Theme: Governance

  • A Difference in The Way Women and Men Have Voted

    A Difference in The Way Women and Men Have Voted, https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/01/a-difference-in-the-way-women-and-men-have-voted/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 00:45:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267255991890055168

  • A Difference in The Way Women and Men Have Voted

    A Difference in The Way Women and Men Have Voted, https://t.co/W8BzQkfvck

  • A Difference in The Way Women and Men Have Voted,

    —“I would like to know if there has always been a difference in the way women and men have voted, or if the women’s lib movement in the 60’s marked the time when women moved to the left.”—Susan Bigs

    Short answer: Men and women have different biological functions, abilities, instincts, intuitions, and incentives. We always follow our incentives. We always organize to promote our group’s incentives. The family is a compromise where in we share the same interests. The market for cmmons in the state, and the market for goods and services outside of the state, allow those already in the family to compromise in a market of mutual exchange. And allow the classes of families to cooperate on means even if we share different ends. The primary difference is between married women with children allied with husbands (conservatively), and unmarried, single mothers, and increasingly university indoctrinated women and men to vote left. For the first generation, women voted conservatively. It changed after that. It changed radically when the jewish marxists failed to create class warfare due to the failure of marxism and the success of european markets under rule of law, and when those marxists in the frankfurt school switched from to cultural marxism to undermine our culture, then the jewish postmodernists switched to identity politics to undermining cooperation between us, and then when jewish feminists switched to undermining cooperation with the genders. Birth control began it. The control over women over family spending and 70% of all spending and the influence of marketing to women increased promotion of it. The decline in economic necessity of husbands decreased it. The increase in entry of more women into the workforce, partly because of it increased it, the decline in births because of it also, the decline of marriages because of it, the decline in the duration of marriages because of it, and the decline in the two income household driving down average household wages did it. The increase in college debt -especially for women who took ‘gut’ courses (and mostly still do), provided incentive to the academy who promoted it. And the rest is history. In other words, men and women share the same interests in a famly, and historically, a married man, represented his family, if he and his family held property (and if he fought in the military when needed), then his vote was in the compromise interests of the family. Our failure was in maintaining one house of parliament/commons instead of continuing the practice of adding houses for the classes. Had women had their own house, and had labor had it’s own house, then the ‘evils’ of majoritarianism would not have destroyed our country and our demographics as a side effect of female differences in voting by demanding more resources from the state, and devoted resources to the reproduction of the underclasses, instead of the production of commons from which we had so long enjoyed the returns.

  • A Difference in The Way Women and Men Have Voted,

    —“I would like to know if there has always been a difference in the way women and men have voted, or if the women’s lib movement in the 60’s marked the time when women moved to the left.”—Susan Bigs

    Short answer: Men and women have different biological functions, abilities, instincts, intuitions, and incentives. We always follow our incentives. We always organize to promote our group’s incentives. The family is a compromise where in we share the same interests. The market for cmmons in the state, and the market for goods and services outside of the state, allow those already in the family to compromise in a market of mutual exchange. And allow the classes of families to cooperate on means even if we share different ends. The primary difference is between married women with children allied with husbands (conservatively), and unmarried, single mothers, and increasingly university indoctrinated women and men to vote left. For the first generation, women voted conservatively. It changed after that. It changed radically when the jewish marxists failed to create class warfare due to the failure of marxism and the success of european markets under rule of law, and when those marxists in the frankfurt school switched from to cultural marxism to undermine our culture, then the jewish postmodernists switched to identity politics to undermining cooperation between us, and then when jewish feminists switched to undermining cooperation with the genders. Birth control began it. The control over women over family spending and 70% of all spending and the influence of marketing to women increased promotion of it. The decline in economic necessity of husbands decreased it. The increase in entry of more women into the workforce, partly because of it increased it, the decline in births because of it also, the decline of marriages because of it, the decline in the duration of marriages because of it, and the decline in the two income household driving down average household wages did it. The increase in college debt -especially for women who took ‘gut’ courses (and mostly still do), provided incentive to the academy who promoted it. And the rest is history. In other words, men and women share the same interests in a famly, and historically, a married man, represented his family, if he and his family held property (and if he fought in the military when needed), then his vote was in the compromise interests of the family. Our failure was in maintaining one house of parliament/commons instead of continuing the practice of adding houses for the classes. Had women had their own house, and had labor had it’s own house, then the ‘evils’ of majoritarianism would not have destroyed our country and our demographics as a side effect of female differences in voting by demanding more resources from the state, and devoted resources to the reproduction of the underclasses, instead of the production of commons from which we had so long enjoyed the returns.

  • Guns Are the Last Phase of A Civil War, Not the First

    Guns Are the Last Phase of A Civil War, Not the First https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/01/guns-are-the-last-phase-of-a-civil-war-not-the-first/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 00:40:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267254650572607495

  • The New Big Lie: “One Man to Turn This Country Upside Down”

      Genetically Feminine Conflict Strategy, … Strategic Practiced Feminine Jewish Strategy, … … Formally Articulated Feminine Jewish Saul Alinsky Technique, … … … Used in Marxist, Feminist, Postmodernist application; … … … … Undermining the compromise; … … … … … between classes, genders, individual differences; … … … … … … Of Rule of Law, Markets in everything, and The Intergenerational family – as the means of persistence of earned civilizational advantage for all. By the “New Big Lie” of the new “False Promise of Equality”, by reforming supernatural promise of life after death, with the pseudoscientific promise of elimination of differences in interpersonal, sexual, social, economic, political, market value that are entirely the product of our vast differences in genetic ability, quality, and therefore value to one another. Man was not oppressed – the families of the unfit classes were domesticated by the families of the better classes like all other plants and animals were domesticated, because of the outsized rewards for humans for having done so, and the necessity of: A Division Of labor, Property, The law of Tort, the Suppression of free riding, parasitism, and corruption by that law of tort, with property as a unit of measure; Causing Markets in Everything; Thereby Suppressing the reproduction of the underclasses; Who by poor genes, poor ability, poor character, poor discipline, must be genetically left behind for the rest of humanity to evolve out of ignorance, superstition, incompetence, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the hazards of a nature unconcerned, with human life, in a brief period of planetary, solar, and galactic quiet enabling, our persistence, evolution, and transcendence. Why does the NEW BIG LIE work like every other new big lie? Because we have failed to sufficiently domesticate the remaining demi-human animals into full humans, such that they are not vulnerable to the big lies, that resist, prevent, and reverse our evolutionary progress into the gods we imagined – free of the vicissitudes of a nature hostile to human life.

  • The Origins of Political Conflict in Women’s Genetic Strategy

    The Origins of Political Conflict in Women’s Genetic Strategy https://t.co/UvXTgeSla4

  • “A republic will always end up run by an aristocracy or an oligarchy. In the cas

    —“A republic will always end up run by an aristocracy or an oligarchy. In the case of the (originally) aristocratic republic of the US, incremental democratization (esp. after 1828), mass lower class immigration and democratic control of the popular media (industrialization of propaganda)was the means by which a largely foreign oligarchy was able to supplant the formerly ruling WASP aristocracy in the 20th c. to the detriment of us all.”—Scott De Warren

  • “A republic will always end up run by an aristocracy or an oligarchy. In the cas

    —“A republic will always end up run by an aristocracy or an oligarchy. In the case of the (originally) aristocratic republic of the US, incremental democratization (esp. after 1828), mass lower class immigration and democratic control of the popular media (industrialization of propaganda)was the means by which a largely foreign oligarchy was able to supplant the formerly ruling WASP aristocracy in the 20th c. to the detriment of us all.”—Scott De Warren

  • The data is correct. If the streets were full of white men the government would

    The data is correct. If the streets were full of white men the government would be terrified. Why? Lethality. Antifa is largely spoiled (angry privileged) white kids. Antifa uses public damage and looting. But one white man who slips through FBI/DHS kills dozens. Why? Lethality.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 00:27:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267251387156647937

    Reply addressees: @M4A2020 @thequarksoup @billprady

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267249322959073281