9 Replies on “Linder quote

  1. „Spiritual love“ is the sand Christianity throws in your eyes to blind you to the fact that there is only this flesh, only this world. In all cases, what’s called love is only self interest. The Christian imagines that by a display of „spiritual love“ he will help assure himself a place in heaven.
    Promiscuous physical „love“, i.e., sex, isn’t bad per se. The problem comes from what you have to do in modern society to get it. If the world were such that I could easily have sex with a thousand women I’d probably do it. Unfortunately, in America we live in a totalitarian matriarchy where prostitution is illegal almost everywhere, and this drives up the price of pussy to ridiculous levels — without doubt its intended effect. To avoid having to patronize prostitutes, many poor saps get married, which may solve the immediate problem for a while, until the eventual divorce in which the wife is awarded everything, including the children and a large chunk of the husband’s future earnings. The marriage racket and the love myth are both inventions of women in the service of their own self interest.

    1. SexualUtopiaCover
      Marriage is the invention of men to control women.
      See the PDF of an important essay of this book here, originally published at The Occidental Quarterly.

      1. „Marriage is the invention of men to control women. “
        Only in a patriarchy, which hasn’t existed in the West for thousands of years. Patria potestas, baby! It’s the natural order of things. Let’s bring it back.

      2. As originally conceived and implemented among the Romans, patria potestas meant the father of the family held the power of life and death over wives and children. But even among the Romans, as they became more „civilized“, this power waned. In my view, the restrictions on women that don’t include this power, such as existed in earlier eras (i.e., your examples of the Middle Ages or Victorian times) are weaker and represent steps toward matriarchy. Today, we have a fully matriarchal society in which marriage is a racket and serves only the interest of the woman. Feminism and matriarchy emerged together over time as an artifact of technological civilization. Here again, we can see that Christianity, with its feminine ideals of love, compassion, and equality, has exerted its usual corrupting influence by facilitating this change and helping to overthrow the natural order.

    2. yes, an invention of men to attempt to secure their women. at least for us insecure guys. and what’s so bad about a marriage crashing and burning? or should i say, a long term teammate kind of relationship? if the relationship comes to a close, try to resolve it with parity. accept and own one’s role in the relationship, where ever it went, however it turned out. and then let bygones be bygones.
      and it helps to remember a rule of nature, in death there is life. the predator derives life from its dead prey.
      and sex is a real appetite, at least for a portion of us. accept it as an intentional pursuit and that satisfying it costs, whatever. slot some energy and focus and $$$ to the task and then and get on with living, the doing of other attention-demanding tasks. or dying.
      but to hell w/ Right Wing Authoritarianism/ Patriarchy. to hell w/ imposing oneself on another. may our relationships be strong on mutual consent and consensus. if not, move on and keep looking and living.

    3. Yes: and I had included those facts in the 2017 edition of FRDH:

      As I said, the blogger devoted five videos to explain the cycle. In one of his videos he used the paradigm of Ancient Rome, when the father was the judge, jury and executioner of the family (pater familias). Roman history does not even register how many apprentices of feminists were executed by their husbands or fathers, as women are still executed today by husbands and fathers in the Muslim world.
      In Rome the problem started right after the Second Punic War, when a vital law was abolished. Lex Oppia restricted a woman’s wealth. It forbade any woman to possess more than half an ounce of gold. Unsuccessfully, Cato the Elder opposed the abrogation of that law and Roman feminists harvested other triumphs, even in the Senate, and the trend smoothly continued up to the Christian era. By the time of the Byzantine Empire even brownish women could inherit property.
      The Roman Empire disintegrated but the Middle Ages rectified Rome’s mistake throughout Europe by getting back to patriarchy. After the Enlightenment the cycle that Cato opposed started again, with women “reclaiming their rights” and writing pamphlets. The eighteenth century influenced the nineteenth century. In the United States the turning point occurred when women obtained the right to vote in 1920, although the women’s movement had started in 1848. The welfare state initiated in 1935 with Social Security and was expanded in 1965 to include Medicare. “No fault divorce” was another escalation of feminism, in addition to the 1967 initiative for affirmative action for women. From the 1990s feminism transformed itself into runaway feminism. In 2010 the welfare state was expanded again to include Obamacare. The beneficiaries of this state are women, especially single mothers, not men.

      Although this essay does not appear in the 2018 ed., it still can be read: here.

      1. Yes, this is similar in some respects to my view, but it makes a serious mistake in not taking the impact of technological development into account. Modern feminism would be quite impossible without the development of scientific birth control, for example. That’s why feminism took off when it did. In the sixties, technological conditions were finally ripe. This development was a thousand times more destructive to the race than women obtaining the right to vote.
        Roman feminism? I don’t think so. Sure, among the upper classes there were a few women who from time to time had some power, but they weren’t exercising it for women’s group interests, only their own. They mostly operated behind the scenes. Rome never had female warriors or even a female politician, let alone a female ruler. So I think calling such activities Roman women did engage in feminism is a misapplication of the word. But at the same time it must be acknowledged that any retreat from full patria potestas is still a loss of power for men and a gain of power for women. Interestingly, the retreat began even before Christianity, which illustrates that Christianity doesn’t play a causative role, but only supports the technological trend.
        Because most people think of technology only in terms of machinery, they don’t readily see the welfare state as a form of social technology, but it is. It was invented by Bismarck as an answer to Marxism, and in the long run it’s been more successful. Once industrial civilization reached a certain point, something of the kind was bound to come into being. The modern welfare state is a good example of the unintended consequences of technological developments. It wasn’t designed with feminism in mind, but it certainly helped it along more than anyone ever imagined.