Are We Witnessing The Downfall Of Scientific Authoritarianism?
It seems social engineers have studied human beings well, as a power mad elite attempt to mold us into androgynous pods (one of the latest pushes is the mass marketing of makeup for men) who benefit their bottom line rather than free and independent men and women who live in pursuit of their own happiness. In the past century, they’ve learned how to sell us things we don’t need by manipulating our base emotions. They’ve learned how to brainwash millions of women into believing motherhood is oppressive and that being like men is what all women should aspire to.
They’ve taken lessons from psychologists, anthropologists and scientists about the structure of human societies and used them to aggrandize power rather than to serve the interests of the public. The knowledge gleaned from science is being used not to advance the human condition, but to control the masses in a way that benefits the upper crust of society rather than the individual.
This is an introduction to four of the most important thinkers of the past century. As we examine their ideas, we will see how each of these men’s ideas have been subverted by a small minority to manipulate and control the masses of humanity.
There is reason to believe the scientific knowledge elucidated below has been systematically used against men and society in general by a clandestine Deep State, i.e. “men behind the curtain” of Western governments.
Sigmund Freud’s ideas have been used to turn Americans into a mindless protoplasm that knows how to do nothing but consume for consumption’s sake.
Many people dismiss Freud’s theories without realizing they became the very foundation of the modern consumer economy when his nephew Edward Bernays decided to adapt them for use by corporations and the government in the then newly formed field of “public relations.” The term public relations is actually a creation of Bernays, who knew “propaganda ministry” wouldn’t sound so good even though that’s exactly what any public relations office is.
Penis Envy is one of the most controversial of Freud’s theories, even though it has been used quite successfully in numerous ad campaigns and social engineering schemes. In fact, the first successful cigarette campaign designed to get women smoking (smoking had always been taboo for women before) was based on the Penis Envy theory. Bernays designed a campaign in which cigarettes became “Torches of Freedom” as he encouraged women to symbolically and subconsciously sport their own penises by lighting up in a garish public display. The campaign was a huge success for Philip Morris, as cigarette sales for women skyrocketed after the “Torches of Freedom” campaign.
One need look no further than feminism to see Freud’s Penis Envy theory in action once again. At its core feminism is about turning women into wannabe men rather than encouraging them to fulfill their natural biological and psychological roles as mothers and wives. An ROK commenter recently offered this excellent assessment as to why women have gone insane as a result of the mass institution of Freud’s theory by feminism in Anglo America.
She believes childbearing to be oppressive but it isn’t. The ability to create life is a profound and admirable thing. What could woman ever do that could be more important than that? And of course they are miserable, because they aren’t fulfilling their purpose. They aren’t using their most important body part. They pretend they don’t even have a womb and take drugs to stop it from functioning. Like a cooped up horse that doesn’t use its legs, or a bird that can’t use its wings, or a bull or goat that can’t use its horns, women who don’t use their womb go insane. Women are meant to live in a perpetual cycle of sex-pregnancy-childbirth-suckling. It’s their natural life cycle if they don’t take birth control drugs to prevent it.
There is no surer sign Penis Envy is the basis of feminism than realizing the truth of that statement. Women have become ashamed of their life-creating capacity and think it’s nobler to slave away for an uncaring corporate boss rather than taking an active part in creating and nurturing the next generation of humans.
Freud’s scientific theories have been shamelessly used by elites to turn women into wannabe men, and corrupted by Bernays to help the corporate-government complex turn the whole of society into compulsive shoppers and eaters. This benefits the elite at the cost of everyone else in society.
It’s important to realize buying things for women will never fulfill them like keeping them barefoot and pregnant, to be uncouth about the issue.
In 1934, Oxford-educated anthropologist J.D. Unwin published Sex and Culture, a scientific study of 6 civilizations and 80 tribes covering a span of 5,000 years of human history. He warned of the consequences of completely abandoning restraints on female sexuality.
These societies lived in different geographical environments; they belonged to different racial stocks; but the history of their marriage customs is the same. In the beginning each society had the same ideas in regard to sexual regulations. Then the same struggles took place; the same sentiments were expressed; the same changes were made; the same results ensued. Each society reduced its sexual opportunity to a minimum and displaying great social energy, flourished greatly. Then it extended its sexual opportunity; its energy decreased, and faded away. The one outstanding feature of the whole story is its unrelieved monotony.
This dire warning came a full 30 years before the CIA funded Gloria Steinem and her Ms. Magazine. Any policymaker educated in anthropology would have known of Unwin’s groundbreaking revelation. This knowledge was ripe for the picking for those who wanted to break down Western society and redesign it as a New World Order collective in which the state was at the center of family. This of course means men have effectively become enemies of the state.
Aldous Huxley thought highly of Unwin’s ideas. He wrote:
Unwin’s conclusions, which are based upon an enormous wealth of carefully sifted evidence, may be summed up as follows. All human societies are in one or another of four cultural conditions: zoistic, manistic, deistic, rationalistic. Of these societies the zoistic displays the least amount of mental and social energy, the rationalistic the most. Investigation shows that the societies exhibiting the least amount of energy are those where pre-nuptial continence is not imposed and where the opportunities for sexual indulgence after marriage are greatest. The cultural condition of a society rises in exact proportion as it imposes pre-nuptial and post-nuptial restraints upon sexual opportunity.
In layman’s terms, Huxley warned us human society would regress rather than progress if women were allowed to become degenerate whores and their uncontrolled hypergamous instincts allowed the Pareto Principle to return – a world in which 20% of men dominate the sexuality of 80% of women. The rest of men go without until sex and companionship until they Go Galt and tear the system down.
Again, we see another apparent example of scientific knowledge being used by elites in designing an authoritarian playbook.
Social anthropologist Robert Briffault’s erudite work entitled The Mothers, released 90 years ago also spelled out what would happen once male utility value was supplanted by the welfare state, a full 40 years before Johnson’s Great Society literally became the greatest act of cuckoldry in the history of mankind. Men have been cucked by the very government they are forced to pay taxes into ever since.
Social engineers would have to know the consequences of instituting such a system. From Briffault’s book The Mothers:
The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.
That simple statement illustrates why a welfare state weakens men’s hand in society. Of course, this is not surprising to those who know women see men as nothing but utility objects. (Then hypocritically chastise men who rightly see them as nothing but sex objects. Even though women literally have nothing else to offer men in the West in modern times.)
There are three important corollaries to Briffault’s Law:
Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.
Any agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit.
A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current/future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male.
In other words, anthropological science has revealed women are consummate users – even predators – of men. Of course, The Anglo-American Matrix used this knowledge to weaken the roles of men in society, replacing his provider role with the almighty state.
None other than engineering genius Nikola Tesla wrote about what was coming as a result of women trying to compete with and displace men from their roles in society. He wrote:
This struggle of the human female toward sex equality will end in a new sex order, with the female as superior.
However, while social engineers pushed women out of the home and the kitchen and into roles as corporate cogs and male wannabees, their innate psychological desires to submit to man, have children, and nurture have gone unfulfilled. The result is two generations of women who become increasingly shrill and miserable.
It seems to me that women are not particularly happy in this newly found freedom, in this new competition which they are waging so persistently against men in business and the professions and even in sport. The question that naturally arises is, whether the women themselves are the gainers or the losers.
What else was the feminist march on Washington a week after Trump’s inauguration but a bunch of malcontents, drunk on their own power pushing anti-family and anti-male bile without realizing the cognitive dissonance in the messages they preach. The very reason feminists are so unhappy is they never fulfilled their biological and evolutionary roles in society, and are destined to die with cats or other animals for children rather than human children who would love them and care for them in their old age.
So, feminism definitely makes women losers in society, to answer the question posed by Tesla.
Scientific Dictatorship Crumbling
It’s quite a coincidence that every Western policy instituted in the last century has gone against the prudent course the above knowledge would have dictated for leaders who care about their citizens. The good news is the use of the knowledge outlined above to control, deceive and brainwash millions might be coming to an end.
Thanks to the destruction of the centralized communication model that has dominated the world since the invention of radio and television, and the advent of free and open communication on the Internet, the elite-managed democracy we have been living under is now taking a populist turn. The elites are none too happy about the fact a mass awakening is revealing the control matrix they so carefully crafted, one that will be destroyed once a critical mass of awakened individuals has been reached. Perhaps then, this scientific knowledge can be used to help, rather than hinder humanity.
From their lofty perches at Davos, Switzerland, right after the crowning of Donald Trump the elite revealed just how unhappy they are with the turn away from their management of society. Even Establishment media couldn’t deny what was going on as Bloomberg reported: Davos Elite Seeks Fixes to Defend the System From Populists.
It helps to define populism, what the elite are “defending” against: populism is support for the concerns of ordinary people. The importance of that article can’t be overstated: A mainstream newspaper just came out and said the elite doesn’t give a damn about the concerns of ordinary people if one reads between the lines. That’s huge for the establishment to make that admission. In the report, hedge fund billionaire Ray Dalio even went so far as to say:
We may be at a point where globalization is ending, and provincialization and nationalization is taking hold.
They know the jig is up.
I hope for a peaceful resolution to the coming conflict between the elites and the rest of us, but elite interests are maniacal. There’s never enough money or power for them, while they foist Socialism on the rest of us. The elites at Davos, among others, are the people who really run the world. Our “representatives” in America and Europe only do their bidding.
Expect them to grasp at authoritarian straws to try and force the genie back into the bottle. It seems they are hell-bent on creating a global, authoritarian, Socialist government without telling anyone about it. They nearly succeeded by bastardizing the knowledge of the luminaries referenced above, before the Internet came along and blew a strong wind up their dirty skirts revealing all the treachery underneath.
May this entire crooked facade of scientifically-based authoritarianism based on the corruption of knowledge gleaned by great men crash and burn, and go straight to hell where it belongs.
Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.