If I might add a few thoughts (not to saddle you or your Substack page with my personal perspectives --- so, to emphasize, a reader should not impute my thought other than to me): it is difficult for me to overlook the impact of female emotivism (and the follower behavior of supplicant-male politicians) on the direction of government and the society that it and corporations mold by usurpation.
Women are well suited to creating an abusive state because they act in clandestine, back-door ways behind the shield of bureaucracy, without which they would have no power. Women thrive in pushing the boundaries of government power beyond the legal limits until a policy is de facto established. This is also the way of Communists and, worse, Democrats and corporate anarchotyrannists.
It is not that women are much less or more intelligent than men. But it has to do with deeper modes of organizing biological effort, in coordination with men, in raising families. I am hardly breaking any new ground here.
Men lead. Women elevated to powerful positions generally can only connive, disrupt, pout or nag until they get what they think they want in turning the totality of a nation -- and international affairs -- into a nursery --- doing enormous damage in their wake if acquiesced to.
It was a pleasure to read well-organized writing.
If I might add a few thoughts (not to saddle you or your Substack page with my personal perspectives --- so, to emphasize, a reader should not impute my thought other than to me): it is difficult for me to overlook the impact of female emotivism (and the follower behavior of supplicant-male politicians) on the direction of government and the society that it and corporations mold by usurpation.
Women are well suited to creating an abusive state because they act in clandestine, back-door ways behind the shield of bureaucracy, without which they would have no power. Women thrive in pushing the boundaries of government power beyond the legal limits until a policy is de facto established. This is also the way of Communists and, worse, Democrats and corporate anarchotyrannists.
It is not that women are much less or more intelligent than men. But it has to do with deeper modes of organizing biological effort, in coordination with men, in raising families. I am hardly breaking any new ground here.
Men lead. Women elevated to powerful positions generally can only connive, disrupt, pout or nag until they get what they think they want in turning the totality of a nation -- and international affairs -- into a nursery --- doing enormous damage in their wake if acquiesced to.
I guess there's no limit to the stupidity.
I want to unsubscribe!!
Be my guest.