In a post about John Bagot Glubb Charles Martel had this to say:
The best way to describe Sir John Glubb is “Lawrence of Arabia — but smarter”.
He goes on to quote Glubb at length from Glubb’s work “The Fate Of Empires”. I’ll just present the one of the really good parts:
“An increase in the influence of women in public life has often been associated with national decline. The later Romans complained that, although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome. In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab empire, the women demanding admission to the professions hitherto monopolized by men. “What,” wrote the contemporary historian, Ibn Bessam, “have the professions of clerk, tax collector or preacher to do with women? These occupations have always been limited to men alone.” Many women practiced law, while others obtained positions as university professors. There was an agitation for the appointment of female judges, which, however, does not appear to have succeeded. Soon after this period, government and public order collapsed, and foreign invaders overran the country. The resulting increase in confusion and violence made it unsafe for women to move unescorted in the streets, with the result that this feminist movement collapsed.
We are on that road already. There are parts of any town in America with above 100,000 population that are no go zones for women and which even police prefer to avoid. If they can.
So women’s disdain of men eventually creates conditions where men are required. Modern day feminism will be no different. Alas.
And yes. I’m aware of Glubb’s leadership of Arab Armies in the 1948 war against Israel. It doesn’t mean he got everything wrong.
Comments
3 responses to “Decline And Fall”
It stuns me that we are required to ignore the fact that American women have been intemperately politically active for the last half century, contributing a not small portion to the mess that is the American polity.
This mess is so bad that at least half of the citizenry believes their governments routinely and legally violate their rights.
Such a split can easily lead to civil war. A civil war would be ubiquitous, not sectional, as the last time. No one would be safe behind front lines. And women would not be exempt from the violence, as so many worked and voted to create this statist tyranny. They would lose many of their political gains.
I hope more women voters think their way into understanding that the welfare state is the slave state. They certainly won’t be told. They must do so lest they prove that chaos is the only alternative to patriarchy.
I hope more women voters think their way into understanding that the welfare state is the slave state.
The human condition is to prefer slavery when times are good.
Look at all the trouble Moses had leaving Egypt.
And women? Since “slavery” is their natural preferred state (What is the difference between the state and a husband? The state will not beg you for sex.) few will notice.
She can indulge in her monthly alpha fantasies and the state will provide. Until it can’t. And what does a month with out sex give her? Bigger rushes with the “sperm donor”.
She no longer has to work at bonding to keep a mate around. She would give that up? For what? Men want liberty. Women want security. Women are 51% of the electorate. We are so screwed until conditions deteriorate very significantly from our current state.
Haven’t crime rates declined over the past two decades even with feminism?