The UN Gender Agenda
Napoleon said that he feared four hostile newspapers more than 100,000 hostile bayonets, but of far greater concern to us should be the Marxist roots of the ideologies that are making over our society and that Lenin had said, "Destroy the family and society will collapse, " and "Give me your four-year olds and in a generation I will build a socialist State."
At the founding of the UN, the importance of the natural family was recognized and declared to be worth protecting and promoting. Families were thought to be the fundamental building blocks of nations.
But, things changed.
The strongest force seeking to destroy traditional religions is feminism. Radical feminists have little use for religion or churches as they are, but they do not leave the churches whose doctrines and liturgies they find objectionable. They work within to change the churches so that the final product will bear little resemblance to Christianity.
— Robert H. Bork in
Slouching Towards Gomorrah (p. 287)
The preceding excerpt from
Slouching Towards Gomorrah
is from Chapter 11
The Politics of Sex: Radical Feminism's Assault on American Culture.
That chapter from Robert Bork's book provides insights as to why
gender feminism is bad for our society in as much as it fosters a climate of propaganda against men and all things male that would earn the accolades of Josef Goebbels for a job well-done.
Robert H. Bork did
not mention much that what is
at work in the USA is also at work at the UN and therefore affects every nation on Earth.
If the term "radical feminism" (a.k.a.
Marxist- or socialist-feminism) is somewhat new to you, you need to
expand your knowledge. After all, radical feminism, the
currently controlling faction of feminism, governs just about
everything that is happening in your life. See,
Carey Roberts column
Carey Roberts is an analyst and commentator on political
correctness. His best-known work was an exposé on Marxism
and radical feminism.
Carey Roberts' best-known work, his exposé on Marxism
and radical feminism, is not necessarily easy to find,
but
this link will help with that. (Some of the URLs for the
article series appear to keep changing. For that reason the
identified link leads to an Internet search for the series. The
first or second link in the return list will most likely lead
you to the series.)
Government-funded special interest groups, also called non-governmental organizations (NGOs), gained control at the UN and wage an all-out war on the family. These NGOs are driven by
redfem extremists who hate families and attack the natural family by destroying its weakest link, fatherhood and the role of men as heads of families.
Family-hostile legislation that would never pass in many national legislative assemblies is being promoted through UN resolutions that then are brought through
the back door into the UN member-nations, by passing administrative orders or orders-in-council, often on the sly, without legislative bodies even being aware that the UN resolutions are becoming law in their countries. However, even if the legislative bodies know about the destructive agenda of the UN that is being imposed on their countries, they are often powerless to oppose it.
| misogyny: | "a widely accepted social attitude in a sexist world" includes beliefs that "demean [women's] bodies... characters and... efforts." |
| misandry: | "1) a refusal to suppress the evidence of one's experience with men;
2) a woman's defense against fear and pain;
3) an affirmation of the cathartic effects of justifiable anger." |
— from A Feminist Dictionary
compiled by Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler;
quoted in Jack Kammer's
"If Men Have All the Power How Come Women Make the Rules"
(Translation
into French)
(Note: Just so there's no mistaking the true meanings of the terms, look up the proper definitions of
misogyny and
misandry.)
As with the Nazis, who first vilified and demeaned the targets of their ethnic cleansing, so the
radical feminists (a.k.a.
redfems) now demean the targets of their wrath – men. The gender agenda then progresses to the elimination of fathers from the lives of the fathers' children.
Today's radical ideologues demand that we do it all "in the best interest of the child." Even that is nothing new. Many ideologues, from Socrates, through Napoleon, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin to Mao, all used variations of the same theme. In the communist ideology that was first being discussed by Socrates and then defined through the efforts of
Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx (the fathers of modern communism) there was no room for the natural family. The natural family was seen by them as the fundamental source of all class struggle, even as the cause of the idea of personal property. Therefore they openly called for the destruction of the natural family and for state-control and -ownership of the children.
Today's
redfems and
gender activists are promoting the
original communist family politics, even to the extent of having the State gain control of the upbringing of our children. The UN are exerting enormous pressure on many nations to implement government-sponsored
daycare for children, even for children under three years of age.
There too, they are perpetuating destructive family politics that proved to be enormously harmful to the development of children in the communist countries.
To gain an impression of how effective such a program is and what its consequences are, check PROPAGANDA IN THE PROPAGANDA STATE [the USSR]
...For those Marxists who insisted on creating the world's first classless society, children meant everything. Adults would repeat, "Under communism there is only one privileged class – the children.
Stalin and his circle declared a war (as in the civil war) against the counter-revolutionary forces, traditional peasants, and called the young to the front lines. Often Pioneers confronted a familiar enemy: their parents." [The Pioneers were the children in the Russian youth movement. They were encouraged to rat on their parents and depicted as heroes if they did. --WHS]
See also
Matriarchy in USSR — off-site
Where did all of that come from? The Greek culture of antiquity was idolized during the Renaissance and in the aftermath of the French Revolution, when humanism was thought to offer a viable, better and more enlightened alternative to the established moral traditions that were being promoted through the established religious denominations. Humanism evolved into communism, mainly on account of the quality of the
education curriculum that was then available. The people who promoted the new godless statism were educated well enough that they could read Socrates, Plato and Aristotle in the original languages in which they wrote, and the study of the classical culture was very much in vogue then.
Plato, in "Republic," has Socrates offer this advice to philosopher kings: take all the children from their parents and rid the city of adults.
Napoleon, and the founders of the Wandervogel ("bird of passage", the enormously popular youth movement that began in about 1880 in Germany and produced many of the prominent (and homosexual) Nazi leaders, used the slogan "Who owns the youths owns the future."
Lenin said, "Give me your
four-year-olds, and within one generation I will build a socialist state."
Hitler said, in Mein Kampf: "It [the State] must set race in the center of all life. It must take care to keep it pure. It must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. It must see to it that only the healthy beget children...."
"President Obama is committed to helping states develop
seamless, comprehensive, and coordinated 'Zero to Five' systems
to improve developmental outcomes and early learning for all
children....it will be the goal of this Administration to ensure
that every child has access to a complete and competitive
education -- from the day they are born to the day they begin a
career."
— (Fact
Sheet: Expanding the Promise of Education in America, Mar 10, 2009
see also:
Remarks of President Barack Obama –
As Prepared for Delivery Address to Joint Session of Congress, Tuesday,
February 24th, 2009)
All of those ideas are now very much a part of the gender agenda promoted through the UN, and the gender agenda is an outcome of women's studies programs that are being controlled by feminist sociologist who proudly wear the badge of being Marxist.
And even a variation of Hitler's program of ethnic cleansing is being promoted through the UN, because the population control measures imposed on many nations on Earth are being imposed through political and financial blackmail and coercion primarily in the underdeveloped countries. The darker the colour of the skin of its citizens, the more actively the UN imposes its population control measures in a given country.
The population control measures imposed by the UN don't stop anymore at attaining Zero Population Growth. No, the newest goal for the reduction of the population of the world is to bring the population down to the levels that existed at the time of Columbus -- 300 to 500 million people. Families are an obstacle to achieving that goal.
See
The Demographics of Death, or The Decline & Fall of the Human Empire
All that opposes the destructive gender agenda of the UN it this reasonable definition of the family, and through the efforts of the gender agenda is now being abolished:
The "family" in all ages and in all corners of the globe can be defined as a man and a woman bonded together through a socially approved covenant of marriage to regulate sexuality, to bear, raise, and protect children, to provide mutual care and protection, to create a small home economy, and to maintain continuity between the generations, those going before and those coming after. It is out of the reciprocal, naturally recreated relations of the family that the broader communities—such as tribes, villages, peoples, and nations—grow.
— Dale O'Leary,
The Gender Agenda, p. 24,
original source: Allan Carlson,
What's Wrong With the United Nations Definition of 'Family'?
in The Family in America (August 1994), p. 3
The following is the recipe for the corruption of our children that appears to be used by the people promoting the gender agenda.
Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex.
Make them superficial, destroy their ruggedness.
Get control of all means of publicity and thereby: Get the peoples' mind off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities.
Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance.
Destroy the peoples faith in their natural leaders by holding up the latter to ridicule, contempt and obloquy.
Always preach true democracy but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible.
Encourage government extravagance, destroy its credit, produce fear with rising prices, inflation and general discontent.
Foment unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders and foster a soft and lenient attitude on the part of government towards such disorders.
By specious argument cause the breakdown of the old moral virtues: honesty, sobriety, continence, faith in the pledged word, ruggedness.
Cause the registration of all firearms on some pretext, with the view of confiscating them and leaving the population defenseless."
— Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (so some say)
Note: A purported history of the origins is given at the URL. Original source document unknown --WHS
The web page (one of a few) at which that text is located — a text that was supposedly obtained in a raid by allied military intelligence officers in Düsseldorf, Germany, in 1919 at the offices of a communist organization — states that it was published in a Florida newspaper, in 1920.
However, it is somewhat doubtful that the purported circumstances of obtaining the leaflet that is said to have been the source of the text are accurately reported.
Düsseldorf is the place of my birth. I grew up there, It was my home town. It was not occupied by Allied Forces in 1919, contrary to what the report at the indicated web page identifies. Düsseldorf is on the eastern bank on the River Rhine, and only the parts of Germany that were on the western bank of the River Rhine were occupied in 1919. Not until 1921 did French armed forces occupy Düsseldorf, as part of their actions that were intended to enforce that reparation payments (in the form of shipments of coal from the Ruhr Valley to France) would be made by Germany.
Whatever the source of the text may be, the items listed in it most certainly and accurately define the dimensions of the gender agenda, don't they?
