Jim is right about Women

In his latest blogpost, broadly discussing our future following the end of Trump’s term, Jim writes:

“Our key issue is patriarchy, and each of us should promote it at the individual level, by being alpha in our interactions with women, and by telling our women that this is God’s will, and by approving or disapproving of individual associates according to whether their conduct undermines or supports their family and our own.”

Where we go from here, Jim’s Blog

This statement is then questioned in the replies by a user who goes by “TheDividualist”, who specifically asks why would Jim prioritize the women question over other, more conspicuous issues such as immigration, homosexuality, communism, etc.

In order to answer that, I must first acknowledge that the other mentioned issues do have more glaring short-term consequences and that is precisely what makes us inclined to tend to them first. However, they are all rooted in, or at least facilitated by, the decline of patriarchy.

In the book of Genesis, immediately following the original sin, God dictates that husband shall rule over wife, and that he must work the ground in order to eat of it and provide for his family. This establishes the patriarchal system humans have been operating under ever since. Only by understanding that all of civilization and its institutions have been founded on this principle can we realize that its destruction will lead to the inevitable collapse of everything else.

While many are quick to point out in the name of liberty that society is made up of individuals, most seem to forget that, most importantly, it is made up of families, to which those individuals belong. Individuals do not cater exclusively to their own personal interests, but also to those of their loved ones. Families are reliant not only on themselves, but on the cooperation between them and other families in the division of labor which allows for society to maintain itself and prosper.

With the weakening of the family unit, which happens primarily through the destruction of its internal power structure and hierarchy, men loses both interest and capacity in cooperating and upholding his society. There is a reason, beyond knowledge of the territory, why warriors become fiercer as the battle draws closer to their household. As Jim puts it in a later reply:

“There is a very strong correlation between failure to protect private male ownership of female sexuality, and failure to protect private property in land. Every home needs a wife and a garden. If no wife, no interest in a home and garden, and politics will create a landless, fatherless mob, living in little boxes, and elites will use that mob to destroy each other.”

Where we go from here (replies), Jim’s Blog

Feminism has not been at the forefront of progressivism for centuries by occasion, but by design. It remains the most powerful tool in the destruction of Western civilization for it infects and corrodes its very atoms. It paved the way for homosexuality, multiculturalism and all other forms of egalitarianism to become mainstream, because not only did women bring these issues to the polls, they brought it to the dinner table. If you’re curious about how this corrosion progressed exactly, heed the following excerpt from p. 48 of “Cultural thought of Ludwig von Mises” by Jeffrey A. Tucker:

“Feminists are the ones most likely to exercise the vote once it is granted. Given their socialist intellectual framework, feminists would also support heightened state intervention, which is likely to make the lives of women who are full-time wives and mothers more difficult (with state child care, fewer tax breaks for motherhood, and cultural opposition to the family). Greater state intervention, by making most people poorer, also makes the maintenance of the traditional family with one wage earner more difficult. Moreover, non-feminist wives and mothers will have less interest in being politically active. Thus, by default, women’s suffrage leads to political power being exercised against non-feminists. It would be far better, Mises might have argued, for the non-feminists to oppose women’s suffrage, then to live under the feminist domination that would logically follow the passage of women’s suffrage.”

Cultural thought of Ludwig von Mises (1991), Jeffrey A. Tucker, p. 48

Female sexual and reproductive services are the sole instrument for the furthering of our species; thus, they are a more valuable and sacred asset than land or capital. Once male control over these assets is stripped, there is little in the way before the destruction of all of civilization. It is worth adding that women have a compulsion to usurp male authority, something that also dates back to the original sin. Now, a compulsion to concede power (and even masculinity itself) is being cultivated in men, primarily through the decline of virtue. That must be reversed and order must be restored within the household, and then (and only then) beyond.


1 Response

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment