? China? Japan? Russia? Europe? The US might look like a shithole, but what’s better? What other options do you have?
Brazil, Iran, Qatar, Argentina, Turkey, Germany-just to name a few: it’s a big world out there.
He may hava a point….The filth indoctinated many future teachers/proffessors/social workers/media “professionals” …see link… feminism/socialism/social justice etc. is all bred from the same pool of ideology….
Spot on! If you live in a former communist country (like I do) you understand very quickly that the defeat of communism was a formal event, not connected with the day to day approach to life of these people.
More than an ideology,communism established a way of life, ruling principles for society, cultural guidelines and behaviors. Communism became life itself and its so ingrained that even those that were born after the collapse of the communist regime, are raised to believe in those principles and behaviors. (even if they now call them something else).
Capitalism is failing. Communism is lingering. What next? A pint of lager….
“Equality” requires the suppression of competitive advantage. Otherwise known as ‘privilege’.
Former Soviet KGB Psy-op officer explains how it all started in the 70s. Wake up.
Great video.
Can anyone reccomend a good place to begin learning about politics and history. I’m not a total rube, but I don’t know enough about either.
A book, a blog, a video series, anything.
A good analysis of the origins of Cultural Marxism can be found in various articles here: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/
Thanks. I’ll definitely check these out.
Well, for Marx itself read “The Communist Manifesto” first, and then “Capital” if you have the patience. The Manifesto was written in easy language in purpose, and most of the things it supports are things that we got in the 20th Century (normal working hours! Wow, a revolutionary!). Some Marx books are more haunting and a better read than others. The “Brumaire” is excellent journalism, “Capital” is a science book (in economics, or as it was called at the time, “Political Economy”).
ROK should write a 10 best history/politics books for men.
The basic idea is, after WWI, Marxists concluded that Western culture had to be destroyed before Marxist economics could be imposed. I think this video explains it reasonably well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uHbLE8n6xE
This is why I believe in a Laissez-faire type cultural capitalism. Why? Its the most compatible with human nature. Lets be honest, we still and will always live in a ‘kill or be killed’ environment.
Whether its in high school, office environment, sports , politics , warfare. Humans don’t exactly have a good history of equality. Every since the dawn of mankind, In every continent, every race, religion, government, economic system there has been HIERARCHY
There will never be an age of complete equality, why? ITS NOT HUMAN NATURE. In fact matriarchy/feminism IS INEQUALITY. Its ideology can only be implemented if males are defined as INFERIOR to woman.
There will always be a scapegoat that’s dehumanized and deemed as inferior e.g. Jews, Blacks, Muslims,
The reason why cultural marxism sounds so good is because too many people are too lazy to get of their asses and do some self-improvement. Everyone wants a free meal ticket, little do they know that the ticket comes with a price. Thats why Self Made Millionaires/Billionaires are hated. They remind the degenerate masses how shitty their lives and life choices are.
Very true, but it’s good to make sure that YOU are not the one that is deemed inferior, brotha…
Competition = Evolution.
Equality = Stagnation = Extinction
There can be sane competition. Competition does not mean that you need to live a shit life if you don´t win.
Free market capitalism in all areas please. Also any one preaching egalitarian beliefs should be shunned and dealt with.
I think it would be more instructing to point out that the Mosuo are also prone to ensuring that men get access to sex. Sexual deviancy is a natural symptom of the malignant cancer of a matriarchy.
If women rule, they don’t want anyone to tell them whose seed they are, or are not going to use themselves as a cum receptacle for. In a male dominated society, no man would willingly allow himself to be cuckolded, and live to brag about it.
The problem with matriarchy in the past is that the women were still dependent on male soldiers, and workers. Only when, and its a big IF, that ever changes will women have the ability to establish a true matriarchy. In other words, the technology has not been built by men yet for women to usurp control and rule. It may be a ways off as well as the men’s movement is starting to catch on. If the natural pecking order of physics is to be believed, feminism should be due for it’s “equal,” and opposite reaction.
Better luck next time at this rate ladies. Besides, if it is indeed technology that enables women to self autonomy, and men build it, they will need to convince men not to rule over them with that too. Considering the treatment feminism has wrought on men the world over, that is highly unlikely.
The US and the west are not going down the drain because of the military industrial complex. The cost of the Iraq war or the Afghanistan war has never been more than a portion of the federal deficit in any given year, and especially so under Obama. The real problem is that more than half the population is employed directly by the government, or hired by a company to work directly on a government contract, or receiving some form of government aid.
I assume nobody expects that the cost of the US military could be cut to zero. How much can it be cut by someone looking to shrink it radically? $100 billion a year? $300 billion a year? This is no more than a third of the annual US deficits. Military costs are not the cause of our over spending, or are at worst a secondary factor.
I think the OP is accurate in pointing out the role of cultural marxism in the downfall of the US and the west in general.
The west has been a matriarchy ever since the Victorian era.
Women achieve agency through men so the one who should be blamed for the current state of affairs is not some political ideology or other nebulous boogeyman.
The blame lies squarely on the shoulders of our forefathers.
The only reason feminism happened is because American men allowed it too.
I suggest you read Chinweizu’s Anatomy of Female Power.
I will reiterate that the west has always been matriarchal and always pedestalized women to demigod status.
Indigenous peoples were called savages because they didn’t put their women on pedestals and made them earn their keep.
The entire premise is wrong.
Fortunately, the rest of the world is not matriarchal (except for a few small areas), and the rest of the world eventually is going to swallow up the West, so presto! Problem solved. Don’t sweat it, dude.
Matriarchy has been the subject of several discussions amongst feminists that I was able to witness. Sadly the extremists want it n the poor idealists think that it can’t n won’t happen. I believe that like all well intentioned political causes it’s going to end up in a mess. Humanity went through that phase. Bringing back Matriarchy would mean an involution. Very few women in our entire history gained power n didn’t let it get to their heads.
And I live in eastern Europe. Feminism is showing already. Women don’t know or identify with the term but they act n think like feminists
Matriarchy and patriarchy both suck. Maybe it’s because I’m an artist, but pigeonholing and categorizing people and trying to stuff them into little boxes is stupid and pointless. I’ve had people do that crap to me all my life.
Feminism is showing up in Eastern Europe? Thump ’em down. Then get rid of all your macho brutes. Try to rebuild with some gender moderates
And by the way, power, especially great power, goes to EVERYONE’S heads.
I wish I could thump em down but eastern Europe is in love with anything that comes from the west. And our men are not that brutal, I think. Maybe I’m just too accustomed to them. 😛
Relax, guys. Marxism has been wielded predominantly by powerful men who have no interest in female equality. During a number of years in the 1970s, I traveled throughout the western part of the USSR and most of the Soviet Bloc countries. Yeah, there were female doctors, scientists, and engineers — plenty of them — who filled the positions of millions of men who were decimated in WWII. Relatively few men over the age of 35 were to be seen, especially in the USSR. Unskilled women, often elderly, dug culverts, built scaffolding, broke boulders into gravel, and hauled trash, all by hand.
The highly educated women made great “equality” propaganda for Soviet big wigs to display to the rest of the world. These were the same guys that had delighted in putting a female cosmonaut into space in order to humiliate the U.S., who had not yet sent up a “real” (i.e., male) astronaut. Star female athletes were forcibly pumped full of steroids that ruined their health and passed on birth defects to their children.
Great equality, right? The top brass ate well and had imported cars, classy pre-war apartments, and beautiful country dachas, and their cloistered, non-working wives frequented Paris fashion shows and vacationed in Cannes. They crapped all over the common folk. Genuine equality for women — and men — was merely a showcased political tool.
I later experienced Marxism in its most pure distillation: an Israeli kibbutz. Within 48 hours of arrival, I could see that men ran the show. During my year as a volunteer in this egalitarian paradise, men held the highest and most prestigious positions, garnered the most funding for university schooling, and got the most perks, such as private photography dark rooms, more frequent use of the communal vehicles, weekends in Jerusalem, etc. Kibbutz women sometimes griped about these inequities but were seemingly too comfortable to try to change things. Life on the kibbutz was pretty good for both sexes, but the men remained firmly in control, all the while accepting praise from outsiders for their “equality” toward women.
Two American hippie communes I visited — one in northern Caifornia, the other in New Mexico — proclaimed that “chicks and dudes, we’re all the same here, man.” Not so. Gender roles were more firmly divided and enacted in these tiny, remote enclaves than nearly any Western places I’ve ever been to or lived in. Guess who was on top of the teepee.
Look, there are always going to be a variety of ideologies around — some mere pipe dreams, others fluid and malleable, a few rigidly enforced, many stable and livable. True Marxism, as I’ve seen it through the decades and on several continents, was never feminist-driven and is nearly gone. Don’t be distracted by every new boogyman presented to you. Most extremists, whether they’re driven by political, religious, gender, or racial ideologies, eventually burn out. Draw your own conclusions and make your own decisions without peer pressure or fear. Think for yourself, guys, and build your own lives.
Matriarchy produces Human Resources, which does this:
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2013/10/20131024_splooge.jpg
Is this for real? It’s hilarious! What’s their gripe about the pipes? Can’t they use Draino?
Don’t know if it’s HR driven or if HR just sent out the flyer. More likely it’s some Poindexter from Accounting with a calculator, toting up those semen-related costs.
I’d sure like to see the comments written on one of those flyers after it’s been onboard for a week.
That is funny as hell.
This is very timely. This statement: “But if a last-ditch attempt is to be made, the jugular must be aimed
for. Play them at their own game. Bypass the feminists and attack the
root of the problem; push to criminalise Marxism in the same vein that
fascism has been outlawed.” I have had a lot of luck debating Feminists using something akin to this strategy; I think of them as little girls in elementary school who think Liberalism is all that and a bag of chips and proceed accordingly. Also it helps to understand what you are dealing with in the Liberal mindset; the Anonymous Conservative I think has the most revolutionary and useful explanation:
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/touching-the-raw-amygdala-an-analysis-of-liberal-debate-tactics-preface/
Are you a li’l gal who wants to play with the boys and prove she’s not a big bad feminist? Watch your step there, honey … if you vote, drive a car, attend a coed university, earn a decent wage, travel alone, control your own body, use maternity leave, partake of the Family Leave Act, or want job protection if you don’t give your boss a blow job … jeez, any of these things might mean you’re the F-word. Or are you one of those females that likes to grab these goodies and then decry the ball-breaking bitches who helped gain those rights and privileges for you? Can’t have it both ways … that’s called hypocrisy, sweetheart.
Run along home and put on your apron, li’l gal … and leave Trigger alone. Didn’t you know that horse riding is a masculine pursuit?
Actually what I am interested in is debating Liberals – why? Because it’s fun but also because I am involved in fighting gun control … and I am trying to help spread the message of the r/K selection theory at the Anonymous Conservative. I hope you visit his site and review his analysis. If you like it, please share it widely.
Thanks for the link, Mina, I’ll look at it tonight.
I hope you debate liberals in order to change things, not just have fun. Good luck with your work. What do you make of the new German “safe gun?”
Give those ol’ bitches a nod the next time you vote or drive to work.
Matriarchial religion => Cultural and economic Marxism => Matriarchy
A religion that doesn’t consider the children of a man in the religion and a woman outside of the religion to count as part of their tribe, but does consider the children of a woman in the religion and a man outside of the religion… Such a religion is by definition a matriarchical goddess cult. Whether stated explicitly or not, they believe that something about their women (and only their women) is special and not even their men are this special.
This it is no surprise that people who believe in Matriarchy push the policies of Matriarchy.
Marx had wanted strong family when he was writing about capitalism. It was 19 century. Meanwhile, thanks to industrial development, conditions that lead to strong family had changed. Almost every advice on this site is correct. But, if Marx were alive today, he would be against feminism for sure. He didn’t foreseen all the consequences of woman’s liberation. Marx belonged to the classical Marxism (logically) and what this article is talking about is ortodox Marxism. Ortodox marxism is a corrupted, perverted (psychopathic) form of Marxism that was in Soviet Union.
Beside that, in modern era there is a lot of agents-provocateurs among modern left. They are so-called “quasy left” (leftist feminists, postmodernists, leftist ecologists, “social-democrats” and so on). The point I want to articulate (and to show why I don’t agree with this article) is that it is possible to be Marxist (in a purely classical sense which means to be open to discussion and to the change of opinion) and to be against Feminism. Furhermore, it is overlaping because Feminism (“womn’s studies”, for example) in the second half of 20 century has been financed by major banking capital (Rokfellers, Rotschilds, Morgans etc.). Having in sight that in 30-es years of 20. century fascist propaganda tryed to bloor the fundamental difference in the society (the difference between alredy named riches on one side and productive people on the other) by separating industrious sector of the society. They were trying to do that by emphasising trully unimportant difference between, for instance, industry and agronomy. I hope this site, and all movement for men’s liberation confronted to feminism, is not just a one modern try of previously descriebed type.
I love hearing this tired saw about the communism of th e20th century not being real. It almost universally comes from people with no direct experience with it at all.
The Soviet Union, not to mention the rest of them, including the DDR where I lived, were not “corrupted forms” of Marxism at all. They were essential and pure forms of Marxist-Leninist Socialism, and executed in the only way it is possible to run a system like that.
Marxist theory was the sales pitch used to pacify and neuter a population into submission. The motive of those doing it was a hatred of people and what they thought they were limited to in their ability. In short, it exists for the same reasons irrational Malthusian thinking exists: self hatred, lack of awareness of the human character, personal selfishness of the proponents, and confusion over what people are able to.
Marx is such a fucking dumbass; it’s not even funny. He’s just a stupid, arrogant, angry dumbass who’s incapable of basic logic.
That first sentence has completely defeated me. I’m sure I’ll eventually figure it out but I don’t have the energy for the requisite five readings. This guy needs to read some George Orwell to get the idea of putting over complex ideas in a simple, easily understood manner.
It does take effort but it is worth it.
I have something to admit. The whole idea of redirecting the sexual frustration of young males against (in USA traditionally ostracized) Marxism, is very, very smart.
Those who control the world deserve to be in charge. The real question is not will they rule but how long they will manage keep their social status.
I lived behind the iron curtain. Your comment is so deeply ignorant of the horrors of both the “living socialism” they were prone to calling it, and the revolutionary socialism we have here in the US, that it beggars belief.
Socialism requires society be transformed into a monoculture to work. It’s purpose is to preserve the control an elite have over the population by making silly promises to them, and making excuses out of failure, and blaming imaginary class-enemies for the failure of the very concept.
Despite that, it never really HAS worked, and inevitably requires coercion, and then repression to sustain itself.
Anyone who supports Marxist ideas and any of it’s non-variants with a dozen different names has the mind of a greedy child.
They didn’t “provide for all”, they just made it illegal to be unemployed.
It’s sad how neo-liberal policies have prevailed on the economic side while neo-Marxist policies have prevailed on the social side. The right has brainwashed people into believing cron capitalism is a good thing while the left has brainwashed people into believing radical egalitarianism is a good thing. We need a national socialist revolution but to do this we can’t deny the horrors of the Nazi regime. So many national socialists want to whitewash the Nazis which turns people off. Let’s learn from the mistakes of the Nazis and not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Show me a matriarchal society and I will show you a disaster.
In some ways, it’s much worse now in the US than in Latin America in the sense that the extended family is non-existent, the nuclear family has fallen apart- AND crime, corruption, etc seem to be skyrocketing. The extended family is still pretty strong in many parts of the world. Your social/family life would probably be better in a traditional society like Iran’s or Morocco’s – than it is in the atomized, nihilistic US of AmeriKwa.
Yes, it is correct that Soviet bloc countries never accepted the social theories of Marx and that these social theories have pervaded the west far more than in nations that were under economic Marxism.
A couple things that should be added though: Marx did not envision a society that was either matriarchal or patriarchal, he believed in a fantasy that sprung from his industrial era viewpoint that all social relations would be defined by the collectivist state and industrial production would make distribution of material goods more efficient. Marx believed that humans are essentially bad when not restrained by a collectivist state. Human history, to Marx was defined by “domination” and “oppression”. The essence of cultural Marxism is to look at all social interactions and look for one group beating up on another group. Marxists only do this to convince us that humanity cannot handle freedom (nevermind that the most murderous tyrannies were all collectivist) Thus Marxists do not actually care about the cause of the minority groups that they use to sell their idea that humans can’t handle freedom. They only use these groups to attack any group that represents stability. Thus Marxists really don’t care anything for women’s issues.
The other thing is that matriarchies are not quite what feminists envision. First, there is no evidence that matriarchy was replaced by patriarchy, only that some societies functioned one way, other societies, the other way. In a true matriarchy, the women provided and thus decided how to use what they provided. The men in matriarchies often just spent their time hunting and fishing and had less responsibility. The point is that whoever pulled the strings, had more responsibility. In a patriarchal society, the father took on the care and protection of his family and should be lauded for that. Modern hippie feminists dream about “matriarchy” but couldn’t stand being the provider for the family. Also gender roles were strictly defined in matriarchies, another fact feminists can’t handle. Most feminists would be horrified at the prospect of actually having to live in a matriarchal society. The men go off to hunt, the women sit in the village all day grinding corn and taking care of children. Then the women make the decisions about how to use the corn.
First time visitor, and I am amazed, truly amazed, at what you fellas have compiled here. Really, just amazing. Has the author of the above, or anyone complimenting here, read the Declaration of Independence? Your very freedom to spout this nonsense is predicated on the fundamental provision that “all men are created equal”. You guys are, just, wow, idiots. Feel free to write me; I’d love to “debate” you slack-jawed yokels on the finer points of well, just about anything…