I am a right-wing feminist, so reddit has banned me on a number of fronts.

submitted by ech from self.Introductions

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

the white-positive sphere really does have a problem with anti-female-ness. (and non-White male hangers-on often try to make it more about female-hatred than about pro-whiteness, I've seen it a few times now.).

You're not wrong about that. I understand where you are coming from, but I also understand the arguments against universal female suffrage. Women's nurturing instincts are easily subverted into the destruction of civilizations through emotionally driven support for mass immigration and entitlements. This statement is hard to argue against because there are dozens of historical examples. Women get equal voting rights or acquire power, and a civilization is dead within a few centuries. In general people making this argument still love women, they just don't want (most) women having a say in how the society is structured. There are inherit conflicts between female nature, and the cold rational decisions a government needs to make.

Those that are actively hateful towards women tend to be ostracized in most spaces. Many I think are just edgy incels that latched on to the movement to have a sense of brotherhood somewhere, since in modern society nobody wants omega males. This problem is not unique to WN movements and communities, but also plagues various feminist circles that inevitably fill with skeevy "nice guy" allies. The only WN space I can think of actively hostile to women is Dailystormer, perhaps some of TRS. Both are sites that have discredited themselves in every possible way over the years, including this one.

The only thing that unites these various communities are the 14 words, beyond that they are all over the place. That those words are offensive to anyone shows how far gone we are down the path of anti-White hatred. There is nothing morally wrong with the statement, "We must secure the existence of our people, and a future for white children." - unless you think the extinction of White people is a moral imperative.

[–]taibo14 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I think a lot of women get their ego tied to suffrage. Democracy is a numbers game, so it's not about whether you personally are cogent and resistant to emotional manipulation, it's about the majority of women (or x group). If your response is that the same can be said about a lot of men then I'd agree.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

If your response is that the same can be said about a lot of men then I'd agree.

It is, I don't think mob rule (democracy) is a good system of government. Republics wherein voting rights are earned rather than taken for granted have a far better track record. That the US started out that way and has undone it all with amendments doesn't give me much hope on that front either. The US founders were right about needing to tear the government down and start over again every 60 or so years.

The pathological altruism of Europeans has ever been our undoing. If we feel something is unjust we tend to make retarded decisions based on emotions that have dire long term consequence.

[–]ech[S] 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

OP here. I, too, am skeptical of democracy, but edgelords who just pick on female suffrage specifically are usually lame misogynists. There's no principled basis in this day and age for granting universal suffrage to men and not women. You constantly see shitposters harp on the 19th Amendment and women's "nurturing instincts" or alleged incapacity for independent thought (males who say this are often, themselves, NPCs), but nobody mentions the antisocial, burn-it-down tendencies of unattached young males. Male voters got us the Immigration Act of 1965, and male voters are more likely to favor war than female voters. If you really want to limit suffrage, there are better schemes, such as:

  • Suffrage for families: A married man and woman with at least one child collectively get one vote.
  • Suffrage for taxpayers: Self explanatory.
  • Suffrage based on a test of cognitive ability and/or civic knowledge: self explanatory.
  • Suffrage based on national service: self explanatory.

All of these proposals seem less popular, in my experience, than just trashing women. Perhaps because the NEETs who populate these discussions don't have families, or pay very many taxes, or distinguish themselves in any way other than being male.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

I agree on everything you've just said. I've always been fond of a "net contributor" twist on the taxpayer approach. If you pay more into the system then you take out - you have a say in how it's spent. It's fair, and to the point. My wife and I have talked at length about the first approach as well. It's decent because only people with "skin in the game" have a say.

However, any of the options you've listed are better by far than Universal Suffrage. Hell, all of those being ways to "earn the vote" simultaneously would even be fine. Then politicians would be forced to pander to those 4 groups, and that doesn't sound bad at all comparative to the pandering they do today...

[–]ech[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Exactly -- "skin in the game" is a big part of the appeal, ditto that you get to prune which audiences are pandered-to.

I basically agree with Peter Thiel that if I have to choose between liberty and democracy, I choose liberty. But, joke's on us, because soon we're going to have neither. LOL.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

But, joke's on us, because soon we're going to have neither. LOL.

If we want to avoid that dystopia we'll have to fight for it - and not with words. You can't put Pandora back in the box without upending the board. I predict the next 6 years will be challenging and bloody. My advice to anyone I like is to get well stocked on the essentials. Long term food, lead, and precious metals. At the end of the day, violence is all that is left when words and reason have failed.

[–]ech[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It's difficult to predict the future now but if I had to, I'd predict a slow slide into entropy and rot. Infrastructure gradually shittier. Societal trust gradually declining. Court system less reliable, families less functional, streets less clean. But no big explosive definitive boogaloo. This could be the worst case scenario, because at least if we dramatically imploded into a full-throttle war, there would be no pretense of enforcing the old rules and nobody could stick their heads in the sand anymore. This could be a long agonizing frog-boil situation instead.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's difficult to predict the future now but if I had to, I'd predict a slow slide into entropy and rot. Infrastructure gradually shittier. Societal trust gradually declining. Court system less reliable, families less functional, streets less clean. But no big explosive definitive boogaloo. This could be the worst case scenario, because at least if we dramatically imploded into a full-throttle war, there would be no pretense of enforcing the old rules and nobody could stick their heads in the sand anymore. This could be a long agonizing frog-boil situation instead.

You sound like me on my blackpill days. I know plenty of people and groups that won't stand for it, I just don't know if it'll be enough. :/

[–]ech[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It is theoretically possible we know some of the same groups. I'm very blackpilled on the "will it be enough" question, but candidly and crassly, I am rich enough to survive even if it's not. I regret what is in store for normies, however.