You timed your message great. I've actually been meaning to drop you a line, but wasn't sure what to say just yet. I'd recently read about the Sec. of Defense mandating that the combat arms open to women and it bothers me to no end.
Seeing how you've been devoted to studying that wordless place where violence comes from in men, it seemed like something up your alley. As one commenter said best, "Any country that sacrifices its women to Mars, is not worth fighting for."
I have no love for our empire, nor did I when I served, but in the end, I figured it was an agent of order in the world, however retarded. But this is something, that for me, is very bad harbinger and is a stark reminder of just how diseased this thing is. Wonks running the war machine trip over themselves to offer up their country on the altar of bullshit quotas and moral-signal their devotion to twisted beliefs, yet they can't grasp the strategic importance of family creation and child-rearing, let alone the realities of sexual dimorphism. This thing has slipped beyond human scale. Strangers in our own land.
Anyhow, I hope you're well. Keep giving 'em hell, James
Sam, I personally recoil from the idea of assigning women to combat roles in the military. My feelings though, mean nothing.
As I am exploring in A Dread Grace, in the subsection on the Maternal Face of War, women are often, in certain cultures, very effective at encouraging—dare I say, nurturing—war. The human female, with her gathering, nesting and alarm-signaling communication set, is the ideal voice of proxy aggression. It is a known fact that cultures in which women have a greater voice than their enemies, that aggression and dominance can be expected over their neighbors. The specifics will be covered in the various segments of this essay which will run all winter.
As a science-fiction writer, I have long seen women in specialized combat roles as a given, an inevitable part of our devolution into a hive of mammalian insects. Men will always be the apex predators on the battlefield until the war machine becomes sentient. If this happens extinction naturally follows as the Machine inherits the Wonk ethos of its creators.
In the meantime, to fully mechanize war, down to the decision making process [which is happening with the drone program] we need to take it out of the realm of exceptional activity and make it an everyday activity. The female cry for others to die to insure the security of her womb, her young and her nest must carry ever more weight. By putting a few dyke jocks in body bags the moral objection of men being sent to war by women will be quashed, and the war machine might rumble on.
Have you wondered, why the War on Drugs?
Why was the April, 2015 Maryland National Guard deployment to protect the Baltimore City Police from urban insurgents commanded by a black woman?
Why was the arrest of the drug dealer whose death triggered the unrest supervised by a black woman?
Why is the City of Baltimore—an ongoing multigenerational crisis—administered by a black woman?
Why are men not permitted to handle a crises?
They do, in the background, but cannot be seen to have agency. The woman must appear to be the key actor.
Why, Sam, do paramilitary police kick in doors in every American city on every day, in activity almost identical to that which Spec Ops teams engaged in in Iraq?
Why is a sexless society so important to the rulers of the American Hive?
Why must the U.S. be engaged in overseas combat operations every day of the year—and it is. I recall that in 2005, when I checked a Pentagon casualty report assuming that only combat deaths from Iraq and Towelheadistan would be listed, that this report, reproduced in an American magazine with large circulation [might have been Time] stated that U.S. combat deaths were sustained in 31 unnamed countries. Taking away the two we were at war in, that left 29 question marks. This year, the U.S. will conduct combat operations in most of Africa’s 40-plus nations, why?
The mindless drive of an instinctually expanding social machine like the State gravitates toward constant low-intensity aggression, like a lion that does not have to chase its prey, but has goats dropped into his pen with broken legs, The State eats leisurely when it is scaled up.
Provided the economy and ecology continues to sustain this logical insanity, I see a future world were a few men manage from behind the scenes through female figureheads, who command the allegiance of the only men who are permitted to be men, special operations warriors who will manage us like they did the Iraqis.
Abolishing gender will have the desired effect of absolving the male half of the population from resisting such aggression even as the shrill voice of the feminine proxy aggressor calls for more boots on the ground in the war on drugs and the war against the Islamists.
To understand the motivation of the “wonks” who operate the joystick of State, I suggest we recall what stands in the way of perpetual war, which is “family-creation and child-rearing.”
In every case, when the State get involved in family affairs it oversees the dissolution of that family, not its affirmation and the managing hand of a state-indoctrinated social worker, who is eventually replaced by a parole officer.
Just as the family was the basis for the tribe, it is the enemy of the extra-tribal State.
James, Sam, thank you Ishmael.
James,
Your comments reminded me of some observations made by Ibn Khaldun back in the 14th Century and some Canadian shitlords in a recent podcast.
In the Muqadimma, Khaldun wrote the following about his theory concerning the cycle of dynasties, and when you think about it against the backdrop of the postwar West, there's a lot that seems similar (muslimphilosophy.com/ik/Muqaddimah/Chapter3/Ch_3_12.htm):
"We have stated that the duration of the life of a dynasty does not as a rule extend beyond three generations. The first generation retains the desert qualities, desert toughness, and desert savagery. (Its members are used to) privation and to sharing their glory (with each other); they are brave and rapacious. Therefore, the strength of group feeling continues to be preserved among them. They are sharp and greatly feared. People submit to them.
"Under the influence of royal authority and a life of ease, the second generation changes from the desert attitude to sedentary culture, from privation to luxury and plenty, from a state in which everybody shared in the glory to one in which one man claims all the glory for himself while the others are too lazy to strive for (glory), and from proud superiority to humble subservience. Thus, the vigor of group feeling is broken to some extent. People become used to lowliness and obedience. But many of (the old virtues) remain in them, because they had had direct personal contact with the first generation and its conditions, and had observed with their own eyes its prowess and striving for glory and its intention to protect and defend (itself). They cannot give all of it up at once, although a good deal of it may go. They live in hope that the conditions that existed in the first generation may come back, or they live under the illusion that those conditions still exist.
"The third generation, then, has (completely) forgotten the period of desert life and toughness, as if it had never existed. They have lost (the taste for) the sweetness of fame and (for) group feeling, because they are dominated by force. Luxury reaches its peak among them, because they are so much given to a life of prosperity and ease. They become dependent on the dynasty and are like women and children who need to be defended (by someone else). Group feeling disappears completely. People forget to protect and defend themselves and to press their claims. With their emblems, apparel, horseback riding, and (fighting) skill, they deceive people and give them the wrong impression. For the most part, they are more cowardly than women upon their backs. When someone comes and demands something from them, they cannot repel him. The ruler, then, has need of other, brave people for his support. He takes many clients and followers. They help the dynasty to some degree, until God permits it to be destroyed, and it goes with everything it stands for."
As for the Canadians, I recently found the podcast ran by Kevin Michael Grace and Kevin Steel. In last week's episode (2kevins.com/archives/257) they discussed Jonathan Haidt's dust-up with the modern young female hive ("The Female Rage Machine" 8:56) as well as the destruction of family and society by SCALE (Size Complexity Atomization Liberalization Elitism). They start at 1:11:56, but at 1:33:35 they go into how Feminism in particular is a gimmick that enables managerialism (Capitalism, the State, etc.) to deconstruct the family for the purpose of "maximizing utility."
There's gotta be a way out of the box. We deserve better enemies than these shit-knuckles. I can't help but believe that at some point the survival instinct kicks in and people begin confronting The Wrongness however they can, in their own ways, and start re-forging their own little places of order; that in the days of decadence, tradition and improvisation can meet somewhere revolutionary.
What Would Conan Do?
PS: Thanks, Ishmael.
There may be a pattern here. The Romans fell apart after no fault divorce became the norm. Not immediately but over time the Men realized, the same as our civilization, that paying a Women after you married her and she's run off with your kids is a very bad deal. When the Men were needed to fight off the Vandals...well what was in it for them? Why get all smashed up for a civilization that just ripped you off. I think this is where we are now in the US. I also read that the same thing happened in Babylon but I'm not as sure about it as I am the Romans.
I served in the armed forces but no way would I do so today. This county is run by a hostile elite that doesn't care at all about the average Joe.
There are an uncomfortable number of parallels with our current decline and Roman decline, particularly in terms of masculinity, sexuality the military and celebrity athletics.
I see modern military contractors as possible developing into parallel entities to the Germanic tribes of the late empire.