[Samseau]

(02-13-2017 06:54 PM)John Michael Kane Wrote:  

(02-13-2017 12:00 PM)Jean Valjean Wrote:  

(02-13-2017 11:39 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

It would take very little force to enforce limited suffrage. What would women do, form an army and start taking over cities?

I don't think it will be necessary to enforce it. I think women will vote to abolish their own suffrage once the benefits are explained to them, just like they vote for anti-feminists when they perceive that feminists aren't looking out for their best interests. Feminism, like other trade unions, tends to become corrupt, rendering relations between workers and management so dysfunctional, in order to enrich union leaders, that ultimately, competition from Asia takes the American workers' jobs away.

The workers' cooperative, said to be the ultimate form of worker empowerment, hasn't caught on, because workers don't really want to be bothered with governing the company. They just want to do their jobs, collect their paychecks, and go home, without having to waste time in meetings debating company strategy.

Similarly, a typical woman would probably rather sit in her cozy house sipping hot chocolate on a cold November morning, while her husband is the one to stand in line to vote. But because society told her, "It's your duty to vote," she feels the need to head to the polls, in order to conform to expectations. To vote to abolish women's suffrage would be to vote to relieve herself of this responsibility.

Men have a monopoly on force and willpower, but the breaking point before they exercise that willpower is EXTREMELY HIGH. Yes, men can easily enforce revoking the vote, but getting them to that mental space requires much more impetus. Systematically, we can restrict the vote very easily. Mentally, men aren't suffering enough to get them to take action against what would be such an unpopular choice. Keep in mind that no politician is going to stand for it in this era, because it is against their self-interest. What politician is going to limit his own voting base by half? There's simply no strategic argument against restricting the vote, unless things have already gone to hell so badly that we don't have rule of law, or we are on the brink of civil unrest or war. We need to be at the tipping point or past it before men will curtail women. A through read of history books will show you that women are put in their place after the men have finally woken from their stupor in giving the women too many civic responsibilities. As long as the water is flowing, the electricity is on and men aren't starving, there will be no revoking the 19th.

Of course we cannot predict when the idea of limited democracy comes into fruition, but we can certainly prepare the way. Just as many manosphere ideas have seeped into the mainstream there's no reason why people cannot question the inherent rights to vote. When the time arrives, whether from catastrophe or a great leader, the idea will be ready for use.

Remember, the founding fathers built the US Government based on teachings from thousands of years ago. Jefferson and Madison knew their Aristotle in Greek if I'm not mistaken.

Do you think Aristotle cared if his ideas were implemented in his lifetime, let alone his culture? Think like Aristotle.