Category Archives: Feminism

UPDATED: Nothing Like A Peace Proposal to Out Warmakers (Like The Wicked Witch Of The East)

Feminism, Foreign Policy, Gender, Hillary Clinton, Middle East, War

In Libya, our murderous efforts brought the National Transitional Council to power, under whose rule massacres are a daily occurrence. (147 people dead today. “Inter-tribal clashes” is how the West is finessing the carnage.)

The West’s Libyan learning curve is about to crest in Syria, as the Us and its conniving (far smarter) Saudi pals are considering assistance to the rebel Free Syrian Army (FSA).

As RT reported, “Damascus has accepted Kofi Annan’s six-point plan to stop bloodshed in the country, a spokesman for the UN envoy to Syria announced… the Syrian government was willing to cooperate with Koffi Annan’s peace plan to ‘remove all excuses’ for possible international intervention.”

On the other hand, “the Syrian opposition refuse to accept any resolution that does not stipulate Assad’s removal, claiming that his acceptance of Annan’s 6-point proposal is merely an attempt to draw out the conflict.”

Meantime, at the “Friends of Syria” summit, which should be more honestly tagged “Friends of Syrian Rebels Summit (Allah bless their bonny heads),” The Hildebeest and her Saudi handlers debated the ultimatums to be presented to the Assad regime before overthrowal.

UPDATE (April 3): “THE WICKED WITCH OF THE EAST,” writes says Michael S. Rozeff, at LRC.COM, “has signaled the policy shift of the U.S. to bring down the current Syrian government by saying ‘We believe Assad must go…’ What is she brewing up to bring this about? This is a now familiar pattern. It was after Obama said the same thing about Gaddafi that the Empire went into high gear to remove him.”

The complete CBS quote of the Hildebeest’s words:

“We believe Assad must go, that the killing must stop. The sooner we get into a process that ends up there, the better.”

Clinton seems to have a major obsession about bringing the sufferers of the world under her “healing” ministrations. Another “War of the Womb.”

Jacqueline Kennedy was so smart; she said women should not be in politics. They are too emotional. (Later on she was forced to retract, as revealed in the audio recordings of Mrs. Kennedy’s historic 1964 conversations with historian Arthur Schlesinger, on life with John F. Kennedy. I am currently listening to the tapes—and to her mesmerizing voice—in the car.)

UPDATED: Fluke’s No Fluke; Sisters Love Uncle Sam

Feminism, Gender, Liberty, Ron Paul, Socialism, Welfare

The following is excerpted from my new column, “Fluke’s No Fluke; Sisters Love Uncle Sam”:

… As sincere as she is in her conviction that a woman’s “reproductive rights” are the responsibility of other taxpayers, Sandra Fluke is no statistical fluke.

Sisters love the state.

Andrew Kohut, head of the Pew Research Center, dates the statism of American women to the 1980s, a function of “Ronald Reagan’s assertive foreign policy,” but also of the female affinity for bigger government. Kohut confirms that, “Then, as now, women [have] tended to favor a larger role for government programs than do men.”

John Derbyshire traces remarks about the ladies’ lack of proclivity for liberty to 391 B.C.

“That was the year Aristophanes staged his play ‘The Assemblywomen,’” Derbyshire documents in “We are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism.” “In the play, the women of Athens, disguised as men, take over the assembly and vote themselves into power. Once in charge, they institute a program of pure socialism.”

George Orwell, whose insights into these matters were very deep, also noticed this. He has Winston Smith, the protagonist of ‘1984,’ observe: ‘It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of orthodoxy’ (p. 88).

Having lived in communist China “in the years just after Mao,” Derbyshire seconds Orwell. “If you wanted to hear … utterly unreflective parroting of the Party line, a woman was always your best bet.”

Libertarians like to imagine that their constituency is differently derived than that of the Republicans. However, the fantasy that women flock to liberty is just that, a fantasy. I’ve attended those libertarian gatherings in which, after “subtracting the dragged-along wives and girlfriends from these events, the normal male-female ratio of the remainder is around ten to one” (p. 86).

Granted, among the fair sex, Rep. Ron Paul fares better than his Republican rivals—no doubt because of his trenchant opposition to the Warfare State. But Obama beats Paul handily. “Against Mr. Paul,” notes the Wall Street Journal, “Mr. Obama …wins among women by 18 points and loses among men by four points.” …

The underlying truth of this very public tiff remains this: On the whole, extending the franchise to females was in furtherance of egalitarianism, not freedom. …

The complete column is “Fluke’s No Fluke; Sisters Love Uncle Sam.”

If you’d like to feature this column in or on your publication (paper pr pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

Support this writer’s work by clicking to “Recommend,” “Tweet” and “Share” the “Paleolibertarian Column” on RT and “Return To Reason” on WND.

My book, “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,” is available from Amazon. (Remember those Amazon reviews; they help the book’s mission.)

UPDATE (March 9): Myron is being cynical with his Archy Bunker comment, but is there any wonder millions of ordinary American men, who did the right thing for decades, and went to work to support their families, are no longer doing this? That white America is unraveling? They’ve been piled on as Myron has done in jest (I hope) repeatedly, called cavemen and primitives and worse by The enlightened Class, only to be replaced in the affections of their families with the state.

UPDATED: Rush Limbaugh Pimps Principles (& No One Understands RIGHTS from Wrongs!)

Conservatism, Constitution, Feminism, Gender, Individual Rights, Intelligence, Republicans

In the proud history of conservative serial stupidity, Rush Limbaugh’s latest faux pas takes the cake. An issue concerning constitutional principles fell into his large lap. But the conservative movement’s self-aggrandizing, insufferably pompous Mouth, pimped it.

A privileged Georgetown University law school student named Sandra Fluke was permitted to make the case before a “nonofficial congressional committee” as to why the state should compel the insurance industry to provide sisters with birth-control pills. (Some committee members were in tears listening to this cloistered cow tell of women turning away from the pharmacy counter for lack of funds. Go to the Republic of Biafra for a taste of deprivation, Fluke!)

This flaccid fool was supremely repulsive in her perverse conviction that a woman’s “reproductive rights” were the responsibility of other taxpayer. Fluke is a testament to the destructive role of women in our politics, forever petitioning to expand the power of the state at the expense of individual rights. (Read a corrective about natural rights, here.)

Recall, Limbaugh once launched a sneering assault on a deformed Michael J. Fox, aping Fox’s Parkinson’s-induced spasms, instead of critiquing Fox for petitioning Congress for unconstitutional favors, just like Fluke.

When it came to Fluke, Limbaugh flunked as badly. He began thus:

“What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic] who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex — what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex.”

Limbaugh then said, “ok, so she’s not a slut. She’s round-heeled.” “Round-heeled” is an old-fashioned term for promiscuity.

This is entertaining, but besides the point.

But here is where the middle-aged, so-called conservative loses it, sounding like a lusty old voyeur:

“So Miss Fluke, if we are going to … pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.”

Game. Set. Match, Sandra Fluke. Limbaugh not only lost the argument to this inconsequential woman, but he also helped anoint a future Democratic, feminist, front-woman and leader.

Conservatives have a hard time with first principles; perhaps they don’t have any. Thus, they can never win an argument with a liberal, for all they have in their intellectual arsenal is a Benthamite utilitarianism (except that Jeremy Bentham was really smart).

Why are conservatives Addicted to That Rush?

UPDATE (March 3): No One Understands RIGHTS from Wrongs! Your point is not the point either, Robert Glisson. The point is that conservatives and liberals alike do not have any mandate to promote responsibility vis-a-vis the legislator. The Fluke female can screw herself silly; quit preaching to her! People are sick and tired of conservatives in their bedroom and liberals in all the other rooms. The only point here is that no taxpayer, coerced by Congress, should be compelled to pay for Fluke’s personal choices, good or bad. I give up on anyone understanding what a natural right means. I do, however, get why people are Addicted to that Rush, who is not “more often right than wrong,” but is both insufferably self-righteous and wrong.

UPDATED: Grunts, Get In Touch With Your Inner-Muslim (Annals of Pillage In Afghanistan)

Feminism, Foreign Policy, Gender, Islam, Jihad, Middle East, Military, Multiculturalism

The following is an excerpt from my new column, “Grunts, Get In Touch With Your Inner-Muslim,” in which I “hit both sides of aisle for reactions to Quran-burning incident”:

“Just the other day, America was debating whether it was OK for our soldiers to pee on people they had killed in Afghanistan. There was no quarrel over whether it was OK to kill the peed-upon, in the first place.

Building on the skewed, To-Pee-Or-Not-To-Pee diversion, the question du jour is whether the same soldiers should say sorry for incinerating Qurans on a bonfire in the Bagram Air Base, north of Kabul.

Built by Kellogg Brown & Root, which was ‘until recently a subsidiary of Halliburton,’ the Bagram Base ‘is located on a sere plain beneath snowcapped spurs of the Hindu Kush,’ writes author Cullen Murphy in ‘Are We Rome? The Fall of an Empire and the Fate of Rome.’

‘In the Past, Bagram has yielded glassware and bronzes from as far away as imperial Rome.’ But,

Bagram today is an outpost of American, not Hellenic, civilization. … Bagram Air Base supports a population of more than 5000. The base perimeter, nine miles around, is ringed not with walls of stone or mud but with chain-link fencing and concertina wire and arrays of bright lights and electronic sensors.

With its rows of ‘prefabricated dwellings,’ stacked ‘shipping containers’ (‘giant bladders of water and fuel’), ‘American-style stores’ and hospitals; with, precincts packed with hundreds of contractors who cater to the troops, with checkpoints, multi-denominational chapels, which double-up as Vegas-style, quickie naturalization centers for Afghan recruits—Bagram embodies ‘imperial overstretch’: “The idea that one’s security needs, military obligations, and globalist desires increasingly outstrip resources available to satisfy them.’ (‘Are We Rome,’ p. 71.)

The dilemma over an apology is only the froth on the top. It is the elephantine character of the American entanglement in Afghanistan that underpins the fury. …”

The complete column is“Grunts, Get In Touch With Your Inner-Muslim.”

Support this writer’s work by clicking to “Recommend,” “Tweet” and “Share” the “Paleolibertarian Column” on RT and “Return To Reason” on WND.

If you’d like to feature this column in or on your publication (paper pr pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

UPDATED (March 5): Annals of pillage in Afghanistan, via RT, which is honest about Russia’s role in the destruction.