A feminist-marxist magazine sums up some deep reservations I have about women and their massive impact socially and politically, exemplified by this column from March 2006, ?..women?struggle to affirm rights and end all forms of exploitation and oppression?[and the] brutality of imperialism to block any such efforts. From the successes of the Palestinian people...to the refusal of the peoples of Haiti, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba, Venezuela and other countries to accept U.S. dictate?women have been in the forefront of these struggles.? Sane no. Accurate no. But relevant ? incredibly so.



While not all women are foolishly Marxist, nor natural granola bar eaters hugging trees, the article's feminist allusions, along with its anti-American, anti-capitalist, pro-Arab sympathy, has more than a passing connection to women in reality. The female vote and the use of taxpayer money to further push society along into a caring-mommy state, with compassion and love for all, has been a signal event in the Western world.

By granting women the right to vote and giving many female groups and Marxist organizations tax money to sell their mindless chatter and feel good placeboes, the Western world has created a veritable Frankenstein. Frankly there is no program, no deviancy, no passing fad, and no conspiracy theory that millions of women, brokered by high paid lobby groups greased on tax money, will not support.

Marxist-feminism is alive and well and is very, very dangerous. Back in the early 20th century only a few politicians ? amongst them Churchill and Baldwin ? opposed female suffrage. Churchill clearly saw that by giving women the right to vote, an entire left wing deluge of parties, programs and promises would cascade upon Parliament. Consider this, in the UK currently there are about 120 odd female MPs. Less than 20 are Conservative, meaning that 80% represent left wing parties. The same percentages are reflected across Europe and Canada. Where there is a female politician, there is an 80% chance she is a socialist.

Why are women left wing? In a recent UK and German study of this problem researchers looked at data on voting patterns from 1991 to 2004. They noticed a few interesting things. First the more women there are in a household the higher is the chance [by a significant percentage] that the males in the household voted left wing. In other words you can have 3 sons and most likely you will avoid the socialists. Have 3 daughters and your name is Marx. Second they found that the young have more influence over the adults than vice-versa. In a world gone mad with Marxist education this means that little Tammy and little Tina are taking their warped view of the world acquired in public education, and turning mommy and daddy into good socialist supporting puppets.

Then there is the natural genetic makeup of women. It is pretty obvious that on average the female is collectivist while men are individualistic. Women love the communal ? nothing excites their fancy more than public spending on issues like community safety, equality and health care. Women love to chat, mix in groups, visit the hair salon to gossip, and generally stay plugged in to their community of choice. Touchy-feely emotionalism is usually more important to the average woman, then to the average heterosexual, hair covered male.

The attitude shifts in society reflect the above statements and can be seen in the massive increase in government size.

From 1965 to 1974, government spending in Western Europe averaged 37% of GDP. As women came of age during the 60s sexual revolution and the scaffolding of ?female rights?, their impact on politics was enormous. Out with macho male stuff like small government, military spend and low taxes. In with care, nurturing, social programs and feminist tax payer supported lobby groups.

From 1975 to 2005 Europe took a dumb, sharp, communal turn to the left. Government spending accelerated to an average of 47% of GDP by 1984 and is now just below 49%, meaning that about half of a European economy feeds the monster of government. Comparable rates today for Canada and the US are 43% and 32% respectively ? far too high of course, but a light pleasure when compared to the European statists. A consequence of Europe's fetish with female fantasy? Low rates of growth, productivity and job creation.

But the same trends that are dragging Europe into irrelevancy are impacting Canada and the US as well. Back in 1950 in the US and Canada governments devoured about 20 % of the economy. In the past 10 years government ownership of the economy has grown faster than inflation; GDP growth or income growth. Spending in both countries regularly increases at more than 7 % per annum. Now Canada is trending towards EU styled government control and the US has a healthy dose of liberal-socialist politicians led by Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton that want to turn the US into a gigantic version of Sweden.

The ramp up in non-essential US spending in the past 2 decades is directly premised on buying the female vote. In the US almost 50% of current federal government spending is for entitlement programs [Social Security, Health Care, Pensions]; 35% is discretionary redistribution or infrastructure projects [including income transfers, poverty relief, educational subsidies]; 5 % for the military [in Canada 1.5%] and the rest for interest payments on the debt and debt reduction. But what do Cindy Sheehan, Katie Couric and female politicians focus on? Reducing military commitments, disparaging the military and ramping up social spending funded by higher taxation of course.

There is a commonly held belief that you MUST be empathetic; that income MUST be redistributed between groups; that you MUST provide ?human rights? services; that the environment IS a disaster mandating government intervention; that criminals ARE victims; that white men ARE vicious; that ALL wars are bad; that the military is ALWAYS fascist, that business is ALWAYS corrupt, that women ARE superior and that gay sex IS natural etc. etc. These are feminist-Marxist fantasies that through a corrupt and rotten media and educational system, now enjoy the status of truisms.

The only thing true about such ?isms? is that they are feminist-Marxist nonsense-isms. It is nothing more than the de-nutting of men and the effeminization of society. The female assault on the real world and her demands to be ?heard and respected? have resulted in society becoming a political morass of left wing programs and stupidities.

Maybe Churchill was on to something when he said, ?The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.? In an age of feminist-low culture-sexual license and degrading standards, maybe he had a point.