How To Overthrow The New Master Race: Western Women

By B. Chadwick Galt

The Western man has achieved great wealth, intellectual attainment, technological advancement, medical breakthrough, and the highest status in the world at breakneck speed in the modern era.  But as all good things must come to an end, the Western man is drifting quickly towards the edges of the whirlpool due largely to his own actions.

Historians will debate the reasons for this inevitable fall.  I put it to you that chief among them was the willful abdication of the Western man’s preeminent status in favor of the Western woman.

Here is a YouTube bid by Turd Flinging Monkey that is about this very topic. Funny as shit!!

HOW MEN CAN FIGHT BACK LEGALLY. PAY ATTENTION. Watch or listen to the video and learn.

Little did these men understand that female nature, at its core, employs the strategy of obtaining “MORE” to the point where men have now become dispossessed of the pinnacle of social power.  The Western woman sits atop this pinnacle and is now the most privileged, exalted, coddled, empowered, shielded, and defended demographic group in the world while the Western man is her minion.  Some evidence of the problem is as follows.

Western Men Are Increasingly Trying to “Pass” as Female

Image result for prancing elites

The explosive popularity of Western men living their lives as “trans women” is indicative of their desire to live under the privileges, protections, and prestige of those in this master race.  There is no wonder why Western women are the biggest advocates of “trans women” because imitation remains the sincerest form of flattery.

We need only look toward the pre-civil rights era when racially mixed blacks would often engage in “passing” as whites to avoid the unenviable position as second class citizens.  The trans community is exercising the same strategy, albeit far less convincingly.

Homosexual and Effeminate Men Are Rewarded as Honorary Females

Image result for gay men with women

Lets’s face it.  The most fashionable and celebrated men in the Western world are gay or seemingly gay men because their very existence validates Western women’s status as the master race which is to be emulated and respected at all costs.

Western women defend gay and seemingly gay men to the death because an attack on anything gay is an attack on Western women by proxy.  This is way Western women attend “Pride” events with glee and promote the LGBT lifestyle as hip and progressive.  Each new gay man represents a new loyal follower of women as the master race.

Western Female Supremacy In Public Policy

Western women exert the power of their governments to enhance their exalted status and to symbolically subjugate men in a variety of ways.  One of the most egregious examples is the difference in treatment between male and female genital mutilation.

The United States government actively funds and supports male circumcision programs under the guise of reducing the spread of HIV in developing countries.   The efficacy and clinical underpinnings of this practice are suspect at best but this program is vociferously defended by feminists to thumb their noses at men all while anti-female genital mutilation programs are similarly funded and supported.  This baffling discrepancy is how women in governments actively flaunt their power to reinforce their supremacy over men.

Intentional Restriction of Male Prerogatives

Image result for sexist treatment of men

One of the most powerful ways the Western women has defeated men is by backing men into a behavioral corner by restricting male options.  For example, if a man in the workplace restricts his interactions with women to purely professional matters, he stands to be liable to charges of disparate treatment discrimination at worst.  But if this same man willingly interacts socially with women at work, he stands to be accused of sexual harassment when any woman finds it advantageous to do so.

In the area of public transport, if a man refrains from giving up his seat to a woman, a woman can have him arrested for manspreading in some jurisdictions lest he forget himself in her presence.  But if the same man gives up his seat to a woman, he can be cited for being creepy if the woman so deems him.

If a man shows common courtesy and holds a door for a woman, he can be chastised as condescending for treating the woman as somehow less capable of getting the door for herself.  But if this same man refuses to hold that door open for that woman, he can be deemed a rude miscreant for not showing deferential treatment to his better.

Western men therefore now live in a world of being potentially damned if you choose to do and likewise damned if you don’t.  This is the hallmark of female supremacy in a system where women are empowered with arbitrary power to control men in every sphere of life.

How To Re-Impose Male Supremacy

Image result for men hit back

So how can men regain supremacy when the decks are so stacked against them.  The below are tips men can incorporate into their day to day lives to topple women from their tenuous place of power.

Never help a woman for anything unless she is a family member or a sexual partner

Treat all other women as if they are on their own when they are in a pickle.  Pass by the woman with a flat tire.  Never intervene on behalf of a woman in your personal life.  Treat them as if they are on their own.

Never employ women beyond clerical, customer service or support roles

Although this practice can be legally challenged, clever employers know that spending a little on legal defense early can prevent years of huge costs later.

End all platonic friendships with Western women

Women, unless they are sleeping with you, are to be treated as the enemy which wants to exploit you for whatever money, attention, and services you can provide.  See women purely as providers of sex and children only.  If you want to have platonic friendships with women, do so outside of Western society where women still respect men as leaders.

Vote in each and every federal, state, and local election but never again vote for a female under any circumstances

It has been said that “Elections are less about voting for someone and more about voting against someone else.”

File official grievances, complaints, and lawsuits against women whenever you can as a pure act of war

Women rule the roost in Western institutions, so these actions go a long way towards changing discriminatory attitudes towards men in favor of women.

Travel to and develop comfort in non-Western countries

And increasingly invest and spend your wealth there as an act of defiance.  Starving the West of male consumption revenue will hasten the economic demise of female supremacy and leave it vulnerable to overthrow from within or from without.

When the Islamist or migrant uprising goes into full tilt in the West, refuse to fight it and just let it be.

Hostile outside forces are the means to re-masculinizing the West.  Use these enemies of your enemy to do your dirty work for you because when it is all said and done, Western men will rise to the top in any male-dominated society.

Female supremacy will inevitably fall, but “red pilled” men must collectively do all we can to ensure it happens sooner rather than later.


MOORE: 20 Years After ‘Sex And The City,’ The ‘Real-Life Carrie Bradshaws’ Are Wishing They Hadn’t Slept Around

By Faith Moore

Sex and the City, which premiered 20 years ago this week, changed the way women thought about sex. The assertion of the show’s main character, Carrie Bradshaw, that she will start having sex “like men” — sleeping around and feeling “nothing” afterwards — struck a chord. It was a new kind of fairy tale — a glitzy, glamorous, New York City Cinderella ditching the prince but keeping the shoes. Twenty years later, though, these “real-life” Carrie Bradshaws are single, childless, and many are starting to wonder what happened to their happy endings.

In the early 2000s, modeling themselves on Carrie Bradshaw and her friends, women in their 20s and early 30s began to have sex “like men.” One night stands and sexual exploration became the ultimate feminist statement. If men could do it, then why shouldn’t they? “There was no such thing as a bad date,” writes dating columnist Julia Allison of her time living the Sex and the City lifestyle, “only a good date or a good brunch story.”

In fact, in the years since the show’s premiere, Sex and the City has come to be seen as not feminist enough — receiving criticism for leaving its four heroines happily paired up romantically by the series finale. In 2010, The Telegraph complained that “The happiest character, Charlotte, is by far the most conventional – rich husband, children, no job (by the end), a Park Avenue palace.” In 2017, Marie Claire called one of the show’s main characters “anti-feminist” for saying that “everyone needs a man.” If a lesson is to be learned from the show, today’s critics seem to be suggesting, it’s that it didn’t go far enough. In order to be truly feminist, it seems, women must give up romance altogether.

There’s only one problem: eventually women do want to settle down. In fact, many of the women who bought into the Sex and the City lifestyle 20 years ago are coming forward to share their regrets. Julia Allison says the show literally “ruined her life.” She says it peddled a “fear of intimacy disguised as empowerment.” Writing for The New York Post, Allison wistfully wonders what her life might have been like if she hadn’t bought into the Sex and the City philosophy. “Perhaps I’d be married with children now?”

In her memoir, Unwifeable, journalist and former dating columnist Mandy Stadtmiller describes how a decade of living the “real-life Carrie Bradshaw” lifestyle left her fearful that there “might be no one out there left for me at all.” She writes, “I told myself I was a feminist,” but, ultimately, she came to realize that happiness came, not from casual sex and no-strings-attached relationships, but from “only revealing [her heart] when someone has proven themselves worthy.”

The fact that the women of Sex and the City ultimately want to settle down is not the unrealistic lie the show sold these women. The lie is that they can settle down after spending their 20s and 30s sleeping around. At the time, it seemed like a radical act of feminism to do away with Prince Charming and focus, instead, on the dress, the shoes, and the physical attraction. After all, as novelist Keira Cass said, “Cinderella never asked for a prince, she asked for a night off and a dress.” But suddenly, with biological clocks ticking and one man after another running away from the thought of commitment, these women are beginning to wonder. Maybe Cinderella knew something they didn’t, after all.

Follow Faith on Twitter @FaithKMoore or on Facebook @DisneyPrincessAddict.


4 Ways To Stop A Woman From Manipulating You

There are many reasons women manipulate men. The more prevalent reasons these days are money, gifts, financial favors, etc. For example, if your woman wants a to go on a weekend getaway so she’ll let you fuck her brains out the entire week.

Another example would be if she wants a kitchen upgrade so she tells you that you can have a “man cave” and one night of anal sex with her so you’ll agree to a 5-figure mortgage refinance loan so she can get her overpriced kitchen.

Many kitchens have been negotiated with “man caves” and anal

The best example would be being on her best behavior because she wants you to propose. She sucks your dick every night, let’s you do it in the butt, cooks you meals every night, she’s kind, agreeable, feminine, etc. (Note: A woman is never more well behaved when she hears the sounds of wedding bells in the not-too-distant future)

The bottom line here is that women rarely do anything for a man just to be nice. There’s always an ulterior motive and that’s where the manipulation comes in.

Manipulation vs. Good behavior

While it’s important to know how to nip female manipulation in the bud, it’s equally important to know the difference between a woman attempting to manipulate you and a woman exhibiting good behavior.

The difference between the two is that manipulation is good behavior occurs close to the time when a woman wants something. Good behavior happens all the time.

If a woman knows she’s good to you and doing what she needs to do to hold it down with regular sex, cooking, looking good for you, representing you well in public, giving you access to her phone, staying off social media and so forth, she doesn’t feel the need to manipulate you into doing something for her. She knows she’s entitled to good treatment from you because she’s a good woman to you.

Girls who do this on the regular don’t need to manipulate their men

Women who manipulate men for gifts, trips, iPhones, etc. know they are not doing what’s necessary to be a good woman. Women who use manipulation tactics know they haven’t built up enough equity with you to simply ask you for what they want. So they dress like a slut, cook your favorite meal, or whatever it is they think they can do you manipulate you. Once they get what they want, the good behavior stops and that’s how you know it’s manipulation.

Women who are good all the time know they have the right to ask you for things and they know that in order to keep that privilege they have to continue to do what’s necessary to feel entitled to  good treatment from you.

So now that we’ve laid down the basics, let’s get to the first step on how to stop being manipulated by your woman.

Be proactive and set the tone. Setting the tone and letting your know you are not the kind of man who cannot be manipulated is absolutely paramount. Not only does this reduce the odds of her trying to pull any bullshit with you, when she actually does (and she will) she’ll be far less confident because you let her know early on that you’re not here for the games.

So how do you set the tone and let your woman know you’re not who gets tripped up by mind games? Let’s take a look at four examples and how to properly respond:

Call bullshit on her sob stories


Her: “My ex boyfriend was horrible! He was an abusive alcoholic who gambled away our money while he fucked hookers and snorted cocaine while he simultaneously beat and raped me every night!”

You: :::roll your eyes and chuckle::: “Oh stop…if he was so bad why’d you stay with him for 3 years? We both know you weren’t the perfect girlfriend either. And don’t talk about your ex around me. Save that shit for your friends.”

Cry me a river….

This accomplishes two things. First, it shows her you’re not gonna buy the bullshit stories about her ex like all her other boyfriends did which means she won’t try to bad mouth him again and second, it stops her from talking about her ex around you.

Don’t take everything at face value

When she makes a statement you find questionable, quiz her on it. Ask her questions. Ask for details. That tells her in no uncertain terms that you won’t believe just anything she says. She knows that if she tells you something it has to be true, and she has to be able to back it up lest you question her on the details.

If you don’t ask questions about shit you have questions about, this WILL come back to bite you because if you start and you didn’t do it in the beginning, she won’t answer your questions when you try to. Be skeptical of everything she tells you that doesn’t make sense or sounds strange or suspicious.

Tell her about your ex’s unsuccessful manipulation attempts

It’s inevitable that your girl is going to ask you “So why did you and your girlfriend break up?” Rather than going into some long diatribe about what really happened say this:

“We broke up because she wanted to manipulate me and she couldn’t.”

If she asks “How did she try?”

Dismissively say: “You know how women are.”

This tells her that you know a woman’s nature and that you know that she knows what women do to manipulate men. 

This makes her far less likely to try any bullshit with you later on because she knows you’re wise to how women really are and what they do.

Point out examples when you’re out in public together

Example 1: If you see a woman being overly affectionate to her man in public, say “She must want something.”

Example 2: If you see a man buying something expensive for a woman, say “She must have let him go back door last night.”

Example 3: If you see a marriage proposal in public say “Welp! I guess he’s not having sex anymore!”

Example 4: If you see a woman crying in public, roll your eyes and say “Oh please…”

Example 5: If you see a woman throwing a fit or bitching about something say “That chick needs a stiff drink, a stiff dick, and a nap”

At some point your woman will inevitably challenge your pithy Red Pill arrows with what she’ll rationalize as “the voice of common sense.”

Challenge to example 1: “Well how do YOU know she wants something?! She might just be in love him!”

You say: “You don’t believe that.”

Challenge to example 2: “That’s not what it looks like to me!”

You say: “Of  course YOU don’t” (then laugh)

When she’s heard enough of these she’ll finally say, “God you’re so jaded!”

You respond with: “You call it jaded, I call it experience.”

Taking these steps at the beginning of a relationship will drastically reduce the odds of her attempting to manipulate you, but keep in mind that nothing will completely eliminate it because this is just how females operate. She’s going to try at some point. Count on it.

However, taking the measures above lets her know that you’re not the typical guy who gives into her emotional shenanigans or believes everything she says. And when you make that clear to her both directly and indirectly, she will have more respect for you than she’s had for any man in quite a while.

Part Two will cover some of the ways women try to manipulate men and how to handle it directly so as to squash it like a bug…

…but if you don’t want to wait for the article, click here to watch or listenAnd watch Donovan Sharpe drop Red Pill truth on TSR: Live weekday afternoons at 1pmE/10amP 


Thots On Parade: White Women Really Need A Reality Check

Eric Striker from the Daily Stormer got me thinking after reading this tweet:

He’s 100% right! Why are White women so obsessed with ugly tattoos and working out?

We get it, you are hot. But did you have to permanently affix tramp stamps to your entire body and then prance around the gym half-naked so that every guy has no choice but to stare at you as you walk by doing your gym version of the thot parade?

Here’s a secret guys, that thot is a damaged basket case on the inside.

I know that many normie men find these kinds of women attractive because they are secretly turned on by pathological hostile misandry. They like a woman who is slightly gender fluid with an elevated androgen count that can beat them in arm wrestling and put them in a rear naked choke if they get out of line.

After all, gender is a social construct.


Here is that same woman in 30 years:

Hey, Grandma! May I have another bowl of cereal?

I am not saying that having a tattoo or two in itself is disgusting or bad. Many people in our movement have them, and they usually have some sort of racial or cultural significance, so I am mostly fine with those. However, completely canvassing your entire body with a bunch of Chinese symbols or letters, long strings of gibberish in Sanskrit, skulls, devils, butterflies, hearts with your name in it, et cetera, is just plain ludicrous, LARPy, and screams of serious deep-seated psychological and emotional issues.

Unfortunately, many White women have fallen prey to narcissism. They believe whole-heartedly in the White Girl Magic meme of unmitigated agency for White Women that permeates almost every society known to mankind- and trust me, most of it is correct. White women are in fact the most beautiful compared to any other race by far. White men, in addition to every other race, have put them on a pedestal. However, the only reason they arrived and remain on that pedestal is because of White men. And as a result, they are the most spoiled and entitled group of people that this planet has ever produced.

To be sure, it is lamentable how White women give themselves far too much credit for their elevated status in the world. That, my dear ladies, was bestowed upon you by us. You really should thank us all on a daily basis. We earned your elevated status with our blood, sweat, and tears. Don’t get me wrong, you did help, but not as much as you’d like to think. Therefore, you should never complain about being some oppressed group of people, or how much the White patriarchy has kept you down. That is nonsense, and you know it. The White patriarchy has rewarded you, White women, above all others.

Attention whore much?

We also have to be completely honest with ourselves, gentlemen. A good-looking White woman receives a ridiculous amount propositions for sex on a daily basis. If men received as many offers, we would never leave our bedrooms. So give White women credit, they do have a whole hell of a lot of restraint.

On the other hand, my problem with White woman is the pathetic amount of narcissism and conceitedness that many of them exhibit; ergo, the constant workout routine and “sexy” tattoos. There is nothing wrong with exercising as long as it is about being healthy; the problem is that their motivation tends only to be about their own vanity via how many men hit on them or ask them out for a date.

Oh, and about that reality check I promised, my dear White angels. We need to talk about how rather than spending your days pursuing traditional relationships and having children, you spend them taking selfies, shopping, binge drinking, having meaningless casual sex, using men as interchangeable placeholders to buy you material possessions, and constantly talking about the exciting and scintillating life of the Kardashians. (OMG, What is Kim wearing today and has she lost the baby weight??!!)

Hey, we all understand how important that is ladies. I mean, we might be at war with Russia soon, the country is falling apart, most of us cannot find anything more than a part-time job, and White Genocide, but forget all that, who is the designer of Kim’s shoes in tonight’s E-News exclusive?! You absolutely do deserve a little self-indulgence after all that hard work studying for your sociology exam and posting your various meal pics online, right?


Ladies, I do not mean to just pick on you. Men mimic the same idiotic behavior when they focus on sportsball, which is more pathetic in many ways. It’s all a sick obsession with the the false reality of pop culture that people create in their minds as a barrier between them and their cognitive dissonance.

Many Whites want love, happiness, companionship, and children, but they do not want to take any time out of their busy lives to work towards achieving any depth, self-awareness, and personal sacrifice that would lead up to those goals. They attempt to find a hollowed shell of these ambitions through social media or dating websites that are totally based on superficiality, which leave most feeling empty and sad at the end of the day. For the thot, that void is then filled by the obsession with the tattoos and working out, The tattoos are their armor, and the constant endorphin rush from the workouts help them to escape from the reality of their emotional pain.

This is precisely why the Alt-Right movement has started a paradigm shift to change these kinds of behaviors. No, I am not dog-whistling White Sharia, but I am demanding more and better from our women. We want women that would be happy and excited to go on a date to the Metropolitan Museum of Art rather than some brutally disappointing Hollywood film. We no longer want our women to be pieces of meat covered in tramp stamps twerking at a wet t-shirt contest, who are vapid automatons without acumen or culture. We want good wives, mothers, sisters, daughters, and grandmothers, of whom we can be proud. Ladies, we are asking more from you and ourselves. There is no such thing as a self-made man or woman. We have to complement one another, not slip into androgyny and self-mutilation.

Food for thought, ladies.




Will the Texas Shooting Cause Women to Reconsider the Systematic Abuse of Men?

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
May 21, 2018

The modern West is defined by the systematic sexual, psychological and emotional abuse of men by women. We are taught from an early age that women are simply allowed to do whatever they want to men, and that men have absolutely no recourse. We are in fact taught that it is morally justifiable for a woman to abuse a man in every conceivable manner.

Yesterday, it was revealed that the reason Dimitrios Pagourtzis went on a shooting rampage at his high school was that he was publicly humiliated by an entitled, hateful slut, Shana Fisher – and she was the first one to get the shotgun blast.

The funeral will be closed casket.

It goes without saying that I don’t agree with Dimitrios’ actions.

But I understand. 

Straight white men are the lowest beings in today’s society. As a controversial tweet that went viral recently pointed out, the term “straight white male” is now used like the word “nigger” was used in a previous era.

Obviously, “straight white male” is used in a much more hateful way than “nigger” ever was, but I digress.

The point is: we are taught from infancy that we are the lowest beings on the planet and that we are born evil.

In order to explain away the fact that we also built all of civilization – which doesn’t seem to be something the lowest beings on the planet would do – we are told that civilization itself is fundamentally evil because it was built by us. The conversation ends there, without allowing the white male to ask the next obvious question, which would be: “if civilization is evil, then why are we still living in civilization? Shouldn’t we go live in African mud huts instead, in order to evade this evil system created by evil white men?”

While we are consistently reminded that all colored people are better than us in every way, the direct enforcers of our oppression in most of our lives are women.

Women are put in all of the authority positions in schools, and we are forced to bow to them. We are taught to constantly differ to our female peers in all situations. And yet, as mammals that reproduce sexually (unlike certain amoebas, who reproduce asexually), we have a desire to pursue women romantically.

However, in any sort of romantic pursuit, social power dynamics come into play, and the woman is always in complete control of the situation.

She is allowed, both legally and by social norms, to lead a man on, to make him think she is sexually interested in him, when in fact she is not, and simply takes pleasure from the attention she is receiving from him. This, obviously, is a form of sexual abuse. She is toying with the sexuality of a man in order to boost her own ego. The effect of this behavior is multiplied to the nth degree by the fact that women now are allowed to wear absurd amounts of makeup and dress in revealing clothing in public – a direct form of sexual harassment of men.

You see, a woman does not naturally have confidence in herself, her self-confidence is derived from men. In the natural world, her self-confidence would be derived from her husband. However, in the unnatural dystopian nightmare world of Judeo-feminism, she is able to get flattering attention from unlimited numbers of men at the same time, feeding her confidence.

The direct male analog to this situation would be if men were allowed to go around and simply pull up the dress of any woman they found attractive and start penetrating her. Then ejaculate, and walk away. And there was no law or social norm stopping them from doing it, and women were shamed and punished if they objected to it.

That would be a type of sexual utopia for men at the expense of women – in theory – correct?

Well, what we modern society has done is create a sexual utopia for women – at the expense of men.

If you can’t understand what I just said, then you need to spend some time thinking about it. Think about the women in your life and the way they behave with men. Think long and hard.

It is a bitter red pill, but it is one you must swallow if you ever wish to free yourself from this system.

An Instance of Justice for Men

So we have this girl, Shana Fisher, a classmate of the Santa Fe school shooter.

Her mother revealed over the weekend that she had recently publicly humiliated the shooter as a response to his allegedly harassment-like advances.

Let me just go ahead and drop a bomb on you here: white men do not “prey” on women. They do not pursue women they are attracted to long-term who are not giving them some kind of signals that they have reciprocal feelings of attraction towards them. If he was pursuing her long-term, it was because she was giving him signals.

Her mother says that she said she felt she “had no choice” but to publicly humiliate him just days before the shooting. She may have felt she had no choice, I have no idea what women feel nor am I particularly interested in knowing. However, she did have the choice of simply telling him, straight-up without emotion or innuendo, in PRIVATE: “look, I’m just not interested, there are other girls who might be, but there’s another guy I like and it’s not you, so please just leave me alone.”

If she genuinely felt that this didn’t work – it would work, on virtually any man – she then could have asked a teacher or guidance counselor to speak to him. I am not saying that I agree with that option or think it would be necessary, but it would clearly be another obvious alternative to publicly humiliating him.

The only reason she would publicly humiliate him would be to assert dominance over a white man for her own sadistic enjoyment, which is the national sport of all women in modern society.

Will Women Change Their Behavior Because of This?

That is a rhetorical question.

Women will always indulge themselves to whatever extent society allows them to indulge themselves, without ever considering the consequences.

“Hey, if I publicly emasculate this man for my own enjoyment, he might kill me” is no more likely to enter a woman’s mind than “maybe I shouldn’t run from this cop” is likely to enter a black man’s mind.

The Best School Shooter Narrative

“Scorned suiter” is the best possible school shooter narrative.

We always hope these don’t get blamed on the Alt-Right, because that makes us look insane and also could lead to further crackdowns on us. We always hope they are leftists, because it makes that side look bad.

But this isn’t political, and yet the semi-political narrative being asserted makes the left look bad too, as they try to blame white men for being angry over feminism. There is no white man who – whether he consciously knows it or not – is not angry over feminism, so portraying men who rebel against it as potentially violent psychos is a worthless narrative.

And in people’s minds, there is a seed planted with regards to the fact that maybe something not-so-good is going on in high schools. Maybe our boys are having a hard time. And maybe that is something that we should be discussing.

Feminism: A Jewish War on Femininity

Judeo-Cultural Marxist-Lesbian-Feminist Matrix

   Through Feminism, the Jew attacks the core, primal identity of the female, weakening society by disallowing women to be who and what they are: caregivers.

By Andrew Anglin

The Rise of Globo-Homo Super State

Though weak natured and pathetic men have often framed feminism as an attack on males and masculinity, I assert that it is in reality a direct attack on femininity and the female identity.  The very core nature of the human female has been obscured and vilified by the Jews who conceived and led this movement, and this has been one of the largest factors contributing to the fallout of Western civilization.  In order to restore natural law to society, the female will have to be strengthened, and the only possible way to do this is to reestablish the feminine identity by dissolving the Jewish doctrine of feminism.

The premise of feminism is that females had been oppressed by males throughout the entire history of the human race.  This should have struck all people as patently absurd, but through clever, emotion-based propaganda, the Jews were able to garnish wide support for this insane assertion.  The Jewish racial “equality” movements were based on the ridiculous concept that “race does not exist,”  just so the gender “equality” movements asserted that “gender is a social construct.”  This Marxist doctrine cannot be viewed as anything other than a war on the Natural Order.

What is a Woman?

The human species, not too terribly long ago, existed in balance with the natural world.  We lived in tribes, hunting and farming our food.  Like all other species on the planet, the most base drive, beyond self-preservation, was the propagation of our genes.  Within this order of nature, it was necessary for males and females to take on variant roles in society, due to their variant physical forms.  It was impossible for a man to birth a child, just as it was impossible for a woman to spend days fighting the elements hunting, or fighting in a war over resources with a neighboring population.  Because of these variant roles, which resulted from the variant physical characteristics, the sexes maintained variant psychological make-ups and definitively variant identities.  Absolutely nothing about our biology has changed, but still the Jews, with their doctrine of cultural ((((((((((((Marxism)))))))))))), actually expect us to believe that none of this matters anymore, simply because it is now possible, due to technology, for a woman to provide herself with food and shelter without the assistance of a man.

Filipina women are not susceptible to Jew feminism: “I’m sorry sir, we are very busy holding babies and cooking noodles. Please do not ask us for our opinions on politics.”

It is the biological nature of a man to feel a need to protect and care for women, given that it is the woman that ensures his genes are passed on.  The biological nature of a woman includes a desire to be cared for and protected by a man.  The woman, having a much higher level of estrogen than a man, has an entirely different psychological make-up, and is much more driven by emotion – she is designed this way, because it is this orientation which allows her to properly nurture children.  Because of this much higher level of emotion which exists in her psychological processes, it is clearly only sensible for her to allow men to make the major decisions about issues of key importance, at least those which do not involve children.  Because in the natural world, the man, due to his own psychological drives, is always going to be driven to do what it best for the one who births and cares for his progeny, he will make these decisions with the good of his women in mind.

The 1sr wave of Feminism, women’s suffrage.

I will note here that a post-menopausal woman, whose psychological make-up changes due to a rebalancing of emotions, is often able to think much more like a man, and thus we have the the archetypal image of the “wise old woman.”

The filthy Jew has preyed on the weakness of the White woman, and drawn her into his sickening game.

Both men and women posses a base, animal drive to reproduce.  This is what hornyness and sexual attraction are.  Regardless of popular Marxist doctrine, the reason that the sex act exists is to make babies; this doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be enjoyable, but the fact is, if we were capable of producing offspring through binary fission, we would not have sexual organs at all.  The reason sex is enjoyable is the same reason a steak tastes good – when you see a juicy piece of meat, you don’t say “I need to consume this source of iron,” you say “that looks delicious”; in the same way when you see an beautiful woman, you don’t say “I would like to use this person as a means to reproduce my genetics,” but instead feel emotions and physical urges.

The difference between men and women is that the man’s body does not know whether or not he has produced children.  Though I think a man can consciously develop a desire to produce children, even within a cultural paradigm that tells him this is unnecessary and simply a burden upon him, a woman’s body knows that she has not produced a child, and this can lead to psychological unrest and ultimately a form of mental illness.

What the Jew has Done to Her

A woman is by nature designed to focus on producing and nurturing children, as well as caring for the emotional needs of her male partner.  She is not designed to bring home food, even when bringing home food amounts to acquiring monetary notes, rather than hunting or working a field.  When we as a society force a woman into the work place, we are robbing her of her most basic identity.  Women are either forced to forgo producing children in order to allow them to pursue a “profession,” or they are expected to perform the nigh impossible feat of raising and caring for children while holding a job.  In maintaining this feminist ideal as a foundational aspect of our modern society, we are destroying the right of women to develop and maintain the identity that nature bestows upon them.

Simone de Beauvoir conceived her attacks on the female sex while fornicating with enemy Jew Nelson Algren.

In 1949, Simone de Beauvoir published The Second Sex, which is considered to be the dawn of the “second wave” of feminism (the “first wave” had been much more reasonable and was not even called feminism, and though it may ultimately not have been totally positive, it won’t be discussed here).  She herein made the insane assertion that the entire history of our species was a history of “female oppression,” argued that gender was a social construct and coined the term “reproductive slavery” to describe the female role as life-giver.  Though de Beauvior was ostensibly not a Jew herself, the entire basis of her argument was drawn from Jewish sources, including ((((((((((((Freud)))))))))))) and ((((((((((((Marx)))))))))))).

At the time she wrote the book, she was having an affair with the Jew novelist Nelson Algren.  Many Jews have asserted that he was the entire inspiration for the book, as she stated that before she met him, she had never perceived any inequality between men and women.  We may note that Simone’s long time boyfriend, the confusion artist, communist and Jew-lover (possible crypto) Jean-Paul Sartre, was having an affair with his adopted daughter, an Algerian Jewess named Arlette Elkaïm, while de Beauvior was sleeping with Algren.

((((((((((((Betty Friedan)))))))))))) and the Dawn of Jew Feminism in America

The Jewish plot to destroy the western female really picked up speed in the chaos of the 1960s.  Jew psychologist ((((((((((((Betty Friedan)))))))))))) (born Bettye Naomi ((((((((((((Goldstein))))))))))))) published the book The Feminine Mystique in 1963, where she presented the the bizarre assertion that virtually all American housewives were unhappy with their lives, and backed it up with faked studies.  She said that most if not all women were wasting their lives on children, while harboring the secret desire to be careering intellectuals and called this baseless claim “the problem that has no name.”

Enemy Jew ((((((((((((Betty Friedan)))))))))))) was said by her fighting comrade, the Jew ((((((((((((Alvin Toffler)))))))))))), to have “pulled the trigger on history.”

Following the faked research of Alfred Kinsey, ((((((((((((Friedan)))))))))))) also claimed that most housewives were sexually perverse, having an obsession with sexual gratification due to their inability to be fulfilled by the thing that has fulfilled all female mammals since the beginning of existence: children.  She again use faked studies, which no other researcher was ever able to confirm or reproduce, to back up this scandalous assertion.

In promoting the insane fantasy that most housewives were sexual perverts, having constant affairs with anyone they could find, she made the impressionable housewives who read the book feel like they should also be doing this type of thing.  This process of indoctrinating women into the world of sexual perversion was later streamlined by Ms. Magazine.  Note that the Jewish race has a completely different set of values than White Europeans, and they have traditionally been much more sexually perverse.  Jewish women probably do tend to cheat on their husbands, and thus this is yet another example of Jews rewriting our cultural heritage and value system with their own.

With The Feminine Mystique, the sickening Jewess ((((((((((((Betty Friedan)))))))))))) laid out a blueprint for the collapse of the ancient European social order.  The weird Jewish advocate of the destruction of all society and its replacement with an insane science fiction nightmare world, ((((((((((((Alvin Toffler)))))))))))), correctly called it when he declared that this book “pulled the trigger on history.”

From Housewife to Feminist ((((((((((((Betty Friedan)))))))))))), Taking a Stand for Gender Equality

Enemy Jew baby-killer Bernard Nathanson founded the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws with ((((((((((((Betty Friedan)))))))))))). The Jewish modern Jewish obsession with promoting abortion among their host populations definitely puts the historical allegations of Jewish ritual baby sacrifice in context.

((((((((((((Friedan)))))))))))) later went on to found the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL), one of the most influential forces in the fight to legalize the murder of unborn children in America, with fellow Jew Bernard Nathanson.  The organization still exists as an advocacy group for the more extreme forms of abortion, such as partial-birth abortion, where the doctor waits for the baby’s head to start crowning and then drills a hole in his or her skull and sucks the brain out, as well as the “right” of high school girls to have abortions without their parents consent.  The organization is still run by Jews.

Additionally, though the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was allegedly not Jewish, her husband was.  After Sanger stepped down as the head of said organization, she was succeeded by Alan Frank Guttmacher, the Jewish son of a Rabbi.  Like the larger movement of feminism, the movement to psychologically manipulate fragile women into murdering their own children has been an almost entirely Jewish affair.

((((((((((((Gloria Steinem)))))))))))), the Radical Jew Culture Destroyer

In 1969, the Jewish abortion promoter ((((((((((((Gloria Steinem)))))))))))) published the essay After Black Power, Women’s Liberation (note the direct, shameless piggy-backing onto the Black rights movement – Jews have continually exploited Black people as a means to promote their own goals), where she just repeated everything that ((((((((((((Friedan)))))))))))) had said in a more extreme manner.  The Jew-dominated media catapulted this into the public mind, awarding it with relevance by pretending to be opposed to it, rather than tossing it aside as utterly irrelevant pseudo-intellectual communist revolutionary gibberish.  This is yet another example of the media deciding what matters, while being able to promote it on any grounds they wish.

In October 2006, the used up commie Jew slut ((((((((((((Gloria Steinem)))))))))))), in her Ms. Magazine publication, printed the names of 5000 women who were proud they had abortions, putting her own name on the list.

In the essay, she hailed a new dawn of sexual promiscuity and divorce as a positive social development.  She did not simply push the idea that women have a right to choose how they live their lives, but demanded that women who desire a traditional lifestyle be attacked and terrorized, calling them “Uncle Toms.”  She directly implied that abortions are great, and every woman should have one. She openly declared communism, and cited her racial brother and comrade, ((((((((((((Karl Marx)))))))))))), as a source of her opinions.

She was promoting a Big Lie in the way only a Jew could.

Speaking on the issue of forming a radical “women’s rights” movement within the existing chaos of the wider Jewish-driven cultural revolution raging through traditional American society, she says:

[Women] couldn’t become black or risk jail by burning their draft cards, but they could change society from the bottom up by radicalizing (engaging with basic truth) the consciousness of women; by going into the streets on such women’s issues as abortion, free childcare centers, and a final break with the 19th century definition of women as sex objects whose main function is to service men and their children.

Let’s think about what this means.  We first notice that she is promoting radicalization of consciousness, which is Jew-speak for inciting hysteria.  She claims that American women are going to do this “from the bottom up,” which is interesting coming from a public figure who belongs to an alien race and is setting herself up to be the leader of this movement.  She then goes on to claim that women should no longer bear responsibility for their own actions, instead the government and society should, before claiming that being a mother amounts to de Beauvoir’s “reproductive slavery.”

The interesting thing here is that the exact situation that we have now could have come about by exciting White men to radicalization.  A Jewish man could have popped up and been promoted by the media, claiming that White men were sick of working to support their families, that having to pay for food and a house for a woman and her children to live in was slavery to women, that women only wanted them for their sperm and they were demanding the right to divorce their wives and force their girlfriends to have abortions, and if there were children around they wanted the government to raise them for free.

The reason that the Jew did not launch a masculinist movement declaring that women were leeches that needed to get jobs and pay for their own needs and children has to do with the above mentioned issue of the differences between male and female biology.  Women are much more volatile and susceptible to emotional propaganda.  If the Jew would have come out with a radical men’s liberation movement, men would have laughed and dismissed it as ridiculous, with even the most feeble-minded of them saying to themselves “well, not having a wife and kids would allow me more free time and a lot of extra spending money, but I kinda like my wife and kids” – because for men, logic will trump emotion, all things being equal.

Enemy Jew ((((((((((((Robin Morgan)))))))))))), editor of Ms. Magazine and author of the influential 1970 radical feminist anthology Sisterhood is Powerful, was a founding member of W.I.T.C.H. (Women’s International Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell); in 1969, this Jewish terrorist group staged a protest at a bridal fair, chanting “here come the slaves/off to their graves” at the goyim women who wanted to get married and live happy lives.

Jews play on weakness.  These victors of World War Two began destroying the foundations of our society as soon as they were finished with Hitler’s Germany, and they did this by attacking weaknesses and exploiting them.  They used Blacks – a genuinely disenfranchised group – as a battering ram against traditional White society, stirring up violence on both sides and making the situation unworkable, they stirred up the idealism of youth against their own war in Vietnam, the exploited the teenage sex drive and desire to release energy with their free love and drugs.  And they attacked the emotional vulnerability of women with the feminist movement.

((((((((((((Steinem)))))))))))) later went on to found Ms. Magazine, a radical feminist publication that encouraged women to have sex with as many strangers as possible, have regular abortions, fight with their husbands and complain constantly.  It played up this imagined victimhood, claiming that traditional gender roles amounted to some kind of a holocaust.

The fire that these Jews lit in the 1960s has just kept on burning.  It isn’t going to go out until there’s no more fuel – meaning that our traditional culture has been completely exterminated – or until someone stands up and puts it out.

The Here and Now

The effects of the Jewish feminist movement that began in the 1960s have been staggering.  We are now living in a world where females literally have no idea what they are, and are forced at every stage of their life to be something different than what their biology is demanding that they be.

Whereas the Jews demanded that it was a “right” of the female to work, it very quickly changed into a duty.  A traditional single-income household is now almost entirely a thing of the past.  This was no doubt a part of the Jewish feminist agenda, as given that when you add women to the workforce, you double the amount of available labor, and thus labor itself is only worth half as much in this unregulated capitalist system.  This has put a tremendous burden on those families still existing the West.  I wonder what percentage of women today would be willing to go back and trade abortion rights, “freedom from reproductive slavery” and all of the rest of the incomprehensible, sentimentally romanticized Jew gibberish that the baby-boomer generation bought into for a chance to live a traditional lifestyle.  Surely, whatever perceived oppression women felt they were suffering under in the post-war period couldn’t have been as bad as this.

November 12, America. She was born in San Francisco to a Jewish family. Deborah Gleeman an author of the book The Lesbian Community and anthropologist is her mother. Leonard wolf, a Romanian born gothic horror scholar is her father. In high school she debated in regional speech tournaments as a member of the Howell forensic society. She then attended Yale University where in , she was a Rhodes scholar at New College Oxford.

Enemy Jew ((((((((((((Naomi Wolf)))))))))))), once married to Bill Clinton’s Jew speech writer and New York Times editor, David Shipley, leads the new feminist movement.

Like the ground-breaking feminist movement of the 1960s and 70s, the modern feminist movement, often referred to as the “third wave,” is totally  dominated by Jews.  The entire media apparatus, even that which claims to be conservative, has embraced the doctrines of feminism.  Promiscuity is now promoted in schools, with marriage largely having become a thing of the past.  Forty percent of children are born out of wedlock.  The entirety of the Jew-run entertainment media apparatus promotes all of this, endlessly churning out more and more degrading material to force down the throats of the proles.

Presently, one in three pregnancies in this country ends in abortion.  I do not think the statistics are available on what percentage of these babies are White, but it is rather obvious that it would be the vast majority.  Because of the death of morality – brought to you by the Jews who crushed Christianity by turning it into a religion of soulless material pursuits and spinning it into the realm of science fiction – you now have teenage girls getting pregnant in high school; 50 years of feminism have convinced a large percentage of people in this country that it is then her “right” to murder the child without even telling her parents.  Schools are known to have feminist guidance counselors who encourage them to make this decision.

Even if one were to make the argument that abortion is a morally sound form of birth control, it is a known fact that women who kill their babies develop life-long psychological problems because of it.  Killing ones own children is one of the most blatantly deranged and insane aspects of this hellish Jew-ridden society we live in.  Can you imagine a monkey or a wolf killing her own children because “they have other things to do with their life?”  This is not simply murder – it is an attack on the most fundamental aspect of all life on earth – the desire to reproduce.

How much more of this are we willing to take from these sickening Jews?  When is enough going to be enough?


I am not arguing against feminine strength.  I am not claiming that every single woman should be doing nothing but cooking and making babies.  I am simply saying that the vast majority of women have a deep-rooted desire to be protected by men so that they are free to focus on producing and raising children.  This does not mean that some special individual females won’t decide to engage in intellectual pursuits, and certainly doesn’t mean that women are incapable of engaging in intellectual pursuits.  The reality is that women do very well working in a lot of different fields, as long as they are not placed in positions of authority, but the fact remains that this is not generally what women would choose for themselves if they were given the choice, as it leaves them either absolutely emotionally and physically drained as they attempt to do careering along with raising children, or leaves them hollow and unfulfilled if they forgo raising children in favor of pursuing a career.

We should also be thinking about the children themselves – could any of this possibly be good for them?

It is my contention that women should be able to choose for themselves what kind of life they want to live, but the default position of society should be to provide a climate where women are encouraged to birth and raise children.  All throughout history we have had scenarios where exceptionally strong women have played major roles in the larger whole of public society.  However, for most powerful, intelligent and passionate women, the old saying that “behind every great man, there is a great woman” has held the truth of the matter.  Women, as wives and mothers, provide the home environment within which men are capable of becoming successful in their endeavors.

The hard reality is that the feminist movement is not a product of Western civilization; it is, like every other major change our society has underwent in the last 100 years, a creation of the Jew.  It is impossible that without the Jewish influence, White society would have embraced these radical changes to the social order.

If men are to become men again, and rise up with strength and fury and take back their society, it must follow that women also become women again, resuming their role as the backbone of our society, taking care of the home, raising healthy children and providing emotional respite for their husbands.

What we seek to do is restore the natural order which the Jew has upset with his lies and manipulation.

Source: Total Fascism

How To Save Western Civilization?


I’ve had a front-row seat in the culture war for over a decade, but I haven’t made any big policy declarations like other movements. Men’s rights activists their “family law reform” platform. The MGTOW group has “legalize prostitution and invent realistic sex bots.” The alt right has “white ethno-state.” The alt lite has “civic nationalism.” When it comes to policy, I’ve been quiet, solely focusing on fostering truth and masculinity. Only now am I ready to make the commitment to a policy platform which nips the essential problem in the bud in a way that other movements do not. We must repeal women’s suffrage, starting with the 19th Amendment in the United States. Once this is accomplished, no other planned or conscious action must be taken to solve nearly all our societal ills.

The origin of our problems

Today’s problems are all branches of a radical leftist root that has been normalized through feminism, social justice, and socialism. Allowing women to vote has made it effortless to elect leftist politicians who hate the family unit, men, and healthy market competition, while simultaneously weakening society by pushing women into work and giving them generous welfare in the form of handouts to single moms and the able-bodied along with make-work jobs for females in bloated government bureaucracies.

Thanks to leftism, we have seen the rise of a techno-matriarchy with an agenda of male disempowerment and persecution that transfers resources and soft power from men to women while solidifying hard power among elite globalists who control it all to uphold their own high-level aims. Individual globalists work together as an oligarchy to enact a divide-and-conquer strategy among races and sexes to fund leftist causes, politicians, and NGOs. The group with the most money to influence “democratic” politics and public opinion implants their useful idiots and political puppets to maintain control.

These puppets, whether on the “right” or “left,” have a true center on the left end of the spectrum for the sheer reason that votes from women must be gained. The manosphere cannon has shown that women have special mental faculties that operate almost exclusively on emotion, submission, and social conflict more than logic, dominance, and merit. Western countries have transformed into a national representation of the female psyche.

Appeasing women leads to civilization destruction

To appease female voters and their destructive nature of promiscuity and drama, a symptom of which is collectively propelling a book about a woman being brutally dominated by a man (50 Shades Of Grey) to one of the best selling books of all time, society has veered so far to the left that it is crumbling at its base through declining birth rates and collapse of the family unit. Because we have given women suffrage, it has become necessary to gain their votes by promising whatever they want in the moment, including the removal of all gates to the sexual market so they can engage in the great game of “alpha male hunting,” which has led to such unbridled chaos and sterility that we have to import third-world people as these empowered female voters abort nearly 60 million American babies. The demographic crisis the West faces today is primarily due to allowing women to do as they please instead of imposing healthy standards on their behavior and choices. The direct cause of this horror movie is giving women the vote.

I haven’t even touched the surface of the problems we have today that stem from having to appeal to the female vote: lowering of academic standards in universities to allow them to “excel,” promotion of degeneracy in media, invention of apps and technology to allow frictionless casual sex with bad boys, promotion of sex change operations among children, re-defining fat women as “beautiful at any size,” legalization of gay marriage, use of murder (abortion) as birth control, maligning normal masculinity as “toxic masculinity,” and elevation of damaging myths such as “rape culture” and the “wage gap” to foment gender fear and confusion. The culture has degraded because women have been at the forefront of degrading it. Their true nature, once unimpaired by societal limits, embarks on an tragic mission of destruction to recreate reality in a way to make them appear more attractive to high status men, no matter the consequence.

The problems I mentioned above would take thousands of local and Federal laws to address individually, and it would meet intense opposition from globalists who would fund the sort of antifascist protests and Deep State interference that we have seen thwarting Donald Trump. And even if those thousands of laws are passed, there is no guarantee that a renewed leftward push, thanks to ongoing demographic changes, wouldn’t roll them back. Is there a way to solve the problems while being assured that they couldn’t be repealed over the course of several generations? I’ve thought about this dilemma for years, after scratching the surface with previous thought experiments, and can only come to one conclusion: the problems in society can only be solved, and remain solved beyond one generation, by repealing women’s suffrage.

The ultimate solution

Take away the power of women to vote, and the degradation stops. The paltry population of male feminists, who are likely suffering from low testosterone due to environmental plastics, would offer no barrier in stopping the return to patriarchal normalcy. Women, helpless at enacting political change, would just whine and nag endlessly, and when they tire themselves out, they’d complete their protest by buying dildos or cats. Consider that no Democratic candidate for President since Jimmy Carter would have likely won if women were not allowed to vote. Upon repeal of women’s suffrage, a new party to the right of Republicans would be created as conservative men seek true conservatism and tradition.

Remove a woman’s right to vote and within just one national election, every single leftist party would be crushed. Within two elections, politicians would speak directly to men and their innate interest for patriarchy, economic success, stable families, and an equitable distribution of females among society. More than half of the candidates running for office would already be more conservative than Donald Trump, who is still liberal on social issues like equality and gay marriage.

Within three elections, the entirety of the liberal platform of the past 50 years would be rolled back, and the only living audience a woman can gain for her political opinions is from her feline friends. Within four elections, the global elite would be forced to retrench while sitting on billions of capital with no direct path of influence except sponsoring color revolutions and coups that can be defeated in the name of patriotic national defense. By then, the power of NGOs, media outlets, and day care universities will have declined. Within five elections, cultural standards would have tamed the sexual marketplace, and birth rates would rise once more as both women and men see the incentive in spending their free time building families instead of endlessly trying to secure a sex partner for the fleeting moment.

Repealing women’s suffrage would also diminish other dissident movements whose solutions can only bring temporary success as long as women have the right to vote. Men will automatically push laws that account for men’s rights. They will automatically regulate the sexual marketplace to make it more fair, diminishing MGTOW. They will automatically regulate immigration and replace it with a policy of natalism, diminishing the alt right. And they will automatically have high standards for citizenship, diminishing the alt lite.

Even the concept of masculinity will be built into the crust of society where only men have a political voice and not women. My game guides would no longer be needed, allowing me to buy land and operate a real farm instead of a content farm where most of my life has been spent pushing back the harmful effects that were unleashed after allowing women to vote. There will be no need for counter-cultural movements of men when those in charge of national politics only need to cater to male votes. If women’s suffrage is repealed, the most reviled dissident today would even be able to easily attain political office.


It should be clear to you that women will always use their votes to destroy themselves and their nations, to invite invaders with open legs, to persecute their own men, and to ravage their economies with socialism. Because they don’t operate on logic like men do, you will always have this destructive element within the political ranks of your nation as long as women have the right to vote. Giving them this right was a terrible mistake. I can now claim to have one political dream, and that is to repeal women’s suffrage. I will vote only for politicians who put me closer to realizing this necessary reality. Within my lifetime, I’m certain that at least one country, in an attempt to save itself, will elevate a barbarous and ferocious strongman to fulfill this task, and he will have my full support, because repealing women’s suffrage is the only issue of our day that can single-handedly solve all the others.

This is excellent article produced by the knowledgeable, intelligent and open-minded human being. I’ve first hand experience with the Judeo-Communist-lesbian-feminist totality in Eastern Europe and the above narration brings back the unhappy memories. I was young at that time, and had not fully understood the older men that insisted that the socialist system and even the Judeo-Communist system wouldn’t be so bad, if it won’t be screwed by the greedy Jews and wicked women. Now, I’m 72 and the current Judeo-lesbian-feminist totality in the United States is a painful déjà vu to me.






Communist Women Demand a New Family Life

Western Heritage Editorial Comment: While Lenin sought to consolidate the Bolshevik revolution against internal and external enemies, there existed within the young Soviet Union a vast utopian impulse to change and reform virtually eve social institution that had existed before the revolution or that was associated in the Communists minds with capitalist society.

Alexandra Kollontai (1872—1952) was a spokesperson of the political left within the early Soviet Union. In Communist circles, there had been much speculation on how the end of bourgeois society might change the structure of the family and the position of women. In the following passage written in 1920, Kollontai states the visions of this change. During the years immediately after the revolution, rumors circulated in both Europe and America about sexual and family experimentation in the Soviet Union. Statements such as this fostered such rumors. Kollontai herself later became a supporter of Stalin and a Soviet diplomat.

Here is what Kollontai said: There is no escaping the fact: the old type of family has seen its day. It is not the fault of the Communist State, it is the result of the changed conditions of life. The family is ceasing to be a necessity of the State, as it was in the past; on the contrary, it is worse than useless, since it needlessly holds back the female workers from more productive and far more serious work….But on the ruins of the former family we shall soon see a new form rising which will involve altogether different relations between men and women, and which will be a union of affection and comradeship, a union of two equal members of the Communist society, both of them free, both of them independent, both of them workers. No more domestic “servitude” of women. No more inequality within the family. No more fear on the part of the woman lest she remain without support or aid with little ones in her arms if her husband should desert her. The woman in the Communist city no longer depends on her husband but on her work. It is not her husband but her robust arms which will support her. There will be no more anxiety as to the fate of her children. The State of the Workers will assume responsibly for these. Marriage will be purified of all its material elements, of all money calculations, which constitute a hideous blemish on family life in our days….

The woman who is called upon to struggle in the great cause of the liberation of the workers—such a woman should know that in the new State there will be no more room for such petty divisions as were formerly under stood: “These are my own children, to them I owe all my maternal solicitude, all my affection; those are your children, my neighbor’s children; I am not concerned with them. I have enough to do with my own.” Henceforth the worker-mother, who is conscious of her social function, will rise to a point where she no longer differentiates between yours and mine; she must remember that there are henceforth only our children, those of the Communist State, the common possession of all the workers.

The Worker’s State has need of a new form of relation between the sexes. The narrow and exclusive affection of the mother for her own children must expand until it embraces all the children of the great proletarian family. In place of the indissoluble marriage based on the servitude of woman, we shall see rise the free union, fortified by the love and mutual respect of the two members of the Workers’ State, equal in their rights and in their obligations. In place of the individual and egotistic family there will arise a great universal family of workers, in which all the workers, men and women, will be, above all, workers, comrades.

Alexandra Kollontai, Communism and the Family, as reprinted in Rudolf Schlesinger, ed. and trans., The Family in the USSR (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1949), pp. 67—69.

* * *

Hitler Rejects the Emancipation of Women

Western Heritage Editorial Comment: According to the Nazi ideology, women are indispensable for producing and rearing of children and for supporting of their husbands in their homes. In this speech, Hitler urges this view on the role of women. He uses anti-Semitism to discredit those writers who had urged the emancipation of women from their traditional roles and occupations. Hitler returns here to the ‘separate spheres” concept of the relationship of men and women. His traditional view of women was directed against contrary views that were associated with the Soviet experiment during the interwar years. This Nazi outlook on women and the family should be contrasted with the view set forth by the young Bolshevik Alexandra Kollontai.

Here is what Hitler says: The slogan “Emancipation of women” was invented by Jewish intellectuals and its content was formed by the same spirit. In the really good times of German life the German woman had no need to emancipate herself. She possessed exactly what nature had necessarily given her to administer and preserve just as the man in his good times had no need to fear that he would be ousted from his position in relation to the woman….

If the man’s world is said to be the State, his struggle, his readiness to devote his powers to the service of the community, then it may perhaps be said that the woman’s is a smaller world. For her world is her husband, her family, her children, and her home. But what would become of the greater world if there were no one to tend and care for the smaller one? How could the greater world survive if there were no one to make the cares of the smaller world the content of their lives? No, the greater world is built on the foundation of this smaller world. This great world cannot survive if the smaller world is not stable. Providence has entrusted to the woman the cares of that world which is her very own, and only on the basis of this smaller world can the man’s world be formed and built up. The two worlds are not antagonistic. They complement each other, they belong together just as man and woman belong together.

We do not consider it correct for the woman to interfere in the world of the man, in his main sphere. We consider it natural if these two worlds remain distinct. To the one belongs the strength of feeling, the strength of the soul. To the other belongs the strength of vision, of toughness, of decision, and of the willingness to act. In the one case this strength demands the willingness of the woman to risk her life to preserve this important cell and to multiply it, and in the other case it demands from the man the readiness to safeguard life.
The sacrifices which the man makes in the struggle of his nation, the woman makes in the preservation of that nation in individual cases. What the man gives in courage on the battle field, the woman gives in eternal self-sacrifice, in eternal pain and suffering. Every child that a woman brings into the world is a battle, a battle waged for the existence of her people….

So our women’s movement is for us not something which inscribes on its banner as its programme the fight against men, but something which has as its programme the common fight together with men. For the new National Socialist national community acquires a firm basis precisely because we have gained the trust of millions of women as fanatical fellow-combatants, women who have fought for the common task of preserving life….

Whereas previously the programmes of the liberal, intellectualist women’s movements contained many points, the programme of our National Socialist Women’s movement has in reality but one single point, and that point is the child, that tiny creature which must be born and grow strong and which alone gives meaning to the whole 1ife-strugle.

J. Noakes and C. Pridham, eds., Nazism, 1919—1945, vol. 2, State, Economy and Society 1933—39: A Documentary Reader, Exeter Studies in History No. 8 (Exeter: University of Exeter, 1984), pp. 449—450.

Alexandra Kollontai was a model for Eastern European women, and the excerpts intend to contrast two opposite social trends that continue to resonate in our time.