Feminist Propaganda and the Election of 2016

As Mainstream Propaganda Media are strongly inclined to point out, there are a certain percentage of American voters who will support a Hillary Clinton Presidency without regard for any facts that contradict her qualifications, honesty, integrity, stated intentions or health. Some estimate this support as high as forty percent of eligible voters or more.

At least twenty percent of this avid yet irrational support has roots in radical feminist propaganda going back the the Nineteen-Fifties. It was then that the US Central Intelligence Agency – the CIA – began to promote radical feminism as a change agent for American culture. The CIA hired Gloria Steinem as one if its operatives. Steinem went on to contribute significantly to the movement. She remains one of the “goddesses” of the radical feminist movement today.

An important point to remember when considering any aspect of propaganda today is what Harvey Cox wrote in his prophetic book of 1965, The Secular City.

First of all Secular City was not a “proto-feminist” book, as espoused by ultra-feminist Ann D. Braude:

   "Harvey Cox published the proto-feminist Secular City in 1965”

Cox asserted that "God is just as present in the secular as the religious realms of life," and had originally titled his book, "God and the Secular City."

Cox, a theologian, was reflecting on the present movements within society, especially the rise of modernism and the decline of mainstream religions as a factor in influencing American society, politics and culture. He pointed out, for example, that the corporate and government organizations were usurping the influence once held by major religions.

"Secularism is not only indifferent to alternative religious systems, but as a religious ideology it is opposed to any other religious systems. It is therefore a closed system.”

It's quite possible that Braude interprets radical feminism as a “cult” religion, a sub-part of Secularism. Of course it is. In that interpretation she is right, but this is far from a good development.

In this context alone The Secular City would become “proto-feminist” although that would place it farther back in history than its origin. [Feminism was already actively mainstream by the mid Nineteen-Fifties.]

Perhaps one of the most critical yet overlooked statements that Cox made in Secular City was that the science of Human Engineering had, by 1963, been so advanced that those applying it to large populations were [and are] able to “engineer” beliefs and customs within large population groups.

In essence: propaganda works exceedingly well for those who apply it.

Consider, now, how Wikipedia deals with this science of human engineering referred to by Cox:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia : Redirected from Human engineering 

Human factors and ergonomics (commonly referred to as HF&E), also known as comfort design, functional design, and systems, is the practice of designing products, systems, or processes to take proper account of the interaction between them and the people who use them.

Importantly, “Human Engineering” is erased as a reference point to understand or explore what potential and actual applications it has on human society. The implications are enormous.

Radical Feminism is human engineering. It is everything that Cox referred to in The Secular City by using that term.

Those who apply the science of human engineering do not want its target populations to know that it is being applied to them.

Since the CIA first hired Gloria Steinem to promote radical feminism hundreds of other authors have written millions of pages of propaganda to further that cause.

Among the new wave of feminists, Camille Paglia wrote in April, 2016:

“First-wave feminism, born in 1848 at the Seneca Falls Convention in upstate New York, was focused on property rights and on winning the vote, achieved by ratification of the 19^th Amendment in 1920. Abortion entered the feminist canon with Margaret Sanger’s bold campaign for birth control, a violation of the repressive Comstock Act for which she was arrested in 1914. Her organization, the American Birth Control League, founded in 1921, later became Planned Parenthood, which remains a lightning-rod for controversy because of its lavish federal funding. Sanger remains a heroine to many feminists, including me, despite her troubling association with eugenics, a program (also adopted by the Nazis) of now discredited techniques like sterilization to purify and strengthen the human gene pool. It was partly because of Sanger’s pioneering precedent that I joined Planned Parenthood and contributed to it for many years—until I realized, to my disillusion, how it had become a covert arm of the Democratic party. “

Properly understood, it becomes clear that Planned Parenthood supporters and contributors constitute another religious cult that is a subset of Secularism as a religion.

With the proliferation of social media, vocal representatives of modern and radical feminism have become ubiquitous and egalitarian. Anyone can get their message across, and with social media, followers are easily gathered. Propaganda that once took millions of pages to espouse now is succinctly conveyed using a few words, as in Twitter feeds:

I have no doubt that those who agree with this line of thinking are strong supporters of Planned Parenthood. Also, those who agree with that genre of “thought” would be greatly offended if asked to rationally defend those concepts [actually, Feelings] with explanations and supporting logic.

More examples, some rather extreme, of feminist thinking are compiled by: womenagainstmen.com 

“I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” – Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor

“To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” -– Valerie Solanas

“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” — Andrea Dworkin

“Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” — Susan Brownmiller

“The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.” — Sharon Stone

“In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” — Catherine MacKinnon

“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart 

“Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.” – Catherine Comins 

“All men are rapists and that’s all they are” — Marilyn French

“Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” — Germaine Greer.

All of these statements are “legitimized” by the Mainstream Propaganda Media by its remaining completely silent on implications of this militancy. Silence is tacit endorsement.

Since the onset of hyper-feminism in the Nineteen-Seventies, not insignificantly after the 1972 Roe-vs-Wade Decision of the US Supreme Court, tens of millions of male children grew up under a dominant influence of a single mother. As the decades have passed since then, an increasing proportion of young males has grown in age, but not necessarily in maturity, under predominant feminism. Within the present decade more than twenty-five million children are known to live, in the United States, without any father figure to influence their development into maturity.

The result is clear: a majority of younger people in America who have been limited to this half-meal of psychological-social nutrition feel emotionally attached to the radical feminist viewpoint. It follows that they believe themselves obligated to accept whatever is taught by feminists, especially when it comes from schools attended throughout their fatherless development. And that it does, for one thing that saturates federal standards of “education” is that man-hating, man-diminishing Common Culture espoused equally by and in sync with the Mainstream Propaganda Media.

It is worse than it might seem.

Beliefs are one thing, and only go so far in shaping a culture. Behavior is arguably more important.

And this is why this new wave of feminized younger men is unhealthy for society. First of all these behavioral changes did not happen through a natural course of maturation of western society. The changes we now see have been engineered throughout our culture by manipulation at the deepest psychological levels. That is simply what human engineering is; manipulation at a subconscious level. At a saturation point, programmed beliefs “rise to the surface” as behavioral changes.

This level of manipulation always has a hidden agenda behind it. [Decoding this hidden agenda is one point of this blog. It will take many pages of explanation, so I hope interested readers will subscribe, return, and share this information.]

Madeleine Albright 2016

Relevant to politics in 2016, the influence of radical feminism in presidential preferences is easily perceived. A majority of younger voters flocked to Bernie Sanders. On a psychological level he represented the non-masculine figure that they felt comfortable with. Promises, promises; like the single working mother that they grew up with, and a mostly-absent father if any at all, The Bern promised what they wanted to hear. Bernie in some ways appeared like the absent father whose only purpose is to provide things, or who covers expenses without having to be physically present. He's the ultimate kind benefactor who lives on the other coast. And consistent with their expectations of men and fathers these days, he proved to be a fraud. Hence, he reinforced their belief that “all men are liars, and all men make promises they won't keep.”

This also explains the visceral “anti-Trump” and “Never Trump” attitudes of so many people under forty years old this year.

Trump comes forward as a strong, independently thinking man. He admits to being strong. He boasts about discarding “political correctness.” All of these are factors that feminist-influenced mobs are repelled by. Even though these feminized mobs, both female and male, and most of those who are confusedly in between, don't have a whisper of a clue why they are repulsed by Trump, they gather together in reinforcing clusters to console each other.

Meanwhile, Hillary uses Neuro-linguistic Programming [NLP is another form of human engineering developed by CIA operatives at Esalen] in her speeches, taking advantage of enrapt listeners. The essence that she conveys is the same one repeated multitudes of times by the Mainstream Propaganda Media: “Fear Trump.”

Essentially, every person who watches of listens to Mainstream Propaganda Media, especially CNN, MSNBC, and similar broadcasts is being programmed to develop a quite irrational fear of Donald Trump. 

Albert Einstein 

"I am dead against trying to keep religious conservatives out of the political debate. The tactic of exclusion is self-defeating.”  Harvey Cox