CB, that was an interesting article, though it seems a bit excessive.
Because of the NZ political system going female, I have been wondering about the paradigm shifts that happen in democratic processes.
Initially, it was Kings and Courtiers and the property owners versus the emancipated serfs. Which became the wealthy versus the poor. Then the burgeoning state versus private property. Lately I have been wondering whether there is another shift underway, to men versus women.
The Kings have been tamed, the wealthy and landed have been limited, the state has become Big Government. Those aspects are entrenched in many democracies.
In New Zealand, which is a political leader in some ways, though backward in many other ways, women were first to get a vote [the USA very belatedly rated women as worthy and negroes were a long time being rated as equal - about a century after Maoris were rated equal British Subjects in 1840 though there were some grandfather clauses allowing immigration to Britain when Britain retreated from empire]. Now, women really do run the show. Pretty much in entirety. Queen, Governor General, Prime Minister, various ministers, Chief Justice, Telecom boss [biggest NZ company] and many others. We have been mummified! Everything is now forbidden [especially if boys like doing it]. Mother smother is in process.
The process has been underway for several decades in a big way, but with trends starting 100 years ago.
I wonder if the gender divide is the new political division and the reason things are actually quite nice here, overall [horrendous crime notwithstanding], due to the inability of women to raise children without men to counterbalance their, hmm, can't think of a word, feminine nature will have to do.
Unbridled males make a hideous way of life and maybe that's what we see in Islamic extremism. Unbridled females in charge will no doubt be equally hideous in other ways. Perhaps we are seeing the divide and politics will shift from masculine to feminine as it used to shift between lords and working class.
Already polls show women far prefer 'soft' parties such as Labour and Greens. Men prefer the "right wing" parties which are for personal responsibility, not asking directions, and individualism.
Women like village life and civilisation, men go hunter gathering in animal hides and sleep in a ditch. As a wild generalization you understand.
Perhaps Islamic societies are so unbalanced they are like the horrors of the Kingdoms and serfdoms and communism versus the individual. Islamic life isn't just bad for women, life is bad for everyone, just as it was in old democracies before the balances were found.
Where women are respected, present and having a say, things seem a lot better for everyone. But here they have gone nuts. Now they are wondering where the guys have gone [the guys are gun-shy and marriages are way down and reproduction is way down]. Women are learning that power is fun, but being a totalitarian doesn't necessarily make for a good life.
Maybe the battle of the sexes is the new political divide.
After that, I expect to see the state versus the individual's right to self-determination as the new divide. Maybe NUN versus Nationalism will come first. Globalisation versus the village. Especially given the carnage in Iraq and the wringing of hands over the UN's and Cow's position.
Mqurice |
