Globalisten & Cultureel Marxisme

Forum Forums Wereldpolitiek & nieuwsachtergronden Globalisten & Cultureel Marxisme

Tags: 

Dit onderwerp bevat 254 reacties, heeft 12 stemmen, en is het laatst gewijzigd door  fatsnotbad 4 dagen, 12 uur geleden.

15 berichten aan het bekijken - 31 tot 45 (van in totaal 255)
  • Auteur
    Berichten
  • #217959

    fatsnotbad
    Sleutelbeheerder
    #217984

    Dutch Engstrom
    Bijdrager

    Overzicht van Culture of Critique (Critical Theory is het handelsmerk van cultureel Marxisme; bekritiseer alles waar we in het Westen voor
    staan en je ondermijnt de gehele cultuur. Zie het Westen vandaag de dag.):

    Analyse van de Frankfurt School en de meest invloedrijke aanhangers van cultureel Marxisme:

    Korte uitleg van cultureel Marxisme:

    De Joodse revolutie begon in Rusland en daarom kon Yuri Bezmenov er uitgebreid over vertellen:

    #218035

    Dutch Engstrom
    Bijdrager

    Of je wilt of niet, er is geen ontkomen aan identiteitspolitiek in een multiculturele samenleving.

    Commercial Photography

    #218038

    fatsnotbad
    Sleutelbeheerder

    Zie je hoe gevaarlijk vrouwen zijn i.c.m. de crimigranten die ze met open benen verwelkomen?

    Mike

    #218040

    Dutch Engstrom
    Bijdrager

    Jup. Daar is maar 1 oplossing voor: het stemrecht ontnemen.

    #218041

    fatsnotbad
    Sleutelbeheerder

    Daar zullen ze never-nooit mee akkoord gaan. We moeten slim te werk gaan, trust the plan. Daarom heb ik in een commentaar onder een video van Black Pigeon Speaks die hierover gaat het volgende geniale plan uit de doeken gedaan:

    A return to old-style patriarchy may not be feasible at this moment. 100 years of socialist and crypto-marxist policies has made sure of that and so-called “conservative” women are not willing to go back to putting on aprons and baking blueberry pies anytime soon. Let’s face it, women are in the workplace now (even though it takes three women to do the work of one guy). Women also gained the right to vote, despite the fact that they are hyperemotional, low-information voters.

    Here’s how I think we can fix this, though:

    First of all, restore a merit-based system with equality of opportunity and not outcome. This is paramount. Sure, some women may actually qualify to be in a leadership position (and they are more than welcome), but most of them won’t. Women are collectivist followers, not individual leaders. But hey, it’s equality, right? Just not the type of equality women like to hide behind and that will automatically grant them all sorts of privileges. Now they will actually need to have skills and talents to show for it. With fewer opportunities available to them, based on their innate capabilities (which don’t hold a candle to those of men), many women will then choose to leave the workplace, get married, start a family and depend on their husbands again as the sole provider. No need to abolish female jobs, just no more gender quota and other insane state-enforced priviliges.

    Secondly, introduce a merit-based system to stop women (and weak men) voting these socialist goons into office. Let’s restrict the right to vote to those, male or female, who contribute to and serve their country either economically or militarily. Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. Why should welfare queens and basement dwellers have voting rights anyway? Of course we should make an exception for retirees and veterans, since they have already served their nation. Voting rights used to be restricted to land ownership and early feminists lost their minds (even though 4 out of 10 men didn’t own property either, but don’t let logic get in the way of the female mind). Now it will be about the willingness to work or fight for your country. No rights without responsibiliies. Since women don’t like taking responsibility, they will drop out of the workforce and military en masse and start baking pies instead, thus giving up the right to vote. We’ll call it “fair inequality”, how about that?

    This should level the playing field considerably. Those women (most likely tomboys with testosterone) willing to put in the extra hours and prove their worth will stay on, those that fail miserably at performing their duties and tasks (which is most of them) will either get fired or quit on their own accord. It literally won’t pay off anymore to be a “strong and independent” female – especially since there’s no welfare system to fall back on, thus forcing women to rely on their husbands once more. Welfare is the life blood of feminism, so let’s choke it at the source. Furthermore, put an end to legalized abortion. A nation that won’t take care of its kids has no future. Lastly, take divorce proceedings out of the family court system and put it back under contract law. Breaking up a marriage will then be equal to breaching a business agreement, for which you need to be able to produce factual proof. No more false rape and DV accusations! Custody should be awarded to those that are economically viable to provide for the kids (i.e. men). No more single moms and feminization of boys!

    If we do this right we can close off all avenues and they won’t even know what hit them. Just use the words “fair” and “equal” a lot and appeal to their collectvism by emphasizing the good of the nation. To save face, the new feminism will be about women choosing to become homemakers themselves, which “conservative” feminist leaders will call “empowering” and a “women’s right” (and which also happens to be true). We all know there’s no such thing as a conservative or right-wing female, but once the societal tide turns they will go with the flow, as they’ve always done. Women don’t make decisions based on a sense of duty or loyalty – those are male values. Women are selfish, materialistic and hypergamous, so take away all their incentives and sell it as “fairness” and “equality” and they will voluntarily give up voting rights and become wives and mothers again.

    I think my plan is genius, don’t you?

    Mike

    #218133

    Dutch Engstrom
    Bijdrager

    Ik ben blij dat BPS Peterson’s anti-identiteitspolitiek aanhaalt.

    #218199

    fatsnotbad
    Sleutelbeheerder
    #218232

    fatsnotbad
    Sleutelbeheerder
    #218247

    Medusa
    Bijdrager

    Mooi artikel van Rypke Zeilmaker:

    Dus nee NEE, ik zeg niet dat Wells al over transgender schreef. Denk AUB even een stapje verder, uit de geopolitieke angst voor overbevolking en haar vermeende samenhang met oorlog… De logica is natuurlijk: wanneer je vrouwen op een voetstuk zet en ze economiseert tot hun 40ste, castratie ( = transgender) en verwijving (homofielen) aanmoedigt, promoot je onvruchtbaarheid.

    #218252

    fatsnotbad
    Sleutelbeheerder

    Dank voor deze bijdrage. En ook nog in het NL, goede analyse!

    Mike

    #218291

    Dutch Engstrom
    Bijdrager

    Vox Day interview bij JF Gariepy.
    Laatste ca. 20 minuten gaan over Jordan Peterson.

    #218370

    Dutch Engstrom
    Bijdrager
    #218401

    Dutch Engstrom
    Bijdrager

    GTFO met je regenbooggezinnen.

    https://nos.nl/artikel/2244485-twee-vaders-een-moeder-volgens-de-wet-is-dat-een-ouder-te-veel.html

    Partners Marco (44), Christian (49) en moeder Marije (35) zouden dan ook graag zien dat de regels worden veranderd. Ze zorgen samen voor hun zoontje Kai, maar alleen Marije en Christian zijn ook wettelijk gezien zijn ouders. “Marco is een heel betrokken vader, dus het is gek dat hij bijvoorbeeld geen medische beslissingen mag nemen als er iets is met Kai”, zegt moeder Marije in het NOS Radio 1 Journaal.

    “Soms vragen mensen: wie is nou de echte vader van Kai? Dan zeg ik: hij heeft twee echte vaders”, zegt Marije.

    Wat is er mis met die mensen ffs?!

    #218403

    fatsnotbad
    Sleutelbeheerder

    Liberalism is a mental disorder. It’s at odds with reality, rationality and factuality.

    Mike

15 berichten aan het bekijken - 31 tot 45 (van in totaal 255)

Je moet ingelogd zijn om een reactie op dit onderwerp te kunnen geven.