The sexual revolution from the 1950s and 1970s has changed social norms concerning sex. Now, it is socially seen as the woman’s fault if she gets pregnant due to the sheer availability of the contraceptive pill and its many forms available to women.
In previous generations, before the 1960s, it was the man’s responsibility to get a woman pregnant to get married and provide a hearth and home to his wife and children. However, social norms, either rightly or wrongly, have been destroyed.
Women, particularly young women, are not educated on how the contraceptive pill works, aware of its side effects and how effective it truly is at preventing pregnancy.
If you use it ideally, the pill is 99% effective. But people aren’t perfect, and it’s easy to forget or miss pills, so in reality, the pill is about 93% effective. That means about 7 out of 100 pill users get pregnant each year.
It’s also important to be aware that for the pill to be effective, it’s got to be taken every single day at the same time, and it can take one month to be effective.
Furthermore, if a woman increases size, this can be in terms of muscle or body fat; the dosage may not be effective. The pill makes the female mind believe that she is pregnant, which can cause an increase in breast size and anxiety due to the mind believing it is pregnant.
Also, the body believing it is pregnant decreases the natural female sex drive and can cause symptoms of depression. Also, the pill, in extreme cases, can affect a young woman’s natural development.
This can nudge a woman’s sexual preferences to either being less or more attracted to their male partners; this is a slight nudge, though, at the extreme ends, it can cause women to be asexual and have no sex drive.
In women, testosterone is produced in various locations. One-quarter of the hormone is produced in the ovary, a quarter in the adrenal gland, and one-half in the peripheral tissues from the different precursors produced in the ovaries and adrenal gland.
Unwanted Pregnancies and Single Mothers
The Change of Social Norms
The social impact of the pill is the removal of responsibilities from fathers to take care of the unwanted children from the woman they slept with due to the pill removing social constraints surrounding fatherhood.
Also, the contraceptive pill contributed to the increase of unwanted children because women and men are sleeping with people not with whom they want to start a family but sex just for enjoyment.
There is a significant difference between the man or woman you sleep with and another one that you may marry, and I have found that this is what the sexual revolution did: it removes responsibility and social constraints from sexuality.
Added to this is the sexual mismatch between men and women, with a man having 16 to 20 times more testosterone than the average female, meaning that men, on average, are much more interested in casual sex and short-term relationships.
The average woman, in contrast, has a more interesting commitment to building a lasting relationship.
Also, with the removal of conservative social norms that help to govern and regulate male and female sexuality, we have seen a free-for-all-all where people can pursue their more natural inclinations, which is harmful to children in the long run.
In essence, the words of Thomas Sowell, ‘Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.’
Unwanted pregnancies and single mothers have been on the rise due to the destruction of responsibilities such as personal responsibility, community responsibility and responsibility of fathers, mothers, and the responsibility of the culture to support the institution of the family.
Family is critical because it supports all when we are having hard times, and we all need a strong support network provided through the institution of family.
Friendships can be a substitute, but in the end, once you’re in your 80s and cannot wipe your ass is doubtful friends will be there to support you in your hour of need.
Family provides a secure network for young children and older people in the most vulnerable states in this world. We started shitting and pissing ourselves, and we ended up doing the same.
This is why the author and feminist Louise Perry is an advocate for the support of family structures and that modern society has artificially extended the time we are independent and that we spend most of our lives either depending on other people for health and safety are looking after the elderly will then depend on others for their care.
Society has broken the generational contract of mutual protection and security that the institution of family provides.
The Industrial Revolution brought fantastic opportunities for developing specialisation, best described in the philosopher and economist Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations, first published in 1776.
In Mr Smith’s book, he argued for specialisation that will lead to cheaper goods and services that will enable people to have more items and better living standards, which will also lead to technological improvements.
The hyper-specialisation made possible by the Industrial Revolution did more to liberate women from the household than feminism ever has because it freed women from domestic chores and responsibilities.
It is highly naïve and disrespectful to believe that women in nothing throughout human history provided meals and clothes as well as working in agriculture to keep their homes fed and the household running.
In the past, running a household was a full-time job just as valuable as a man working in a factory because it did not generate wealth; it was perceived as lesser.
The Wealth of Nations
It is economic activity that doesn’t go to the national GDP that is disrespected by contemporary societies, the work of a wife or homemaker.
The technologies of the 19th and 20th centuries have liberated women from the household and provided them with great opportunities for education and advancement in different career paths, starting with the invention of the lightbulb by Thomas Edison in 1879.
The lightbulb has liberated women because it enabled women to read and write during darker hours; when the children are asleep and the husband has been fed, she can now devote time to educational pursuits and not be limited by the rising and the setting of the sun.
James King, in 1851, created the first washing machine to use a drum. Hamilton Smith 1858 patented a rotary version, and in 1868, Thomas Bradford, a British inventor, created a commercially successful machine that resembles the modern device.
This is another technology that liberated women from household chores of washing, which gave them more time to have other pursuits and is a massive reason why women could enter the workforce because more and more domestic chores were now being taken over by new specialised machines made possible due to the Industrial Revolution which further liberated women from the household.
Women were also liberated from having to kill and cook food from scratch with the freezer. It was used to store food, meat, and vegetables.
In 1859, engineers started using ammonia to freeze food. Until then, vapour was used to cool and eventually freeze the food.
Now, women will no longer have to take a chicken and turn it into a chicken nugget. Now, the chicken was already killed, and it could be cooked from frozen again three more times for women to join the workforce or pursue other avenues of meaning.
On a final note, what made it possible for women to function in the workplace to work in factories was the invention of the tampon[jr1] and public toilets, which meant that women could dispose of any blood during their periods and the female-only spaces for their safety and security.
The importance of female-only areas cannot be overlooked due to women facing the possibility of rape, murder as well as protecting their dignity when engaged in functions involving toilets and the disposal of their sanitary products.
(In 1851, the first public flushing toilet block opened in London and spread nationwide due to its popularity. The cost of using these public toilets was 1 penny, hence the famous phrase ‘to spend a penny’.)
(In 1931, Earl Haas, a physician in Colorado, developed a cardboard applicator tampon meant to absorb menstrual blood. He made the tampon inside the applicator from a tightly bound strip of dense cotton attached to a string for easy removal.)
What has been concisely demonstrated was how industrialisation and the specialisation created through industrialisation enabled women’s liberation from domestic chores and made it possible for women to enter the workplace.
For those reasons, industrialisation was a positive because it gave women the choice of whether to work or stay home as homemakers.
Unfortunately, women don’t have the options today due to the cost of living; staying at home with the children is not an option for most wives, women or others unless the husband/wife or Person is earning £52,000 in the United Kingdom or $100,000 in the United States of America due to the sheer cost of living.
Humanity has experienced a massive significant change in how we live our lives since the invention of agriculture 12,000 years ago.
Only a few centuries ago, with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, which started in 1769 in the islands of Great Britain, humanity experienced another significant change.
What industrialisation meant was that humanity now started creating wealth and other goods and services previously; the economy functioned with a rent space system where there were landlords, and they would receive profits from their tenants and farmers.
This is a primitive economy with limited merchant and middle classes, predominantly in cities and operating trading links.
One of the fantastic outcomes of the Industrial Revolution was that it provided new opportunities, and typically, around 80% of people primarily survived by being farmers in the agricultural economy.
Industrialisation freed people’s farming and made it so people could survive and develop new skills without the need to be farm labourers.
As people in the late 18th and 19th centuries moved from the agricultural economy into industrialised manual labour professions in cities, families became much smaller. Traditionally, a family will consist of a pan-generational household with grandparents, parents and their children’s children.
Furthermore, families will be connected through the husbands and wives of the brothers and sisters living together in a communal space with different cousins and other relatives that would share in the burden and support one another in the endeavour of child raising.
Also, women tended to work in traditional industries, such as spinning wheels and turning wool into cloth; with those traditional home jobs being taken over by industrial machines, it made the women working at home redundant in the 19th century.
This incentivised more men and women to move to cities to secure work and live in smaller apartment buildings, which incentivised people to have fewer children, and children moved from being a valuable resource to an expensive luxury.
In manual labour and agricultural economies, more people are a benefit because they are a cheap source of work. As professions become more highly specialised, it takes longer and longer to have a trained workforce.
That is why when nations industrialise, their birth rates start to plummet; this is why India’s birth rate is hovering just around replacement levels of 2.1 and why China’s birth rate is plummeted since industrialisation and urbanisation in China’s coastal regions.
Having a family without the support of other relatives is much harder, and people not surrounded by other young couples are not holding the baby the very first time into their 30s and disincentivising having babies.
The pros and cons of the Industrial Revolution are that it freed people from living according to the seasons and facing the risk of famine. Still, the negative outcome is that it destroyed the family and the disincentivised connections of different generations of families and made the family unit smaller and smaller. Were now people lucky if they have two parents and a golden retriever as a family unit.
Agricultural to Industrial Economy
Specialisation and Race Relations
Industrial economies and the focus on capitalism over the previous aristocratic and land-based economic systems were previously wealth and power dictated to by who controlled most lands, and wealth was created from a rent space system of the tenants living on landlord’s lands.
This is according to the professor and ex-Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis in his new book Tech Feudalism when he argues that societies could overcome racism and sexism across people renowned and judged by their abilities to generate value or be of value to business owners.
In a capitalist-based society and industrial economy, a person’s value is decided by their skill sets, productivity and the ultimate value in a market-driven system with its profit incentives.
It’s tough to have a sexist society or racist society because being successful and wealthy is driven by people’s ability to create value, which means the person’s character is judged by their abilities, not by their sexual orientation or skin colour.
That’s why in any advanced industrial and post-industrial economies, racism and sexism are counter-productive to a company’s bottom line because the mark of success is now how much money you make, how much money you make for your company and status is created that way.
Western civilisation was able to overcome religious divisions and racism, unlike the chaos we have seen in the Middle East since 2010, for that region is going through its version of Europe’s wars of religion, which lasted from 1517 to 1648.
The reasons why it was so different in Europe was partly due to the old pagan traditions and kingships still surviving during the rise of Catholicism or Christianity in the aftermath of the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 A.D.
In practical terms, this meant that power was concentrated among fewer people compared to Europe than in the Middle East and North Africa, which primarily had rulers and religious classes.
Furthermore, Islam was against and still is against interest on debts, and once a relative died, the inheritance would be divided between his sons; this was a climate which was and still is heavily antibusiness.
It’s incredibly ironic, since the Prophet Mohammed was a merchant and businessperson, that he founded a religion called Islam that is heavily antibusiness due to the hostile business environment.
It is hard for businesses and entrepreneurs to raise money to grow and expand their businesses because banks cannot lend money and make fixed interest on any loans, which means the Islamic world is far behind the West regarding its banking and financial system.
This is why Islam has been frozen economically in terms of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for over 1000 years.
The Sexual Revolution coincided with the Technological Revolution in the 1970s; the period known as the Sexual Revolution was from the 1950s until the 1970s, the reason why the Technical Revolution or the Silicone Revolution is so important and interconnected at the same time.
These revolutions transformed how we work and the kind of work that people do in Western and post-industrial societies, and they fundamentally changed sexual relations between men and women.
A massive plus of the sexual revolution is that it freed men and women from the burden of having sex, which historically led to the production of the child, which meant for the first time in human history, people women had more options when it came to making mate selection.
From these revolutions, there have been winners and losers.
According to the Economist and African-American or American Thomas Sowell, any policy has negative and positive outcomes. Policymakers and society get to choose to live with and accept that there are trade-offs.
Still, we get to decide whether or not the trade-offs were ultimately more beneficial for society.
The contraceptive pill it sells was first invented in May 1950 and was made available in the United States when The Food and Drug Administration approved the first oral contraceptive in 1960.
Within two years of its initial distribution, 1.2 million American women were using the birth control pill, or the “pill,” as it is popularly known.
The United Kingdom was a bit later made available in the UK on the NHS in 1961 for married women only — until 1967 — and is now taken by 3.5 million women in Britain between the ages of 16 and 49.
For people reading this article, I intend to outline the losers and winners of the Sexual Revolution, and ultimately, I’m not trying to convince anybody reading this that the Sexual Revolution and the Technological Revolution that went along with the Sexual Revolution were ultimately positive or negative for men and women.
What I will do is give you, the reader, the information and let you make up your mind.
My take on this topic is its nuance and that, finally, there are winners and losers from the outcomes of the sexual revolution.
For people reading this from different generations they being the Silent Generation born between 1928 and 1945 and the Boomer Generation born between 1946 and 1964 that lived through and were born after World War II, they have very different interpretations, and I’ll be interested in hearing your viewpoints.
As for myself, the writer, I was born in 1997 and grew up primarily with the outcomes of the Sexual Revolution, so from my point of view, I’ve never known a world that is different for women who did not have access to the workplace or the contraceptive pill.
I was also born in a Western liberal society and educated in a liberal Western University surrounded by other liberated people’s different cultural backgrounds, genders, and sexual orientations.
This means I was born and raised in the impact of the post-World War Two world order and the Sexual and Silicone Revolution, so it is much easier for me to point out the negative, having not known a world any different than the one of the last 40 years.
Winners and Losers of the Sexual Revolution
Agricultural to Industrial Economy
Humanity has experienced a massive significant change in how we live our lives since the invention of agriculture 12,000 years ago.
Only a few centuries ago, with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, which started in 1769 in the islands of Great Britain, humanity experienced another significant change.
What industrialisation meant was that humanity now started creating wealth and other goods and services previously; the economy functioned with a rent space system where there were landlords, and they would receive profits from their tenants and farmers.
This is a primitive economy with limited merchant and middle classes, predominantly in cities and operating trading links.
One of the fantastic outcomes of the Industrial Revolution was that it provided new opportunities, and typically, around 80% of people primarily survived by being farmers in the agricultural economy.
Industrialisation freed people’s farming and made it so people could survive and develop new skills without the need to be farm labourers.
As people in the late 18th and 19th centuries moved from the agricultural economy into industrialised manual labour professions in cities, families became much smaller. Traditionally, a family will consist of a pan-generational household with grandparents, parents and their children’s children.
Furthermore, families will be connected through the husbands and wives of the brothers and sisters living together in a communal space with different cousins and other relatives that would share in the burden and support one another in the endeavour of child raising.
Also, women tended to work in traditional industries, such as spinning wheels and turning wool into cloth; with those traditional home jobs being taken over by industrial machines, it made the women working at home redundant in the 19th century.
This incentivised more men and women to move to cities to secure work and live in smaller apartment buildings, which incentivised people to have fewer children, and children moved from being a valuable resource to an expensive luxury.
In manual labour and agricultural economies, more people are a benefit because they are a cheap source of work. As professions become more highly specialised, it takes longer and longer to have a trained workforce.
That is why when nations industrialise, their birth rates start to plummet; this is why India’s birth rate is hovering just around replacement levels of 2.1 and why China’s birth rate is plummeted since industrialisation and urbanisation in China’s coastal regions.
Having a family without the support of other relatives is much harder, and people not surrounded by other young couples are not holding the baby the very first time into their 30s and disincentivising having babies.
The pros and cons of the Industrial Revolution are that it freed people from living according to the seasons and facing the risk of famine. Still, the negative outcome is that it destroyed the family and the disincentivised connections of different generations of families and made the family unit smaller and smaller. Were now people lucky if they have two parents and a golden retriever as a family unit.
Addam Smith: Winners and Losers of the Sexual Revolution
The Wealth of Nations
The Industrial Revolution brought fantastic opportunities for developing specialisation, best described in the philosopher and economist Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations, first published in 1776.
In Mr Smith’s book, he argued for specialisation that will lead to cheaper goods and services that will enable people to have more items and better living standards, which will also lead to technological improvements.
The hyper-specialisation made possible by the Industrial Revolution did more to liberate women from the household than feminism ever has because it freed women from domestic chores and responsibilities.
It is highly naïve and disrespectful to believe that women in nothing throughout human history provided meals and clothes as well as working in agriculture to keep their homes fed and the household running.
In the past, running a household was a full-time job just as valuable as a man working in a factory because it did not generate wealth; it was perceived as lesser.
It is economic activity that doesn’t go to the national GDP that is disrespected by contemporary societies, the work of a wife or homemaker.
The technologies of the 19th and 20th centuries have liberated women from the household and provided them with great opportunities for education and advancement in different career paths, starting with the invention of the lightbulb by Thomas Edison in 1879.
The lightbulb has liberated women because it enabled women to read and write during darker hours; when the children are asleep and the husband has been fed, she can now devote time to educational pursuits and not be limited by the rising and the setting of the sun.
James King, in 1851, created the first washing machine to use a drum. Hamilton Smith 1858 patented a rotary version, and in 1868, Thomas Bradford, a British inventor, created a commercially successful machine that resembles the modern device.
This is another technology that liberated women from household chores of washing, which gave them more time to have other pursuits and is a massive reason why women could enter the workforce because more and more domestic chores were now being taken over by new specialised machines made possible due to the Industrial Revolution which further liberated women from the household.
Women were also liberated from having to kill and cook food from scratch with the invention of the freezer was invented by James Harrison in 1857. It was used to store food, meat, and vegetables.
In 1859, engineers started using ammonia to freeze food. Until then, vapour was used to cool and eventually freeze the food.
Now, women will no longer have to take a chicken and turn it into a chicken nugget. Now, the chicken was already killed, and it could be cooked from frozen again three more times for women to join the workforce or pursue other avenues of meaning.
On a final note, what made it possible for women to function in the workplace to work in factories was the invention of the tampon[jr1] and public toilets, which meant that women could dispose of any blood during their periods as well as the female-only spaces for their safety and security.
The importance of female-only areas cannot be overlooked due to women facing the possibility of rape, murder as well as protecting their dignity when engaged in functions involving toilets and the disposal of their sanitary products.
(In 1851, the first public flushing toilet block opened in London and, due to its popularity, spread around the country. The cost of using these public toilets was 1 penny, hence the famous phrase ‘to spend a penny’.)
(In 1931, Earl Haas, a physician in Colorado, developed a cardboard applicator tampon meant to absorb menstrual blood. He made the tampon inside the applicator from a tightly bound strip of dense cotton attached to a string for easy removal.)
What has been concisely demonstrated was how industrialisation and the specialisation created through the process of industrialisation enabled the liberation of women from domestic chores and made it possible for women to enter the workplace.
For those reasons, I would have to say industrialisation was a positive because it gave women the choice of whether to work or to stay at home as a homemaker.
Unfortunately, women don’t have the options today due to the cost of living; staying at home with the children is not an option for most wives, women or others unless the husband/wife or Person is earning £52,000 in the United Kingdom or $100,000 in the United States of America due to the sheer cost of living.
Winners and Losers of the Sexual Revolution
Unwanted Pregnancies and Single Mothers
The sexual revolution from the 1950s and 1970s has changed social norms concerning sex. Now, it is socially seen as the woman’s fault if she gets pregnant due to the sheer availability of the contraceptive pill and its many forms available to women.
In previous generations, before the 1960s, it was the man’s responsibility to get a woman pregnant to get married and provide a hearth and home to his wife and children. However, social norms, either rightly or wrongly, have been destroyed.
Women, particularly young women, are not educated on how the contraceptive pill actually works, aware of its side effects and how effective it truly is at preventing pregnancy.
If you use it ideally, the pill is 99% effective. But people aren’t perfect, and it’s easy to forget or miss pills, so in reality, the pill is about 93% effective. That means about 7 out of 100 pill users get pregnant each year.
It’s also important to be aware that for the pill to be effective, it’s got to be taken every single day at the same time, and it can take one month to be effective.
Furthermore, if a woman increases size, this can be in terms of muscle or body fat; the dosage may not be effective. The pill makes the female mind believe that she is pregnant, which can cause an increase in breast size and anxiety due to the mind believing it is pregnant.
Also, the body believing it is pregnant decreases the natural female sex drive and can cause symptoms of depression. Also, the pill, in extreme cases, can affect a young woman’s natural development.
The social impact of the pill is the removal of responsibilities from fathers to take care of the unwanted children from the woman they slept with due to the pill removing social constraints surrounding fatherhood.
Also, the contraceptive pill contributed to the increase of unwanted children because women and men are sleeping with people not with whom they want to start a family but sex just for enjoyment.
There is a significant difference between the man or woman you sleep with and another one that you may marry, and I have found that this is what the sexual revolution did: it removes responsibility and social constraints from sexuality.
Added to this is the sexual mismatch between men and women, with a man having 16 to 20 times more testosterone than the average female, meaning that men, on average, are much more interested in casual sex and short-term relationships.
The average woman, in contrast, has a more interesting commitment to building a lasting relationship.
Winners and Losers of the Sexual Revolution
Globalisation and the Silicon Age
International trade and globalisation, as we understand it today, was born out of the aftermath of World War II, 1939 to 1945.
What created globalisation and the specialisation which enabled the technological marvels such as the iPhone invented in 2007 and man landing on the moon in 1969 was possible thanks to American security.
The USA protects the world’s global shipping lanes, ensuring that all nations have the capabilities to buy and sell goods across the globe.
This became the ultimate example of Adam Smith’s utopian version of specialisation, which you wrote about in his book The Wealth of Nations, published in 1776.
What this meant was that if a nation didn’t have access to coal and steel, it would not be able to industrialise; what globalisation did was turn the world into a giant marketplace where individual nations could specialise in certain goods and services.
For Germany and China, it was manufactured goods, and for the United Kingdom, for example, it specialised in financial services due to Britain being the nation that created global finance.
Britain was the world’s most potent superpower and the crated precursor to what we call globalisation during the Pax Britannicus from 1815 to 1914.
The reason why all this is related to the Sexual Revolution is that jobs became so specialised and moved away from manual labour, enabling women to be economically productive by working office jobs and laptop jobs that require brainpower over brawn power.
This was good for women as it freed them from domestic work, and it meant that women no longer had to rely on a man to be a provider for them.
Now, for the first time, women can earn their own money and make independent life choices.
The feminist and author Betty Friedan, who wrote and published the book The Feminine Mystique 50 years ago in 1963, would not have been able to pursue a writing career without the support and cooperation of her husband.
Most women during her time, having been educated in the late 1930s and early 1940s, would have been able to become writers and pursue independent career paths without the support of their spouses.
Women in today’s society have the encouragement and the necessary social norms to put off work and motherhood to pursue careers; however, this only truly applies to a particular class of woman who is part of the laptop classes and higher earners.
I cannot say to most women that having a job as a cleaner working in customer service will not be my idea of an ideal career path, but that’s up to you to decide.
Feminists were fighting not for women to be cleaners or to work in customer service. They were fighting for the right for women to go into higher education and have high-paying jobs.
This is the massive divide in feminism between working-class feminists and the upper middle- and higher-class feminists, but having different priorities and fighting for different outcomes for a working-class woman having the support of a loving husband and family makes much more sense here.
In contrast, a young woman working in the city doing a financial job will need independence from her family and the responsibilities that it entails to pursue her career ambitions.
There is a massive divide between what is a career and what is a job. In a career, fulfilment can be found in a job; you are just a servant to fulfil another person’s dreams and ambitions.
This is a big case of luxury elites; this is where an elite group of people put forward economic policies and social policies that suit their upper-class interests and negatively affect people in the working classes.
If you are a man or a woman living in an inner city, I invite you to go to a dating app as a man using the dating app.
You will find a massive growth of working-class women from 18 to 25 who are single mothers, but if you narrow the field down to women at university, then you will find most of them don’t have children but are from a different socioeconomic group.
In this little bit of information, you can see who is winning and who is suffering due to the impact of the sexual revolution and literal beliefs that can harm some people.
Winners and Losers of the Sexual Revolution
Men Left Behind
The Sexual Revolution and the Silicon Revolution have left men behind due to the old manufacturing jobs in middle America and old coal mining communities in the United Kingdom moving to foreign nations thanks to the hyper-specialisation and being cheaper to get the goods abroad.
This is a massive success story that people don’t talk about because it took over half a billion people in China out of extreme poverty, and the levels of absolute poverty have declined globally since the end of the Second World War.
However, this came at a price for the manufacturing and blue-collar jobs that men typically dominated.
Still, with those jobs having gone abroad, it left those kinds of men without work or purpose, which meant they were left behind by society.
It is not the duty of women to raise men merely that society has left these men behind and has not made a place for people who are not suited for office jobs that require a lot of mental work.
I remember speaking to a man working at Morrisons, who told me how he spent £1000 on new computer software for his PC. I was taken aback by how much passion and drive, as well as his finances, goes into gaming.
This event still makes me think that young men don’t have the motivation to succeed or to build a prosperous future, not just for themselves but for those around them, because they have given up due to society telling them they are not good enough.
For women, it may be frightening how much male motivation is driven by the desire for sexual intercourse and the desire to have female affection.
With the growing use of pornography, the male drive is not being used appropriately and healthily because men are not having sex and are instead using pornography to fill natural needs rather than becoming worthy of female attention. It’s not good for society as a whole.
There are growing numbers of young men becoming addicted to pornography or suffering the effects of erectile dysfunction.
This is because the male sex drive is triggered through the use of images.
If a man sees too many sexual images when he finally interacts with a woman, he will not be able to maintain an erection.
There are two reasons for this.
One is the sheer volume of pornographic images and staged sexual scenes that can’t live up to the real thing, and it makes the man become desensitised to a woman’s natural floors and beauty in real life.
The second reason is that to have self-pleasure for a man, he doesn’t need to have a full erection, and his body becomes used to ejaculating without being hard.
Also, this is very bad for women because when she has sex with a man, he will expect her to act like a porn star due to growing up and seeing images on pornography websites that do not reflect reality.
What needs to be made clear is that those kinds of websites and pornography are studio productions.
What people are seeing is not actual sex but camera angles; people in those productions move the way they do so they can get the best camera angles.
It’s not a good idea to spit or choke a woman; that’s the kind of image a man sees and learns online. Also, for women, because it’s pornography doesn’t make it right, nor is it normal for what you are both seeing is a fantasy and a production it’s not real.
Winners and Losers of the Sexual Revolution
Modern Dating
The Sexual Revolution has destroyed dating. There is no such thing as courtship, which has led to the death of romance due to people learning everything about one another online through dating and social media for you even meet the other person.
So, by the time you get to the dating stage, there is not really anything to communicate about having texted each other over weeks.
Also, sex is no longer sacred due to people’s having multiple sexual partners. A 2017 survey of 2,180 people from the U.S. and Europe from U.K. health service Superdrug Online Doctor found women had a lifetime average of 7 sexual partners. Men had an average of 8 sexual partners.
Sex is no longer sacred, and people are living together before getting married. This reduces the importance of the institution of marriage.
What we are saying to our boyfriend and girlfriend is that before we get together, I’m going to try you out and see if you out I want. This can lead to resentment because what you are communicating is that I’m not ready to commit to our relationship, and I’m keeping my options open.
Modern dating is also harmful because it turns people into a commodity. Dating apps like going on Amazon shopping basket and saying tonight I will have Kelly or I will have Kevin dehumanise men and women on those dating apps and turn them into products.
It’s got to be stated that it provides the illusion of choice and that we have infinite selections when it comes to sexual and relationship partners; this can lead to some women feeling like they are a piece of meat, feeling pressured to have sex with strangers until they find a man willing to stick around.
With the destruction of courtship and no longer being any established dating norms, there are no guidelines for men and women when they are dating, when they should have sex or how they should behave.
The Sexual Revolution has liberated people from commitments and old social norms, but no guidance on how we should behave and how we should act in the dating world is forthcoming and has become free for all, which has left both men and women feeling devastated and like they are just a piece of meat.
The only advice I could give on this matter is that on first dates, you be honest with yourselves about what you are looking for, have realistic expectations and be honest in saying that you’re looking for a long-term relationship and not for just sex.
If that person says they’re not interested in anything long-term, then see that as a positive, not a negative, outcome because that way, you won’t feel heartbroken.
Instead, you will feel emotionally ready to see a different person because you have neither gained nor lost anything from the encounter.
(Thank you for reading to the end of this article.
For people just scrolling down, I intend to break this article into smaller chunks for people who prefer reading articles in much smaller bite sizes of 500 to 1000. Also, the Silicon and Sexual Revolutions are highly complicated, and I could not fit everything into one article.)
The former comedian now turned author, podcast, and political commentator Konstantin Kisin stated that the reason that people don’t care about the welfare of men is because historically if there is a tribe of 10 women and ten men and women are killed off, the tribe goes extinct even if one survives.
In contrast, if nine of the men are killed, and there are ten surviving women, the tribe can repopulate its numbers; this is purely an analogy to demonstrate that historically, women are far more valuable than men.
Also, Kisin for the argument of generational trauma most recently during World War I in 1914 to 1919, then World War II from 1939 to 1945 were predominantly men suffered from a post-traumatic stress disorder and didn’t live in a culture that allowed men to discuss their emotions.
He also puts for the argument that Europe, in particular from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 467 A.D. until the ending of World War II, went to war after war with men repeatedly suffering generational trauma.
Furthermore, he stated that women growing up with their fathers and grandfathers being stoic does not bring forward any emotional complexity. With this being generational, women are not used to dealing with men’s feelings, which is not something they know how to process.
Additionally, men don’t know how to communicate their problems, and women don’t know how to respond to a man who communicates suffering due to the historical norm of the stoic man.
Why The World Doesn’t Care About Men
Suicidal Middle-aged Men
According to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Office of National Statistics, the most significant group that is vulnerable to suicide is men aged between their 40s and 50s.
Also, In 2016, the last year global data was available from the World Health Organization (WHO), there were an estimated 793,000 suicide deaths worldwide. Most were men.
One of the critical drives behind male suicide is the lack of purpose men have in the modern world. Women have adapted to these new challenges far more effectively than men. Men have not adapted to the changing sexual marketplace and the more educational-orientated workforce.
College enrolment for men in the United States between 2017 and 2022 experienced a decline of 20%, with a nearly 6% fall concerning women attending universities in the past four years, according to the National Student Clearinghouse Research Centre.
Among all student demographics in this sector, white men experienced the sharpest decline in enrolment, falling nearly 20%. Moreover, fall enrolment rates for women at for-profit institutions have increased in the same period while male enrolment has declined.
This growing gender graph in educational attainment marks a significant improvement in women’s education, with the modern woman being more highly educated and prepared to face the modern world and today’s contemporary man.
This is a fantastic view turn compared to the state of women’s liberation in the 1960s; however, this leaves them behind, making them purposeless and rudderless to face the challenges of this century.
The reason for this phenomenon is that the educational system is far more built towards the average female temperament of submissiveness and cooperation.
Men tend to be far more aggressive, commit more violent crimes and act disorderly in their teens and early 20s; this is why Fewer than 4% of the total prison population are held in women’s prisons. However, there are distinct differences between the needs of women in custody and men.
Firstly, as stated, there are fewer of them. Secondly, women tend to receive shorter prison sentences than men and often for less serious crimes.
Why The World Doesn’t Care About Men
Men Without Purpose
For men living in the Western world, particularly highly industrialised and post-industrial Western economies, they are becoming purposeless and rudderless, being told repeatedly that women don’t need them.
You are becoming obsolete due to insemination technology, and the state is also taking on the job traditionally taken on by fathers of being the caretaker and financial provider, with more and more young men and women living in fatherless homes.
Roughly 24 million, or one-third of all American children under age 18, live with an unmarried parent, according to a 2018 Pew Research Centre analysis of US Census Bureau data. And 81% of those single-parent homes are headed by a mom.
This has been a growing trend since the late 1960s.
For numerous reasons, women are choosing not to get married and stay with their man and have chosen the state, either in America or the United Kingdom, which seems to be a far more attractive option for women with children rather than staying with the man who is the biological father.
The reasons for this are numerous, but with this trend happening during the sexual revolution from the mid-1950s until the 1970s, it strongly correlated with the use of the contraceptive pill interfering with traditional relationship dynamics.
Why The World Doesn’t Care About Men
The Heart of the Issue
Due to men being told they are useless and that there is no place for them in this world, and with society and culture being far more designed for a female paradigm, men are lost and don’t feel cared about because the world is being designed for women more than men.
Furthermore, with the lack of older male role models, young men and young women don’t have a person to model their behaviour; they spend all their time with other children, but this was not the historical norm in previous centuries.
Children were typically raised in family-orientated and pan-generational relatives, which meant that the children would learn how to be men and how to be women by being around people older than them, including older siblings.
Instead, childcare has become infantilised, and children and teenagers don’t learn how to be men and women by being around other children.
All they have learned is how to stay children and why Generation Z, born between 1997 and 2010, spends longer and longer at home due to never learning how to be an adult from other adults, though economic factors do play a part as well.
As for men committing suicide in their 40s and 50s marriage, the most common duration of marriage for opposite-sex couples getting divorced in 2021 was eight years, with 6,229 divorces.
For same-sex divorces in 2021, the median duration of marriage was 5.9 years for male same-sex couples and 5.1 years for female same-sex couples.
What this tells us is that when men get divorced in their 40s or 50s, they often have to reinvent themselves again into a new career or start a new relationship from the beginning, and for many men, being back to where they started in their 20s is not something they want to do.
Therefore, they have two options: either commit suicide or start from scratch.
Russia has been invading Ukraine since 2014, with the Russian government claiming that soldiers invading Ukraine are little green men or are Russian citizens taking a vacation to go to Ukraine.
The United States government has known since October 2021 that the Russians were planning an invasion.
The Biden administration informed the Ukrainian government for months before the actual invasion, which took place in February 2022, that the Russians would be invading.
To prepare Ukrainians for the Russian invasion, the US government sent assets that Ukrainians could use to fight the Russian Federation; these assets were mainly portable sets and other smaller equipment like the Stinger Fiererockets and other anti-tank weaponry.
This was due to a common consensus that with the Russian Federation having the second-largest land army on the planet, the Ukrainians would fall within the year.
Instead, during the Ukraine War, Ukrainians have performed above anyone’s expectations.
General Mark Milley, the United States Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, carries around a set of notecards that have the overall strategic goals of the USA during the Ukraine conflict, which are as follows;
Don’t allow Ukraine’s defence efforts to become a direct war between the USA and NATO military forces against the Russian Federation.
Maintain the unity of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation members in the face of Russian aggression.
Support the Ukrainian military and its economy with everything the NATO alliance and the USA can provide the Ukrainian government and its armed forces to defend the territorial integrity of the nation of Ukraine. It’s essential to add that without the economic and military equipment of NATO and its affiliate members, and the Ukrainians would be unable to continue the war.
Contain the war inside the territorial borders and geographical areas of Ukraine though this can be debated on whether or not Eastern Ukraine and Crimea are Russian territories.
The United States and its allies cannot guarantee that the Ukraine war will mainly occur within Ukraine. The second reason is that the Russians are performing so badly, and now the Ukrainian government is already using paramilitary organisations to attack Russia.
It’s been repeated in Russian propaganda that Ukraine has always been and always will be part of Russia; this is categorically false information, but like all information that is misinformation, it does contain a grain of truth.
The Russians as a culture group are Slavic, the same way that Western nations like Germany, Great Britain and France have Germanic roots and Latin roots in their cultures, including their legal system and use of words having Latin and German roots.
The Russians as a people did begin in Kyiv but were removed from the area due to the invasion of Genghis Khan and his Mongol hordes in the 13th century.
And throughout the centuries, Ukraine has been a battleground of Germanic kights, the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Ottoman/Turkish Sultans and a host of other neighbouring powers trying to conquer the region.
Ukrainians have only been independent since 1991, and in the proceeding 30 years, particularly during the Ukraine-Russian war in 2014 to the present day, a new distinct ethnic group and identity is emerging.
Ukraine war can be likened to the American War of Independence from 1775 until 1883 because, like during that long conflict, a separate and new American identity was made that was partially distinctive from the home islands of Great Britain.
Over time, each nation and culture group is fractured and reunited through a series of migrations, natural disasters and wars. The unity created by Holy Rome Emperor Charlemagne in the ninth century no longer exists today.
There is no longer a unity between Italians, Germans and the French.
As the culture divided and civilisation collapsed, newly independent nations and identities were created; this has happened before and will happen again.
The most recent in human history was the collapse of the old imperial empires of the previous 20th century. It led to new nations gaining independence and winning their freedom after centuries of oppression.
Despite the 1991 agreement that the Ukrainians would keep their independence if they handed over their nuclear arsenal to the Russian Federation, Ukraine, in perpetuity, would maintain its national independence.
Instead, Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, has put forward a fictional argument that the Western world wishes to devour and destroy Russia.
Vladimir Putin sees the world through a very old lens of the Cold War and previous centuries, making him out of touch with reality.
The biggest crisis Russia faces is not from the West but from the collapse of its demographics, which is the same problem most of the Western world and other nations like China and Japan, especially South Korea, which have no future due to not enough people being born.
According to the Atlantic Council, a non-profit organisation that unites northern American and European analysts stated in a report published in November 2022 that the Ukrainians have the legal right to hit back against Russian installations that firing rockets into Ukraine.
But the Ukrainians are not permitted to do so due to the fears of the Western backers that are worried the Ukrainians will start attacking the Russian Federation territory or Ukraine and launch offences into Russia proper.
Russians may launch nuclear weapons or trigger a global war against the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, starting World War three.
The reason why NATO and the United States are reluctant to provide the Ukrainian government with missiles and aircraft is highlighted by US General Mark Milley, whose goal is to prevent an escalation of the conflict to avoid using tactical nuclear weapons.
In a worst-case scenario, the Russians used tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine, which may avoid world war three, but this kind of attack on Ukraine may not necessarily mean war with the West.
As for the Ukrainian’s reasons for not attacking Russia with its military, one is because they are still fighting Russians within Ukraine, and the second reason is that its supply lines come from the NATO alliance.
Without the equipment, Ukraine could not keep fighting the Ukraine war.
Ukraine cannot attack Russian territory, and it guarantees the Russian position of being the aggressor and never the victim.
The war will primarily occur within the Ukrainian nation, and all damages and loss of civilian life will be Ukrainians.
The Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated as early as May 14, 2023, that the Ukrainian counteroffensive would not involve any attacks on Russian soil.
During the Discard leak of January 2023, it was revealed that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is very interested in attacking Russian targets within Russia that are being held back due to their allies in NATO and the USA having no skin in the game.
A reminder that you don't get to invade someone's country and then dictate the terms under which they can resist your invasion. Ukraine has every moral and legal right under international law to take the fight to Russia on the territory of the Russian Federation. #belgorod
— Free Russian Legion (@freerussianleg) May 22, 2023
Lightly armed Russian revolutionaries now control close to double the area of Bakhmut in Russia's Belgorod region after 2 more successful incursions from Ukraine today. pic.twitter.com/CS2zpiquXd
The only driving political force in a totalitarian country of tightened screws is always an armed guerrilla movement. #Ukraine is watching the events in the #Belgorod region of #Russia with interest and studying the situation, but it has nothing to do with it. As you know, tanks…
America is going through a drastic change in its demographics, which means that ethnic groups and cultural groups that make up the population of the United States are not based on racial lines but purely cultural.
When it comes to race relations, which is purely a human-made concept, it has no jurisdiction in reality; when I discuss different cultures, I’m not talking about a person’s skin colour, merely the cultural and political traditions which they come from.
This can even be purely where their interests lie; for example, the Latin American group of the American population may very well dominate American political and cultural life by the end of the century.
What this means in practical terms depends on how well they assimilated with the United States.
With the USA’s record, it has a fantastic track record of turning people from different nations into Americans no matter where they come from.
The demographics of America, in regards to the white majority, particularly from Western Europe, will become a minority by 2045.
Therefore, the new dominant or rising dominant Latino minorities will have very little interest in supporting the state of Israel as well as the rest of America because the United States no longer need to rely on oil from the Middle East, which increases the United States driven by his domestic politics no longer being interested geopolitically and socially in the region.
The Jewish population within the United States is around 2.4%, around 7.6 million people. This is a minority that continues to get smaller and grow increasingly marginalised as new ethnic groups begin to dominate America’s political culture.
In democracies, policymakers are elected to office by their constituents. Basically, it is the voters who decide the makeup of a democratic nation’s foreign policy and its decision-making.
Greatest Generation: Declining Support for Israel from the United States
America’s Generational Divide
The reason why different generations have different political viewpoints is due to the periods they grew up in and the information and different technologies they were exposed to.
Most people form their political and ideological viewpoints and have seen the world within their first decade of working.
The Silent Generation, also known as Radio Babies or Traditionalists, includes people who were born between 1928 and 1945 and lived through World War II and the Great Depression, according to FamilySearch.
These challenging experiences shaped many of the generation’s attitudes toward the workplace.
Now, we have the generation that built our world political order and kept the peace for over 78 years.
The Greatest Generation, also called the World War II Generation and G.I. Generation, was a generation of Americans born between approximately 1901 and 1924 who came of age during the Great Depression and the 1940s, many of whom fought in World War II.
It is the silent generation and the greatest generation that is responsible for creating internationalism and promoting international organisations such as the European Union and the United Nations to maintain peace in Europe and the rest of the world.
These two generations will mostly be dead by 2040, and the new generations that take their place are not interested in globalisation and securing world piece for future generations.
The United Kingdom’s former Prime Minister John Major, who was in office from 1990 to 1997, marked the passing and retirement of the greatest generation during the 1992 general election.
In a podcast, when he took part in an interview with former Conservative Minister Rory Stewart and ex-Labour fix-it man Alistair Campbell, he said that their passing and retirement marked the turning point of the Conservative Party’s attitude to international and intergovernmental institutions.
Put simply, the older generations favoured internationalism because they lived and groaned up in the aftermath and during World War II and the newer generations born after 1945, I’ve only ever known piece, particularly in western developed nations.
Polls conducted in the United States now show less than half (48%) of Gen Z and millennials believe the U.S. should publicly voice support of Israel compared with 63% of Gen Xers, 83% of baby boomers and 86% of members of the Silent Generation.
Furthermore, the United States has voted into office increasingly isolationist presidential candidates since the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, throwing out of office the one-term Republican president George H Butch Watson (1989 to 1992), who had the experience and credentials to chart America into a new future in the post-Cold War world.
Instead, the United States had the man with the experience to make America’s new international foreign policies voted out of office.
What happened instead? America, for over 30 years, has been living off the glory days of post-World War II and post-Cold War political environments without making anything new.
The American public is not interested in foreign policy or geopolitics and instead reverting to America’s historical norm of isolationism and not getting involved in foreign conflicts; people forget that up until the early 20th century, this was the American normal foreign policy.
Western nations are predominantly nations that are part of the European Union, North America, and other nations linked to liberal democracies and Western European cultures, particularly what constitutes Europe politically and culturally is much larger than Europe itself.
West has been moving in perpetual crisis since the 2008 financial crash due to political leadership and even the general public not being willing to use power in the geopolitical sense due to four main reasons:
· The legacy of colonialism
· Unfounded belief that the West is evil in the United States is an evil empire and finally
· Society and political leaders not accepting the true nature of international politics and geopolitics
· Europe has been in a state of war since the fall of the Western Rome Empire in 476AD
According to Konstantin Kisin, a British and Russian author, writer, and podcaster, it is the application and use of power to serve your citizens.
The United States, the world’s greatest superpower, consumes five times as many resources as any other nation and people on this planet.
This success is caused by the protection and economic security created by the United States post-World War II world order, which has led to prosperity throughout the West until today.
French Empire in Africa: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
The Legacy of Colonialism
European nations from the late 15th century until the collapse of the old colonial powers, Spain and Portugal, in the early 19th century and the withdrawal of French and British from their old colonial territories in the mid-20th century.
The British Empire officially disbanded with the handover of Hong Kong to the People’s Republic of China in 1997, marking the end of Britain as an empire.
With the European nation’s colonial legacy, there is a robust, ingrained reluctance to interfere in African countries outright to interfere in other nations’ politics, the very least directly.
However, it must be stated the political situation is more complicated. For instance, the French have held a quasi-empire in northern Africa due to influencing government with them using the currency African franc, the French language as a common language and the recent coup d’états in Niger in 2023, marking the end of French influence in that region.
The French, British, German and others are reluctant to handle the European migrant crisis, which has been an ongoing crisis since 2013 due to the Arab Spring from 2010 to 2019, and this year, a net inflow of migrants is at least 1,200,000 people.
There is a misplaced view within European leadership, particularly in Germany, which is responsible for two world wars and the deaths of nearly a hundred million people, including 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, that they need to atone for their sins, and this is why Germany opened its borders to migrants.
Under the leadership of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in 2015, the nation had 1 million migrants, and as of 2022, that figure is now 2.7 million, though this data may not be accurate.
America War of Independence: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
The Evil Empire
There is a view pushed by the enemies of democracy, freedom, and the American world system created after the Second World War that the United States is a force for evil in this world.
Furthermore, this viewpoint is being driven by the world becoming geopolitically multipolar.
What this means in politics and international relations terms is that the world is now becoming home to more than one superpower. In practical terms, it is more likely to be regional powers, with each region having one or more great powers dominating the politics within their areas.
This is driven by two factors: the industrialisation and prosperity that the United States created, which enabled nations who did not have access to resources to have the security of global oceans, which enabled free trade and for countries to begin industrialisation and specialisation.
Two great examples of specialisation are the Republic of Taiwan, which creates 90% of global semiconductor chips and the British, which is still the global leader in financial services.
What globalisation did was turn the world into one giant marketplace for goods and services, as well as affordable, which is why poor villages in Africa or People living in the Gaza Strip living in poverty have access to smartphones.
Nations don’t just fight wars with guns and rockets; they fight with war using culture, pushing forward their narrative, rightly or wrongly, that they should influence their regions, such as the Russians, Chinese, Iranians and India, to a lesser extent wanting to be out of the influence of the American system.
What these nations want is to be free of American influence, be free of Western influence and pursue geopolitical policies which they believe rightly or wrongly will be better off without being influenced by the United States of America.
Four people reading this who are curious about what an international world would look like if the United States dismantled its navy and permanently withdrew from geopolitics would see a world reminiscent of the 19th century.
For Europe, due to its declining geographical region, the dominant powers would be the French and English.
In the Far East, it would be China, India and Japan, though to a lesser extent for that nation due to its demographic decline and having more adults in diapers than newborn babies.
As for Africa, my money would be on Nigeria and South Africa. As for North America, that would still be the United States, a continental nation like India and China, and they will most likely have a powerful position in the world.
The Middle East would have to be Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel to a lesser extent because Turkey and Israel are most likely to make arrangements to carve up their interests in the region. However, Turkey and Greece may go to war over influence in the Aegean Sea.
Justin Trudeau: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
Western Liberalism
In 2017, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared Canada the first postnational state; this means he does not see a landmass that any people living there have a claim to that land or that national identity is a genuine belief.
What we consider nationhood was created in the aftermath of the French Revolution of 1789 because the People in France who identified as French were mainly the intelligentsia and people living in cities, so around just 20% of the population.
Therefore, to create unity in the new French Republic and later under the first French Empire was to create a nation-state with one particular ethnic group or people’s belief in similar ideologies, speaking the same languages and believing their nation and its history special.
Nation-states were created and became the predominant method of ruling a land mass area dominated by one or similar ethnic groups due to this being the most straightforward method to govern nations.
With empires typically made of multiple ethnic groups, one ethnic group ruling a nation-state is far easier to manage.
The reason this attitude of not identifying with a nation’s history is making the West have a perpetual crisis is that if you do not believe in your nation, believe in its own right to exist, or believe in its identity, then no political leader or even its people will fight to protect it.
Using the analogy used by the historians David Starkey and Edward Gibbon, the Roman Empire did not fall to armies or farming, but due to its people no longer caring if it existed or if it was destroyed, it did not fall in a cataclysm instead died in a whimper because the Roman people no longer cared.
Suppose the Western people no longer care about their cultural legacy and are unwilling to share their national story with its history and culture. In that case, that too will fall into perpetual crisis, just like what happened to the Roman Empire.
Rome Empire Map: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
The End of the Roman Empire
Watson Roman Empire finally collapsed in 476 A.D. From then until 1945, Europe was in a state of perpetual wars either internally or externally with its neighbours with kingdoms fighting for dominance, which lasted 1469 years or just short of 1 ½ millennium.
These wars and people reading this who are of European descent either by culture or by genetics, our grandfathers or even parents lived through two world wars in the 20th century, and they are the descendants of multiple wars stretching back to the fall of the Roman Empire.
This legacy of violence and destruction has traumatised Western European and Western psyches both emotionally and politically, with nations that are part of the West no longer interested in engaging in international politics and geopolitics the way they used before 1945.
The reason why this is leading the West into perpetual crisis is that, collectively, in our national memories, we have had enough of war and violence and are no longer willing to make decisions for our security that have instead outsourced to the United States of America that doesn’t have over millennia worth of trauma to deal with.
However, it must be highlighted that the United States has had enough of foreign wars and conflicts with American presidents since 1992, with the election of Bill Clinton having become increasingly isolationist and reactive, not proactive to a perpetual crisis.
Russian Federation and Russia historically have been a kingdom, Empire and nation that is easy to invade but very hard to defend against the Mongols; the first French Empire and Nazi Germany found this out for themselves and a host of other nations that invaded or have had wars against Russia.
Russia has flatlands perfect for Mongol hordes and organised armies and tank divisions.
Russia has shown that it can defend itself if it controls the invasion points into Russia by controlling the Carpathian Mountains last time the Russians had this control and security was during the Cold War from 1945 into the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
Russians could only have security by having control of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, and Yugoslavia, including parts of Finland which Russia won during the Finnish-Soviet War of 1939 to 1940, more commonly known as the Winter War.
This war also guaranteed that Finland would not join the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the alliance network created by the United States of America to fight Russia.
These geographical areas are essential to Russia because other power must do more than send tanks through these buffer zones. The territory is outside of natural defences, flatlands, and enough native infrastructure and space to ensure the war happens outside Russia’s borders.
Russia’s defence planning mainly involves plugging the invasion gaps with soldiers and fighting along defensive lines. Russians fight their wars by rail, not by roads, due to massive infrastructure projects not being practical due to the natural Russian geography.
It is hard for Westerners and people growing up in a liberal, multicultural and democratic society and worldview to understand the motivations for Russian leaders wishing to conquer and hold vast sway of territory.
It’s not only alien but an antithesis to Western values since 1945.
What needs to be understood is that the Russian leadership and peoples come from entirely different historical and cultural backgrounds. Russians are not just Europeans; they are so Asians.
The Russians are Europeans who meet the Mongol hordes and see what has been created in contemporary Russia due to Western and Eastern cultural influences.
Russia is not a liberal society; it does not favour a liberal worldview that has been hard-won and thought for in the West, where the individual is just as important as the collective.
This is why the Russians can afford to take losses of 5 to 1 or 10 to 1, and Western liberal nations can not afford those kinds of losses because the West favours individuality over collectivism is one of the significant differences between Western civilisations and other civilisations.
There is also the Russian view of international politics when it is the survival of the fittest, where nations rise and fall in their abilities to protect their soil and compete to be the global or regional hegemony.
History before 1945 was when nations thought nations were in an independent self-help system described by international relations scholars like John Mearsheimer, author of, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, and the system where nations fight for survival.
Mearsheimer uses the example of Otto von Bismarck and their policy of destroying the Poles to prevent the recreation of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, which would threaten Germany and the Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires, respectively.
The reason why this was such a threat to Germany was that in the 19th century, Germany was surrounded by enemies to the West in the forms of the Second French Empire, the East by the Russian Empire, to the south by the Austrian Hungarian Empire and to the north the decaying Scandinavian powers of Denmark and Sweden.
As for the North Sea, this was the territory of the British Empire, the largest empire the world had ever seen, dominating international trade in the 19th century.
So like Russia and its actions in the Ukraine war and Germany in the 19th and early 20th century, these nations perceive themselves as being surrounded by enemies and aggressors who would see their destruction if given a chance but keep in mind their point of view.
They are not protected by natural defences like Great Britain and the United States of America; they are islands onto themselves. Geography plays a massive part in political decisions, what Tim Marshall, a journalist and author, ‘prisoners of geography’.
Russia, since the end of the Cold War in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, has been trying to regain invasion gaps into Russia since 1992 with the occupation Transnistria region of Moldova.
In 1991 Moldova declared independence from the Soviet Union; shortly after this event, the ethnically identifying region Transnistria situated on the east bank of the Dniester River, unilaterally declared independence with the backing of Russia.
The declaration triggered armed conflicts in the region, ending in a ceasefire on July 22 1992. Transnistria is a largely Russian-speaking population and has remained unofficially part of the Russian Federation since 1992, with Russian soldiers stationed in Transnistria.
Transnistria is home to Russia’s largest arms arsenal from the Second World War.
For people reading this who are fans of history, the collapse of the Soviet Union is very much reminiscent of the partition of the German Empire at the end of World War I in 1918, the Empire was broken up, and independent states like Poland were created.
Unfortunately, the divisions and new states created after World War I caused greater divisions and hatred that contributed to Second World War because ethnic Germans not living within the much reduced German Republic/Weimar Republic in 1918 and 1933 gave Nazi Germany a cause bill to expand its territories.
The World after the Cold War did not effectively deal with the remnants of the Soviet Union and Russia after a Cold War spanning from 1945 until 1989; like the Second World War, the origins of the Ukraine War can be found in the aftermath of the Cold War.
The Allied nations defeated the Russians, like Imperial Germany, after 1918.
However, due to the Russian use and availability of nuclear weaponry, that state could ne be defeated, which, like the First World War, led to the Second World War from 1939 to 1945, the Russians were able to rearm and rebuild their economy to be a recurring threat to the West.
‘Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much’-Oscar Wilde, an Irish poet and playwright.
Russians have repeated this process of occupying territory to fill invasion gaps in Russia, the examples above Transnistria region and during the Georgian Civil War 1992 to 1993. On October 20, around 2,000 Russian troops moved to protect Georgian railroads.
On October 22, 1993, the government forces launched an offensive against pro-Gamsakhurdia rebels led by Colonel Loti Kobalia and, with the help of the Russian military, occupied most of Samegrelo province.
Again in 2008, Russians on the pretext of protecting Russians after Georgia deported four suspected Russian spies in 2006.
Russia began a full-scale diplomatic and economic war against Georgia, followed by the persecution of ethnic Georgians living in Russia.
By 2008, most residents of South Ossetia had obtained Russian passports.
Like the Ukraine War, the Russian Federation created puppet republics since the 2008 war and subsequent Russian military occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the Russian government, along with four other UN member states, considers the territories sovereign independent states: the Republic of Abkhazia and the Republic of South Ossetia.
The Russian Federation, People’s Republic of China, South Korea and Japan have some of the world’s worst demographics with Ukraine due to the Ukraine war since 2014 has entered the club of nations with decaying demographics.
This means that nations that do not have replacement generations face the extinction of their cultures and economies because devout people who invest and work in the economy cultures and then nations would fade from human history.
Massive gouges are out of the Russian demographics due to the trauma of the previous century, with World War II killing 22 and 27 million Russians.
The great famine of 1930 to 1933 killed 7 to 8 million Russians and 4 to 5 million Ukrainians.
One of the most significant demographic crunchers in Russian people was the missed decade of the 1990s, were death rates doubled and birth rates halved.
What has been happening recently due to the war in Ukraine is that 1.3 million Russians a 35 and below fled the Russian Federation.
This happened due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and to fear of being drafted into fighting as part of the Russian war machine in the classic throw bodies at the problem until it goes away strategy of Russian warfare.
United States Holocaust Memorial THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC link
TRT World What is the Russian army doing in Transnistria? link
Prisoners of Geography: Read this now to understand the geopolitical context behind Putin’s Russia and the Ukraine crisis: Ten Maps That Tell You Everything You Need To Know About Global Politics by Tim Marshall link
Zeihan on Geopolitics Ask Peter Zeihan: Will Putin “Disappear” and Updates on Russian Demographics? link
China’s crumbling economy originated in the 1980s when China was opening up its economy to the rest of the world by creating special economic zones and implementing the one-child policy, which crippled China’s birthrate with social engineering.
The Chinese did this due to the communist philosophy, which enabled the state to interfere in individual’s lives due to the belief that the collective comes before the individual.
One of the critical battles during the Cold War from 1945 to 1989 was the battle between collectivism and liberal and economic capitalism, which saw the individual succeed but with the collective state-managed controlled economy stagnate and ultimately fail.
The Chinese political leadership chose to charter a third way, not communism with Chinese characteristics but capitalism with Chinese features, due to the underpinning ideology behind the Chinese Communist Party, which has been proven to be the wrong way to manage a nation.
That is why the Chinese Communist Party only maintained its legitimacy for its economic success, not through ideological frameworks of capitalism versus communism, due to China being a market-driven, not a state-driven economy, since the 1980s.
Xi Jinping: Economic Trends and China’s Crumbling Economy
CCP’s Decision-making
At the end of the Second World War, the global population was 2.3 billion; by 1980, it was over 4.4 billion people. This marked a doubling of the worldwide population, with the baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964.
This led to growing fears in the economic and academic community that humanity would experience global famines and mass starvation, which was prevented due to the creation of genetically engineered crops and improved technologies.
The Chinese Communist Party had the information in the 1960s and 1970s that they were heading towards mass famine and that the globe was not built to support a global population of over 7 billion, with the world’s current population at over 8 billion.
They were also heavily influenced by a view of eugenics and communist ideology but from the viewpoint of state intervention in people’s lives to stop China from starving to death.
These fears were ultimately unfounded and were essential to understand throughout the 1950s and 1970s; there were mass fears of global famine and global cooling, which were the global warming climate change fears of the 1970s.
Deng Xiaoping: Economic Trends and China’s Crumbling Economy
Deng Xiaoping
In the early 1980s, China began the process under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping to open up the Chinese economy to foreign investment and begin developing a sophisticated market-based economic system for China, which was still being loosely controlled and monitored by the Chinese state.
China implemented this strategy because economics in the Far East was heavily influenced by the attitude exported from Japan, particularly in their reindustrialisation after its destruction and defeat in World War II.
Japan also industrialised in the late 19th century and conquered Korea and large chunks of China, which was only possible through state intervention and using debt to finance and grow Japan’s economy.
Furthermore, Japan has few natural resources, which drove the need for state intervention and the use of debt and imperialism to expand its economy.
The Japanese use the economy as a political end, not how the West uses it. It is a purely economic tool based upon principles of the free market for the Chinese; they adopted this viewpoint that the economy serves political ends and not vice versa.
Deng Xiaoping began opening up the Chinese economy to foreign investment offshore from the border with Hong Kong, which was still controlled by the British and its crumbling empire. It was handed over to China in 1997, marking the historical end of Britain’s empire.
The city chosen to open up the global economy only had a population of 330,000 people, which was tiny by Chinese standards; in 1980, China became the first nation to be home to over 1 billion people.
In the 40 years since Shezhen opened to the rest of the global economy, its economists exceeded that of its nearest neighbour, Hong Kong, in 2018, and the city is now the eighth largest city in the world at over 13 million people.
Shenzhen: Economic Trends and China’s Crumbling Economy
Impact on China
There are significant economic and social consequences of China’s opening economy and the development of the cities, with 65% of its population living in cities and 50% of its population moving to cities throughout the 1990s.
This was the largest migration of people in human history and marked the turning point in China from an agricultural economy to a manufacturing and industrial economy in the past 40 years.
There are two critical long-term economic impacts of this choice.
China experiences seven generations of economic development within one generation and experiences the same demographic decline experienced by other industrial nations rather than being spaced out over seven generations. Still, it is happening now in one generation.
When nations move from agricultural to industrial economies, people move to cities, and that’s when children become a liability and expensive; in the short term, previously, children were a free form of labour, but in small city apartments, they become a financial liability.
This is why nations, once they begin industrialisation, have a collapse or decline in their birthrate; for example, the United Kingdom’s birth rate declined over seven generations, which kept the overall population stable, and the UK started down that road in 1769.
India is another recent industrialising nation still behind China in industrial capacity and still has a good birthrate, which is just at replacement levels at 2.5, though some data says it is lower; this is an indicator of a historical trend of industrialisation, which leads to the collapse in the birthrate.
Old Chinese Man: Economic Trends and China’s Crumbling Economy
China’s Housing Crisis
China’s economy is functioning in one continuous economic input, and that is the continued phenomenal growth of the Chinese economy that is being powered by its industrial capacity and potential as well as internal factors that artificially raise its growth.
The construction is being promoted in China due to the artificial inflating of its GDP numbers, which has led to China building 65 million houses with a population the size of France with no people living there.
This inflation in the Chinese housing market could lead to an economic crash. The 2008 banking crisis and the 2007 and 2006 US mortgage crisis will look like not much of a big deal.
From the beginning of the recession in December 2007 to its official end in June 2009, real gross domestic product (GDP) — i.e., GDP as adjusted for inflation or deflation — declined by 4.3 per cent, and unemployment increased from 5 per cent to 9.5 per cent, peaking at 10 per cent in October 2009.
Real gross domestic product (GDP) fell 4.3 per cent from its peak in 2007Q4 to its trough in 2009Q2, the largest decline in the postwar era (based on data as of October 2013).
The unemployment rate, which was 5 per cent in December 2007, rose to 9.5 per cent in June 2009 and peaked at 10 per cent in October 2009.
This is just information about the United States, how it affected the rest of the world, how future crashes will be affected by China, how it will be unprecedented in financial history, and how it will affect the global economy.
Chinese citizens cannot invest their savings in assets outside of China due to restrictions made by the Chinese Communist Party that limit the flow of capital outside of China.
Therefore, to invest for retirement, Chinese citizens put their money in the Chinese stock market when there is an oversupply of housing and insufficient demand, which makes it incredibly unlikely that they could use the savings invested in property to live a comfortable retirement.
This leads to a considerable possibility of a Chinese financial crash triggered by the Chinese housing market’s overproduction of housing due to incentives not made by consumers but by the Chinese Communist Party due to state intervention in the economy.
Remember that for the Chinese, economics does not serve the purpose of the economy; it serves the purpose of political aims, which is, again, a different viewpoint than what is predominant in Western nations.
