The Gay Marriage Threat
Racial groupings exist to have regard assigned to them. Without this function people would not feel the racial identity useful. To simply consider the racial grouping as a lobbying group for rights is a mistake as this can be better done with human universalism. Rights only have a sensible existence in the context of rights being equal for all. If the rights are not equal than another term needs to be used such as privileges or simply rules. A right something permanent which should never be taken away, this permanence can only be related to a permanent feature. A permanent effect must have a permanent cause and the permanent cause of rights is being human. So anyone who is human has these rights. Many ask for privileges under the name of rights as a ruse but this is transparent. To the extent that rights exist it is only to the extent that these rights exist for all. When one fights for rights one has all good people as logical allies. There is no need for racial groupings to fight for being treated equal to all others as this is not a racial demand but a demand from individuals. Any campaign which by its nature must be limited by race is not asking for rights but for something else, for privelidges.
So racial groupings do not exist for equal rights struggles, this is a cause for which an obvious racial component discredits the cause, exposes it as a ruse. But racial groupings do exist and they speak to something deep within the human species and this deep instinct demands that the racial grouping be a source of pride, a label or term to which regard is assigned. Any obstacle to assigning regard to the racial grouping can potentially be met with violence as to question the need for assigning regard to the racial grouping is to question the reason for the racial grouping to exist. To even question the need for assigning regard to the racial group is to deny the racial grouping serves a purpose, as having regard assigned to it is the primary purpose of the grouping. When something’s existence is threatened this is interpreted as violence, as an attempt on life and often met with violence. To deny that the racial grouping should be a assigned regard is interpreted as an attempt on the life of the concept of the grouping.
It is human nature to view self esteem, or regard as the mystical life force without which life itself is not worth living. Regard is in practice morale, in the original sense of likelihood of winning. Morale is high when you think you are going to win, when you think you are going to lose morale is gone. Regard, morale, optimism, esteem, it is all the same. In the end it is belief that the group will succeed. This belief is the lifeblood of the group because no one wants to belong to the losing group. When regard is gone the identity collapses. When regard is high, when belief in the future success of the group is high then the identity is strong and maintains and grows its membership and these members are willing to work to maintain membership for the purpose of a share in the group’s future successes. And so the human mind evolved to view regard for the group as vital, as the mystical life force, as the cause of success itself, as the most precious thing the group possesses.
All this is true in a world where all wealth comes from nature, the world we evolved in. In the real world we live in today most wealth comes from human labor. When all wealth came from nature the largest group was the one most likely to control that wealth, the largest group would be the one the most people wanted to join, and the only reason for joining would be regard, morale, esteem, the belief that this group was going to be the winner. Thus the instinctive belief in the circular logic that think you will succeed will bring you success. Because in the world we evolved in this was true. That world was gone thousands of years ago, but these instincts are with us forever.
The racial grouping exists because groups exist. Groups exist because many will overpower the one. The motive is to achieve the success that comes to the group with the most regard due to the circular logic that regard itself causes success, that morale itself causes victory, that esteem itself will bring you what you want. Because in the world we evolved in regard was the mystical life force, this instinct is with us forever.
Feminism is woman-as-race. Racial groupings are obvious because shared physical features leads to a family feeling in the group. Shared physical features make viewing the racial grouping as a larger version of the family easy. Groupings of all types are obvious to the instinctive mind as many will defeat the few. Because these instincts are so deep within us they are satisfying. The instinct to drink when thirsty is deep within us and this satisfies us as reward for obedience to instinct. Forming a group is satisfying for the same reason, assigning regard to that group is satisfying for the very same reason.
Feminism is woman-as-race and it is satisfying. Well, only to someone who doesn’t have a real race to satisfy racial grouping instincts. So its satisfying to white women, mostly in English speaking or Germanic countries, especially the ones in the larger cities who believe themselves to be cosmopolitan. If you have a real racial loyalty the satisfaction is so much greater, woman-as-race holds no attraction. Thus the last ditch effort to unwhite feminism by inventing intersectionality. I am (insert race) and Woman. But for white feminists, the only real ones, the order is reversed. They are Woman and American, Woman and English, Woman and German. And the word that comes first is the only word that matters,
Feminism is woman-as-race. Racial groupings are instinctive because building a group around shared physical features leads to family feeling in the group. The female body is a shared physical feature. Building an identity around woman-as-race feels instinctive, in some weakened and fragile sense, due to its connection to the instinct to form racial groups. The female body is an obvious shared physical feature. The instincts which lead to racial grouping is borrowed for the purpose of woman-as-race. The shared physical features of women are as idealized by white feminists, the only real ones, as much or more than racial features are idealized by racists. Feminism is an imitation of racism only due to the unreality of woman-as-race. If you would grant that woman-as-race is true then feminism is racism. The unreality of woman-as-race is the only possible distinction to be made.
It goes without saying that woman-as-race thinking organizes around the belief that woman-as-race is the superior race. All forms of racial grouping organize around the belief that their race is superior. Without this feature the grouping would not be useful for the instinctive goal of succeeding through grouping. Without promoting the superiority of the race the racial grouping fails to serve as a vehicle for the human instinct based on the sure knowledge that the many will defeat the few. The largest group will win in a world where all wealth comes from nature. And what group is larger than woman-as-race? If you ask the white feminists, the only real ones, the answer is none. What group is destined to take over the world, to save it, to be the cause of all good things? The answer is easily predicted by knowing which racial grouping is being asked as the answer will always be us. And for the pseudo racial grouping of woman-as-race the answer is the same, the answer is woman-as-race. The answer is us, our group, the answer you will always get from a racial bigot, even one bigoted in favor of an imaginary race.