That's a key phase of communism as prescribed by Marx.
Violent revolution to overthrow bourgeois democracy.
Centralised control, redistribution, re-education.
Implement glorious and free democracy again.
They keep getting stuck at 2 for some reason. It's almost like power corrupts or something.
I identify as a naughty Swiss made Piranha V integrated with the Spike LR2 anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) system. Wanna bang?
Given that the last 25 times humanity attempted communism it ended in authoritarianism (and unspeakable suffering and horror), I think it's time to admit that there is a fundamental issue with the ideology which does not accurately account for the human component.
Pointing out that the history of patriarchy enforced toxic masculinity is not accusing men themselves of enforcing it on an individual level, or dismissing rhe role that women played in enforcing these gender divisions.
Well it is, and you've laid out the case. If the system in which we currently live is designed for and by men, then a) they have less of a right to complain about their treatment, b) they have some hand in its creation, and c) have a burden to undo it. In fact, most men have no hand in its creation, have every right to complain, and have no burden to undo it. Raising patriarchy in a discussion about issues men face makes no sense unless you are d) allocating blame in some way, e) suggesting that men have a responsibility to fix their own issues, and/or f) ascribing a certain set of toxic behaviour specifically to men. None of those are helpful. None of those are supportive.
The issue is treating men like a homogenous group instead of specifically addressing those in power, who are both men and women.
FYI "patriarchy" is a gendered term which comes from the Latin, originally meaning "church government by patriarchs" (1560s) and later evolved to mean "society or government by elder males" (1630s). Historically, it referred to autocratic rule by men. More recently it has been expanded in feminist theory which broadly ascribes a set of toxic behaviours to men as a group. The problem with this word is that men don't have a patent on toxic behaviour. It's often not men telling other men not to cry and to man up, for example. It's often the women in our lives, and especially our romantic partners. Raising "patriarchy" in this discussion is tantamount to blaming men for the issues they experience, and this is not helpful to anyone. No more than suggesting rape victims are also victims of the "matriarchy." If you understand how offensive that might seem to you, you might understand how offensive your comment can be to men.
Okay so I'm asking you for the second time: what are you disputing? What are you arguing? You call bullshit without telling me what you think is wrong, forcing me to try to rebut a ghost. Given the fact you refuse to articulate what you're arguing, I surmise you know I'm correct and you won't be specific because you know I'll produce peer reviewed research.
I don’t think I’ve ever cringed this hard in my life.
Did you look it up on Instagram? Which part is bullshit? Be specific so I know which evidence you’d like me to produce.
Let’s start with income. Here are dozens and dozens of citations showing that IQ is the single most important correlate for income. Do you know what income is highly correlated with? Low crime, high employment, long life span, better health, and a hundred other important quality of life factors. Are you disputing that too?
I’m not sure if you don’t understand what I’m writing or if we’re talking past each other. To put it plainly, IQ is the single greatest determinant of income. Income is one of the (and arguably the) greatest determinant of a host of other life outcomes.
Well that doesn’t look right but I’m not a boat physicist so I’ll just accept it at face value.
Well he has to do something or Reform is guaranteed a win in 2029. Have you seen Labour’s polling? Reform has a 7% lead on Labour. It’s nuts. Immigration is now the most important issue for voters. Above literally everything else. 95% of the country wants immigration lower than it currently is. Prime Ministers can get away with being useless on a LOT of issues, but when 95% of the country agrees on something, giving them the middle finger is a one way ticket to being voted out with no confidence by the weekend. Do you know how hard it is to get 95% of the public to agree on something? I’ve never seen an issue with higher homogeneity on any issue in any democracy in my entire life. Just to be clear, this isn’t an outlier.
It’s clear most people don’t support Reform, but damn near everyone wants lower immigration.
I know it's never been a good indicator of success
I suppose you might define “success” in an unusual way, but IQ is the single highest correlate with income of all factors. Higher than parental income, race, or residential location.
If you’re interesting in learning more I recommend this article. They cite a lot of data and research. I’m happy to walk you through the directionality topic as well if you’re interested.
What I'm reading from your writing is that both men and women in power have and continue to contribute to gender norms, which confine and hurt both men and women. If so, why use gendered language at all? There is much research and theory in sociology and specifically feminist studies about the impact of gendered language. I'm sure you broadly agree that "man up" is hurtful gendered language because it implies men should conform to a specific set of subjective behaviour. Why can you not see that a gendered male term for a toxic and harmful system is if not explicitly harmful, certainly implicitly so? Why not use a gender neutral germ like "structural gender roles" or something else which doesn't imply blame? Surely this is not the first time a man has told you he feels offended by your use of this word. Why do you not listen and accept the hurt you cause by your continued use of it instead of just using something less offensive?
Unless, of course, you do intend to imply blame. That men are more to blame. That more men hold power, therefore we should use a gendered word to ensure we are clear who is more to blame.