Women, Ideas & Violence
The hidden roots of female power in Academia, Politics & War
‘The Society that separates it’s warriors from it’s scholars will have it’s thinking done by cowards and it’s fighting done by fools.’
-Thucydides
Warning – I write in generalities.
Those who do not have at least a familiarity with violence do not understand the power of their words.
Many, if not all university professors do not have intimate knowledge of violence & warfare. In fact, they are likely to sneer at physicality as base and facile. They may also abhor war, rightfully so, but without appreciating its intransigent nature. War is a wicked problem.
Words are the medium of exchange we use instead of brute force. Words prevent war when we choose them to.
Women nowadays are the chief demographic cohort of university goers. As of 2020 women, women were awarded 61% of all post high school degrees (associates & above) compared to 39% of men. These percentages are exactly reversed from the mid-1960s. This is not to say that it should be one way or the other. The point is that the modern university is now dominated by women. This is particularly so in certain fields of study. Nursing, Gender/Critical ‘studies and Psychology are examples. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_318.10.asp
Women, on balance and as compared to men, often abhor and eschew physical violence in modern American. Particularly feminist, liberal women especially. These fields of study often skew heavily ‘Progressive/Liberal’ in political advocacy & affiliation. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Political-identification-of-college-professors-by-field_tbl1_40823273
Because of these factors, many young women are filled with violent political ideas, with very little understand of the effects the consequences would be if these ideas were enacted, as opposed to the ivory tower utopia in which they are created. Nor do these young women have a realistic understanding of the relationship their words have to violence. Or they do, and don’t care.
Concomitantly, history & war studies programs have drastically declined in recent decades. https://warontherocks.com/2018/12/the-historical-profession-is-committing-slow-motion-suicide/
Ideas can be extremely violent. History is replete with examples. The twin 18thcentury revolutions of the American & the French. One successful, the other an aborted nightmare. The Revolutions of the 19th & 20thCentury in Europe. All very violent and with long lasting and far-reaching consequences. Natural Individual Rights, National Sovereignty and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat all proved to be very bloody ideas to cleave into existence. These inspired dozens of wars and millions of deaths.
Modern education systems do a very poor job of impressing upon the minds of young people the human cost of war, that is, the human suffering.
We often study the obvious victims. E.G., the Holocaust, rightfully so. Yet less often is studied the life of the average soldier and the suffering inflicted on them psychologically. Even less studied than this is the way that this psychological trauma ripples through an individual’s life and is then multiplied by the many millions of participants in any given war. And then, how this phenomena manifests in society through various other forms of malaise.
Humans are sexually dimorphic. Men have more testosterone. Women, more estrogen. Among many other differences. Hormones shape the way our brain forms, thus how we think and perceive the world, from the day our sex in our mother’s womb begins to be determined after 6 to 7 weeks gestation. We all begin, phenotypically, as females. A massive overhaul of our biology occurs over a lifetime if we are to become male through some divine decree or an alien aberration. Testosterone increases risk taking & aggression, as well as decreases empathy, on balance.
However, many universities teach that men and women are the same. That is, they confuse political equality of rights and responsibilities with biological sameness. This is disastrously wrong. Men & women can have drastically different perceptions of the world.
Because this political and biological equality is conflated, men & women are deeply confused about the true nature and origins of violence. This in turn is the root of many wildly distorted intellectual work being done on the part of the professorship. They promulgate violent ideas shrouded in a gilded tinsel of reason that hides the root beastliness.
An incomplete list of ideas from the university that are now common currency, if & when enacted into society could be & have been highly violent and destructive is as follows:
-Men & women are biologically
-The electoral college is retarding the Democratic will of the people
-The second amendment is outdated
-Subjectivity is the height of truth
-Cultural relativism
-Cultural original sin
-Race essentialism
-Gender essentialism
-The ‘Noble Savage Fallacy’
-Immature Atheism
-The eternal historical victimhood of women and modern American ‘Minorities’
-Slavery is a unique evil to white Americans
It was the Women’s March on Versailles that promulgated the first bloody phase of the French Revolution. It was predominantly women who enacted prohibition and created a vibrant, violent black market for gangsters in America in the 1920s. My point is not to blame women and hold them solely responsible, rather it is to articulate that they have much more power politically than is commonly appreciated.
Modern Liberal, educated women need to better appreciate the baying for their husband’s, sons’, brother’s and fathers’ blood to be spilt in name of the afore mentioned ideas and many others.
Never mind the veracity of the ideas. There is enough polarization around them, and they are fallacious enough to cause bloodshed on a large scale.
Because men are biologically hard wired for self-sacrifice in order to win female affection, they will go to war for these ideas. This is a powerful force through time immemorial and the animal kingdom. Many a soldier’s gravestone was hewn because he believed he had a family, a cause and a woman worth fighting, and dying for. Dueling and the battles of mating competition replete throughout the animal kingdom testify to this deeply hardwired drive.
Women need to wield this power of theirs more consciously and carefully. They need to fully appreciate the power they hold.
Yet the priestly, effeminate, detached intellectual caste feeds the bloodlust. Either out of ignorance, resentment or want of care of the consequences of the war they ultimately demand.
In tandem, to fill the gap, we need not a war studies program that glorifies war, outfitting generals with better weapons and recruits drunk on romantic ideas of glory. The height of this would be Hohenzollern and Nazi Germany, societies that married and accentuated their intellectual, aesthetic & dark, martial spirits.
We need to forge a new type of war studies program that is a sober, holistic endeavor of understanding the full effects of war. Its goal would be to build a mutually beneficial relationship with the soul of it’s Armed Forces and society. If we can forge a clearer understanding of the relationship between ideas and violence, and in turn the downstream consequences of war, we stand a better chance of achieving a lastingly peaceful society. But we need to fathom the true depth of the evolutionary origins of conflict, of which a driver is mate competition.
America may still maintain it’s might. Our generals need grounding, loving, feminine compassion. But our callous, rankled, antagonistic academia need also to know the raw, butcherous truth of the consequences of their ideas before allowing them to enact them in society.
This dynamic is unfortunately promulgated unchecked to the many educated young women who are now making up the intellectual, bureaucratic and business bourgeois of America. They generally show a total lack of appreciation, understanding and respect for the sacrifice men will make to please them. Particularly militarily. The beginning of the antidote to this societal woe is to study military history, the literature of war, evolutionary biology & psychology and primatology.
Fundamentally, males of many species exhibit self-denial and sacrifice to win female attention and thus reproductive rights. This is likewise true for humans. Exemplified best by the show Madmen, and the archetypes of 1950s American gender roles. The male ‘breadwinner’ is just a role; the role superimposes it’s demands on the man’s full humanity. The same is true of soldiers in the role of the ‘protector’. An example of a fuller archetype that that incorporates both the role, and the human would be the ‘Warrior”.
Women also have roles & archetypes that contribute to these societal dynamics. We need more archetypal understanding so we may have detachment and conscious control from the roles we play. This would go a long way towards aiding the harmonious repairing of relationships between both men & women and the academy & the military.