Some time ago, commenter Acartia and I were debating the totalitarian character of pro gay bill 13 in Ontario. I had pointed out how a gay straight alliance club in the US was promoting homosexual sex in a graphic manner to which he responded:
“I sure hope that you are not trying to claim that the bad behaviour of a small sector of an identifiable group is reflective of all within the group. If so, 911 is proof that all Muslims are terrorists and the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church is proof that all Christians are hate filled homophobes. Obviously, these are absurd conclusions.”
Acartia made this argument in good faith but I think his analogy is flawed. He’s right in his reasoning about Muslims and Christians and while I admit that dragging in a foreign group into this debate did weaken my argument somewhat, I feel that I am still somewhat justified in doing so.
Religions like Christianity and Islam are global in scope but not international. By global I simply mean that a community is not geographically concentrated in one region; nothing more nothing less. Global religions harmonize with local cultures. Malaysian culture is very different from Iranian culture despite both countries sharing a common Islamic faith. Similarly, the culture of Italy is very different from the culture of the Philippines which shares the Catholic faith of the former. Global religions do not transcend regional, national, ethnic, and linguistic boundaries. Their appeal might be global but these religions are absorbed by local cultures and remade in the culture’s image. Internationalist movements like Feminism and Marxism on the other hand transcend national and ethnic identities. As I’d stated some time ago, feminism is anti-nationalism and anti-patriotism. Feminism and Marxism subscribe to a narrative of class struggle which is then imposed on societies with scant regard for culture and historical realities and perspectives. While Islam and Christianity vary from community to community, Liberal pet causes do not. Unlike religion there is very little room for interpretation within the ideological framework of feminism and Marxism as their core beliefs are non negotiable. Feminists in India sound exactly like feminists in the west when they harp about “patriarchy” and “gender subordination.” Likewise, LGBT groups around the world employ the same tactics and rhetoric and share the same underlying agenda. There is no such thing as Mexican feminism or Arab feminism; feminism is feminism. The same goes for the LGBT groups in the west, or at least in the anglosphere.
As many have already pointed out, Feminism is essentially Marxism adjusted for gender. Women’s history is now being reconstructed along the solipsistic lines of class struggle without any heed given to nationality, ethnicity, religion, and culture. Feminists have also long decried any attempt at classifying their toxic ideology as a western creation while insisting that their movement speaks for women globally (one size fits all). Feminism essentially inherits the internationalism of Marxism. A few words on Marxism are in order. Marxism is at its core a very Jewish philosophy condensing within its framework various aspects of the Jewish worldview such as:
1)Rebellion: In this case, workers against “Bourgeois.” Other rebellions that Jewry are invested in are feminism (Women against men/family), Multiculturalism (minorities against the majority), Pornography (rebellion against society/marriage), and Homosexuality/gay rights (gays against society and culture).
2)Materialism: Marxism assumes that material gain is the sole motivator of human agency (defined through class struggle) throughout history. Material bounty has always been perceived as a sign of divine favour within the Jewish worldview.
3)Internationalism: Marxism is international and imposes it’s narrow narrative of class struggle on all human societies regardless of cultural and racial considerations (one size fits all). This is also obvious from Marxism’s rendering of class along economic lines while ignoring cultural and religious variables. This internationalism is a facet of the Jewish identity as Jews could never historically identify with the nationalism of their host nations. The interests of the Jewish collective supersede the interests of their host nations and much ink has already been spilled on North American Jewry’s commitment to Israeli interests at the expense of American and Canadian interests. Organized Jewry remains unconcerned with whether the US and Canada are dragged into a third world war, so long as Israel retains the right to wage perpetual war in the Middle East. Henry Ford was correct in titling his book “The international Jew.” A great American and a great Capitalist, Ford was one of the few men who saw the Jew clearly for what he is.
As Gender feminism was essentially a Jewish creation (Betty Friedan/Gloria Steinem), the movement retains much of the internationalism of Marxism; and hence feminism’s need to ‘transcend’ regional and national loyalties. Feminists seem to identify more with an oppressed woman in Afghanistan than with the hungry homeless man downtown. Feminist groups show no sense of patriotism or loyalty to their nations unless they are allowed to reconstruct culture on their own terms. Like its Jewish Frankenstein, the feminist monster would rather censor debate than participate in it. Most feminist blogs and websites are echo chambers that protect their cowardly members with “trigger warnings” and blanket bans.
The main reason why feminism has won so little ground in the orient is due to the oriental woman’s loyalty to her culture and country. South Asian and Arab women actively defend their cultures despite suffering inhumane abuse from their backward and tribal societies. Disturbingly, some of these South Asian women occasionally participate in honour killings. Western women by contrast have historically enjoyed a higher standing partially due to Christianity’s unwavering commitment to monogamy.
A few final thoughts on internationalism are in order. Internationalism serves Jewry well as their interests are tribal no matter how globally dispersed they may be. Yet when internationalism is adopted by heterogeneous gentile groups the result is cultural suicide on a massive scale. Ethnicity, language, gender, and religion are all facets of identity that are worth fighting for and have been fought for since time immemorial. Internationalist ideologies like Marxism and feminism strip us of our cultural identities and reduce us to faceless human resources to be allocated by a totalitarian nanny state.
Read more: Where Western women fail miserably