Wednesday, June 23, 2010

A Counter-Feminist Theory of the State (Redux)

The feminized and anti-male nature of the state voids any social contract binding upon men - no such contract objectively exists. Neither feminism nor the state has any ground of moral authority.

You have no political obligation toward women, either individually or as a class. Your transaction with any individual woman is constructed entirely upon a moral law within yourself.


The following political treatise, in PDF format, explains in detail why the foregoing is true:

http://www.4shared.com/document/FlctSAFM/_2__CFtheoryOfState.html

Please distribute freely to freethinkers and scholars who might find it helpful.

................................................

Note: the following also pertains:

http://www.4shared.com/document/Ke9ST_d3/Message2NonFeministWomen.html

4 Comments:

Blogger NotNOW said...

Lockean state of nature, my friend.

I never agreed to any social contract, never signed it, and the government's assertion of one means I am born into slavery. That is unacceptable.

You are correct that the state has become feminized, but it is the foundation of the state itself that we must question.

You are also correct in your assertion that guilt is used as a mechanism of control.

The pie of political power is fixed; squabbling over political power is a zero-sum game. When the power of the state rises, the power of the individual falls. Feminists would be shocked to have the ever-more powerful state turned against them, but that is exactly what they unknowingly risk. The very state whose power they've done so much to increase could one day conclude it doesn't need their support anymore, or even more shocking the reigns could change hands. This has happened before.

The political game (distinguished from actual politics), as practiced in America, is a distraction. The left-right paradigm seeks to keep us divided among ourselves and fighting each other while the power of the state grows and grows. The left-right paradigm is fed and nourished by the MSM; all public debate is framed within it, and no debate outside of it is allowed.

As such, the feminist hivemind, as a herd of useful idiots, merely serves to help obscure and support the real power structure and as such will one day be deemed obsolete.

"feminism has wrapped itself in the mantle of the state"

I disagree: the state has tolerated and even nurtured feminism as a means to an end. The end? Marginalize men and render them less able to resist the state. What is the purpose of the state? Financial pillage of the masses.

This means feminists are monumentally stupid. They have assisted in building and strengthening a system that will ultimately overtly enslave them and their offspring. The temporary benefits they are getting now, in the form of free money from men and support of their hedonistic lifestyles, will disappear all too soon.

You are exactly correct that this government has no legitimate authority.

1:45 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

"I never agreed to any social contract, never signed it, and the government's assertion of one means I am born into slavery. That is unacceptable."

Okay. Fair enough. But when I spoke of state and social contract, it was mostly with the purpose of establishing a theoretical baseline on which to build my argument.

For plenty of people WOULD assert that there is a social contract and a state order, and assuming such a worldview on the part of a supposed reader, I laid out my argument in terms such a reader would readily comprehend.

Furthermore, if you reject the idea of the state and the social contract, you must still admit that if you and your neighbor privately conclude a code of behavior that will govern your relationship, then you have indeed formed a social contract - and, so far as it extends, an embryonic kind of "state" as well.

""feminism has wrapped itself in the mantle of the state"

I disagree: the state has tolerated and even nurtured feminism as a means to an end. The end? Marginalize men and render them less able to resist the state."


Fair enough. I see no reason for demurral on this point, and I don't see how it contradicts my own remark about "the mantle of the state".

I believe it is six of one, half-a-dozen of the other. Or two sides of the same pancake, if you will.

Of COURSE feminism has wrapped itself in the mantle of the state in order to give itself a sanctified aura.

This does not any wise preclude that other people might be cynically playing the feminists for fools AT THE SAME TIME.

(In fact, that is damned sharp of them! It is a strategy I recommend.)

10:45 PM  
Anonymous Porky Domesticus said...

Off topic, but i thought you might be amused by this bizarre rant aimed at your good self...

http://radicalprofeminist.blogspot.com/2010/03/antifeminist-asshole-posted-this-and.html

1:48 AM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

@porky:

Yup..I remember that bizzarity. And I am still amused at how little it took to set it off in the first place!

BTW: Julian has crossposted that piece to the XYonline website.

The fact that XYonline permits the likes of Julian to be one of their contributing writers, speaks tons.

It means that they are even worse than I thought they were! :(

8:35 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home