I don’t, personally, but just something I have noticed and observed them doing, usually triggered by large migration and the fear of rape that comes with it, so a lot of them start to jump ship back towards their own native men and pretend that the past 6 decades of feminism never happened…so it’s an option i guess.
Yes, but people can be forced to think that they were “compatible”. So from the ruler’s point of view they can be compatible, because they shall be compatible.
That video must be from 1982-1984.
According to Yuri Bezmenov four points are needed: (1) demoralization of the society, especially their students (it takes about 15 to 20 years), because these students are going to be the next powerful generation; (2) destabalize organizations (it takes about 2 to 5 years); (3) crisis (it takes about 6 weeks); (4) “normalization” (people think that they live in peace, although they do not).
“The United States is in a state of war, an undeclared total war. …I know Americans don’ like to listen to things which are unpleasant.” - Yuri Bezmenov.
Meh, they just switch from extreme degeneracy to moderate degeneracy. They still expect all the traditional entitlements of women with none of the traditional costs. That’s the kind you’re talking about. I pity the men who fall for that.
The most important thing is to prevent females from being as useless and detrimental to the system with their modern degeneracy as they are right now, and to impose the kind of order upon them which would make them productive, or at the very least non-destructive, instead.
Whether females agree with it or not, if they apologize or not… who cares? They should have a choice between that and death. Females are submissive by nature, so they would choose that. The ones who wouldn’t submit are masculine anyway, and masculine females are unfit so they can be killed with no remorse. And effete males, the white knights who let themselves be dominated by women, should be killed too, as effeminate males are unfit as well.
But modernity itself is a problem too or, at least, more and more people believe that modernity is a problem, and its people, the Occidental people, are responsible for all problems people have been facing since the end of the 18th century. Therefore many people think or shall think that they have the right for any “revolution” they want to make - with the result of an [i]endless “revolution” of almost all kinds[/a]. Almost! Since these “revolutions” make no sense except one: they are always happening under control, so that senseful revolutions do not happen. What senseless “revolutions” achieve is a more and more problematic world. Senseless revolutions are like wars, civil wars, and they are merely senseful for those who are supposed to be the enemy: the rulers, because they become richer and more powerful by these senseless “revolutions”.
Antagonistic isms like feminism and Islamism are in the interest of the rulers and their puppets. The majority is usually not but is ought to be interested in them, because both the puppet minority and the majority are permanently bombarded by those antagonistic isms via mass media and education systems like kindergartens, schools, universities. So at last there will be the following distribution of interests: (1) 1% with interests being self-interests, (2) 99% with interests being no self-interests (because they are the interests of the 1%).
The Islamic „Golden Age“ was not during the 14th century but during the 10th century (peak).
Yes, but it is not said that this will happen before or after the Islamic hordes will have conquered the Occidental culture.
Modernity stands for a modern society / culture. It does not necessarily stand for a ruling system. The current ruling system is not really new, not really modern, it is as old as human history, and merely some of its instruments are modern, which does not mean that the current rulers are modern minded. So modernity does not automatically mean that those who are ruling are really modern. The rulers themselves do not have to be modern, they have to have the control over everything and everyone who is modern and who is not modern. And indeed: The rulers are “merely” interested in controlling, having power, regardless whether those who are controlled are modern or not. And that is a very old one and thus not a typically modern attitude.
If "feminism weakens the West for Islamic conquest“ (AutSider), we have also to mention that Islamism weakens the West for Islamic conquest, because its terrorism weakens the West, at least currently. There is still no real Western resistance to Islamism. There is more and more Western weakness. And furthermore: there is also much Western conversion to Islam, especially to Islamism.
So if both feminism and Islamism weaken the West, then they are strategically compatible for those who benefit from this development, because actually feminism and Islamism are not compatible.
US citizens “don’t like to listen to things which are unpleasant” (Yuri Bezmenov).
I would nevertheless say to most of the US citizens: Come to the Old Europe (Western Europe) and look how fundamentally and evilly the Globalists have already changed its countries and societies during the last few decades after the so-called “Cold War”.
It is unpleasant, US citizens!
Actually terrorism is the “common cause” that strengthens the West, but only IF they unite into a globalist regime. 
Islam will displace Feminism.
Did Islam invent internet, the one you’re using right now to express your hate? Or medicine that has made you possible? You’re only looking at the negative, but are not even considering the benefits that you are using and taking for granted. When was the last time you went without food for days at a time? Have you ever had to live through and survive a serious and debilitating infectious disease? How many vaccines have you had since you were born? I could go on.
You cannot deny that you are a product of that which you hate so much. Don’t like modern society? Then why are you using internet right now? You remind me of those rich kids that turn against the system that has brought them about; feeling undeserving of all those things they have now. The sad thing is, you don’t even know what you have, because you’ve always had it. That’s why you’re always picking on the bad, not even conscious of the good. So ungrateful, so spoiled.
That picture definitely hit a nerve LOL…because it is so true!
I did not criticize science (medicine, internet), or agriculture (farming), indeed, I consider them valuable. Unfortunately for you, those things don’t have much to do with feminism/liberalism, which is what I criticize. And to the small extent that they do, farmers tend to be conservative-minded due to usually being in direct contact with nature moreso than the city folk, and in order to have a productive scientific community in the long-run, you must have a society that upholds self-preserving values, which means non-liberal and non-feminist values, otherwise you won’t have a society at all and without that, no science either.
The aspects of modern Western society I criticize are all connected to liberalism and feminism, and they are all in direct conflict with previous Western values, you know, the ones which made the West strong in the first place. What I criticize are things like emasculation of men, destructive self-hatred, moral degeneracy, mindless hedonism, materialism, and if I were to criticize a profession it wouldn’t be one that produces food, it would be these worthless pop singers, rappers, and all kinds of useless shit-artists.
You are all about projection… the degeneracy that you love so much that exists in the current society is a PRODUCT of the success of the previous Western values, the ones which you hate so much. Without previous success, degeneracy would never be possible, without the previous generations overcoming nature and building a sheltering wall around it, you and your degenerate kind would be filtered out swiftly… no, the only reason you and yours can exist, for a short time period, is because what you hate has created a system that enables it. That stings, doesn’t it?
You are the one who uses things invented and maintained by those you despise, your very existence is enabled by it. This is why you feel guilt which your psyche cannot deal with directly because it would expose the hypocrisy of your beliefs. So in an effort to spare your ego your subconscious has projected this guilt outwards and directed it toward the one exposing your hypocrisy and making you feel guilty - me. Your simplicity is beginning to bore me, Pandora. At least make an effort to mask yourself a bit better.
Nothing good that happened in the West, nothing that I love and value, has come about because of liberalism or feminism. Liberalism and feminism have done nothing but destroy everything I love and value, including the previous Western values. It is precisely because I want to preserve European values, that I want to purge the West of this modern infection of liberalism and feminism.
Yes, actually, that is true, but currently there is only Western weakness. The Western people do nothing against terrorism. If their rulers speak of “terrorism” and “Islamism” they want to frighten and weaken their people. So their “war on terror” means “war against their own people”.
Are you sure?
And you chose to say that the rules are objectively defined by religion, after which I reminded you that religion, itself, was created by a man. If a man makes up rules and upholds it as a religion, does it make the rules objective? No, they are still man-made rules. And in case if Islam, not only man-made but also outdated.
Your words:
You think Islam is immune to materialism? It is the Muslim mind, rooted in lack and poverty that is most vulnerable to materialism and consumerism. It will be the Muslim woman who will have the tightest grip on her Gucci bag (compared to a Western woman), and a Muslim man to his BMW because their mentality is still that of poverty. The are the ones who won’t be able to control their greed.
The most materialistic people that I’ve come across are not in the West but in newly economically developed countries of Asia and Middle East, where brand names have a strong hold on people’s psychologies and their sense of self-worth.
Maybe you’re projecting yourself here. Based on your artwork, I have long suspected that you, yourself, have a disturbed mind, especially when it comes to your portrayal of women.
So let me ask you this: if you had a daughter (and god forbid you ever will), would you want her to be dependent on a man for her happiness and her protection, or would you rather teach her how to stand up for herself and how to be happy on her own? And what if she ever comes to be dependent on a man like gasp yourself?
Dubai is very materialistic. Dubai, in fact, is one of the best examples why Islam will succumb to materialism/consumerism. It has already turned into a mall culture, with youth secretly rebelling against traditionalism. It is censorship and isolationism that is holding it in place…but not for long.
youtube.com/watch?v=ee9JHCale44
youtube.com/watch?v=vWX8zD14x-8
youtube.com/watch?v=GBpqcFj4gA0
What is utopia have to do with it? Things evolve, things change, that’s all I’m saying. Somehow you automatically assume that we will return back to Middle Ages.
Globalized world.
Right, let’s go back to Middle Ages which you love so much, so you can be a noble knight. And how long do you think you’ll survive?
Women are dependent on men for survival (protection and provision) whether they like it or not, just like men are dependent on women for reproduction (sex and womb), whether they like it or not.
Teaching women that they are not dependent on men would just be teaching them flattering lies and turning them into entitled spoiled brats who would remain dependent on men but think they are not so. It would turn them into YOU, and truly god forbid that happens.
I have yet to see a woman stand up for herself… usually I see other men stand up for them, or women pretending they are standing up for themselves while military and police are standing behind them. You, like all other women, have no idea what standing up for yourself means, because since you are a woman the society cares for your life, happiness, and well being. The advantage of that is obvious, the disadvantage is that one is never truly faced with challenges that force them to stand up for themselves and grow and improve, thus they become… you.
How so? Contraception has been welcomed by both men and women. In fact, it’s one of the things that has given women back the power over their sexuality. Advancement in medicine especially when it comes to reproductive health has much contributed to feminism.
Are you saying if all farmers were gay they wouldn’t be able to do the job? How is farming or scientific research a sex/gender based activity?
It doesn’t sting because I fundamentally agree with you. And you’re projecting even more so violently. “you and yours”? Are you not part of it also? Do tell me you are somehow different - better, that ‘your’ kind was responsible for all the ‘good’ things we now have, but somehow not responsible for all the ‘bad’ things we also inherited. I know you’re such an angel, pointing fingers else where.
Yes, that’s what I see you doing.
I think you’re being too dramatic. As usual.
So… nothing?
yawn
If a man knew how to treat a woman with respect without treating her like his chattel, or his sex slave, she wouldn’t need to turn away from him and seek protection elsewhere. By law, wife (with children) was tied to a man even if he mistreated her or had other women on the side, or chose to leave her for a younger woman. And how many women had to live a miserable life and be told that it’s just her lot by nature, even if it meant a life of abuse and suffering? If a man is a loser, or a drunkard, and takes it on his family (because he can) why should the woman be held responsible and pay for his mistakes also?
Right, nothing you want to hear, apparently.