It's Fascism. New Rules.
Part 1 | Is this goal possible? I don't know. Are they dreaming it? Yes. Should we assume we are in a fight against men who want to reprise the 13th century? Yes, I think we should.
Some of you, sisters & readers, are aware of a very poor philosopher (the kind who is happy to be called a ‘thought leader’), Curtis Yarvin. I won't go into detail here, but the other night when JCJ and I were chatting we agreed he's one of that kind who falls into the wrong reading of Nietzsche and runs off a cliff from there. She has some excellent analysis and imagination in the works, as for example this recent essay on the brittleness and fragility of the authoritarian (toxic masculine) ego. :)
What's happening here in the US right now is relevant to world-wide feminists because these men have designs on the planet, not just the US. Because their historical errancy here is already harming and killing women in the world's most vulnerable corners. Where I was imagining before the election that we might have time to unfold a RadMatFem world, we don't. How we build coalition and establish trust networks globally will just have to happen in this compressed and chaotic time.
Summary: It's fascists. New Rules. Everyone against the Fascists.
I know. I'm not ready to make nice either. (See Part 2 of this series soon.)
I am not excited to make deep common cause with either Patriarchs 1.0 (regretful MAGA) or Patriarchs 2.0 (humbled TQ identarians), but this 3.0 version is Patriarchy 1.0 but with shiny, powerful, totalizing, invasive technology and private equity salivating to buy up our ranches and homes. It's got potential to become nation-level mass enslavement managed by AI.
Is this goal possible? I don't know. Are they dreaming it? Yes. Should we assume we are in a fight against men who want to reprise the 13th century? Yes, I think we should.
