[A commentator called Price out for supporting patriarchy instead of egalitarianism]
I went through the same process of rejecting it, but sometimes you just have to accept the world as it is. As for the 50s, keep in mind that Americans had it better than anyone else on earth at that time. White Americans may have had it better, but they were 90% of the population. Does the unfortunate situation of 10%, which despite it all had it far, far better than the majority of the world – including ancestral populations in Africa, Latin America and Asia – really cancel out the enormous benefits to most Americans and the great contributions to humanity?
I’d also like to point out that rejecting patriarchy is not a move forward, but rather a move in the opposite direction. Humanity has only ever moved forward under patriarchal systems, and when it gives them up, as it does fairly frequently, there’s inevitably some regression toward savagery. What we call “progress” today is merely dissolution, which is an eternal problem, older than the written word.
30 comments
Does the unfortunate situation of 10%... really cancel out the enormous benefits to most Americans and the great contributions to humanity?
I think so.
Humanity has only ever moved forward under patriarchal systems...
Citation, please?
I sincerely doubt that 90% of America "had it better" in the 1950s. Sure, white Americans prospered - if you had money - but they lived in a culture that stifled them, leading to depression and angst that would eventually spill over and make the 60s, well, the 60s. There's a reason it isn't still the 50s, after all.
I'd like to think that non-patriarchal systems the world has "regressed" under. One doesn't think of the major 20th centuries dictatorships, for instance, as especially matriarchal.
Although I guess if you define "dissolution" as "things aren't as rosy for W.F. Price", it's pretty trivial to find examples.
'Humanity has only ever moved forward under patriarchal systems, and when it gives them up, as it does fairly frequently, there’s inevitably some regression toward savagery.'
image
"As for the 50s, keep in mind that Americans had it better than anyone else on earth at that time."
Of course it was better for the US in the 50s, the rest of the world was still trying to rebuild their infrastructures and economies from the complete devastation of WWII. When half your country has been bombed and a large portion of your work force has been killed in war, it's hard to rebuild.
"keep in mind that Americans had it better than anyone else on earth at that time."
(*Watches/reads reports on BBC News/Reuters.com about CNSA's 'Jade Rabbit' lunar rover *)
...must hurt, eh W.T.F. Price? If not for 'Immigration' - specifically a certain German rocket scientist, post-WWII - your country wouldn't have won the Space Race; also your country most probably wouldn't exist due to the lack of long-range delivery systems for your nuclear devices. Can you say 'V-2'? I know you can.
"What we call “progress” today is merely dissolution, which is an eternal problem, older than the written word."
Valentina Tereshkova. Liu Yang. Your 'Patriarchy' argument is invalid.
As for the 50s, keep in mind that Americans had it better than anyone else on earth at that time.
Well of course. They didn't have their factories and infrastructure destroyed by WW2 like Europe and the Far East. It wasn't some special American mojo - just simple geography.
"Does the unfortunate situation of 10%, which despite it all had it far, far better than the majority of the world including ancestral populations in Africa, Latin America and Asia really cancel out the enormous benefits to most Americans and the great contributions to humanity?"
It's funny when conservatives argue with utilitarianism. And no 90% of the US population in the fifties were not white - only 89.5% in 1950 and 88.6% in 1960 .
"Humanity has only ever moved forward under patriarchal systems, and when it gives them up, as it does fairly frequently, there’s inevitably some regression toward savagery."
So I guess that Germany - as it is ruled by a woman and 6 of now 16 ministries are headed by women - Germany is more savage than, uh, let's say Saudi-Arabia, were woman are not allowed to vote. Is that what you are saying?
"What we call “progress” today is merely dissolution, which is an eternal problem, older than the written word."
So in an ideal world nothing ever stops. Chinese women would still have their feed bent backward (and no that is not figurative), Europe would be ruled by Kings and Queens, the Ancient gods would still be followed and America was still a colony of England. "Fuck you" doesn't even cover it.
However, the patriarchy you're thinking of is the bastard son of beardy wannabe tent commanders. Due to woeful testosterone management, they have led us up a fantasy strewn path of frothing madness and greed.
White Americans may have had it better, but they were 90% of the population. Does the unfortunate situation of 10%, which despite it all had it far, far better than the majority of the world including ancestral populations in Africa, Latin America and Asia really cancel out the enormous benefits to most Americans and the great contributions to humanity?
image
1. White "Americans" (what is America exactly? Last I checked it was a continent. And even if you're talking about your shitty country) are not 90% of the population. It's the other way around, actually.
2. There's an entire population, and I repeat: ENTIRE POPULATION in Oaxaca where matriarchy is the norm. This has been going on for THOUSANDS OF YEARS!
In short:
image
"Does the unfortunate situation of 10%, which despite it all had it far, far better than the majority of the world [...] really cancel out the enormous benefits to most Americans and the great contributions to humanity?"
Ever heard the old saying about democracy? They say it's like two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner. Glad to know you have a hankering for leg of lamb, there, Price.
@ UHM :
Still, that's surprisingly close to 90%. I honestly didn't realize how high a percentage of the U.S. population was white.
Of course, that percentage includes white hispanics.
1950s USA was socially stifling and repressive, but it was also extremely rich. It had these qualities for different reasons; social democratic economic policy led to the "long boom", while Mccarthyism made the '50s worse than the preceding decades for civil rights - and said decades weren't that great either.
One does not need to deny the repressions of 1950s America to support similar economic policies, because social repression isn't what made America wealthy.
"you just have to accept the world as it is". That kind of thinking is called an "ideology".
Nobody would claim that the position of minorities (significantly more than 10%, by the way) in the 50's "cancels out" the positive things about American society at the time, so that's a false position to take. All the problems that erupted in the 60s were there, simmering under the surface.
I think, contrary to this guy's assertion, that one of the best ways to move forward today is to outgrow the intensely patriarchal Abrahamic religions.
Even if your random percentages were right, how in the hell does that justify treating a minority poorly?
And I'm sorry conservatives. The 1950's were not the magical, problem-less, theme-park ride of a time like it's been preserved in movies and diners. It might be comforting for you to keep parroting that meme but it's BS. The social upheaval that occurred in the 60's happened for good reason.
You really don't need a watch.
You need a calendar.
This is the twenty-first century and bigotry is frowned upon. Society has grown beyond such pettiness.
Women are just as good as men, often better. Women are just as smart as men, often smarter.
The only thing that men as a group can do better than women as a group is to pee standing up. This ability is of limited usefulness.
Well, men do a pretty good job of opening the pickle jar with their bare hands in comparison to most women.
However, I do remind all women that a good quality bottle opener will open that jar. It's the seal that makes it hard to open. Break it, and it opens right up.
Since, at best, men are half the population, that upper class is even lower.............who´s the 10% again?. That´s the way it actually WORKED.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.