GOOD LEAF, I AM ANSWERING YOU HERE!!!

File: 1491257075278.jpg (83KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 800x800px

Womens suffrage was the single greatest mistake made in Western Civilization

I think of the Romans as the founders of European Civilisation in a way, and they had a system.

They divided themselves into classes and everyone voted according to class. The classes were based in how much land you owned, and therefore how much food you could provide, and how much you could fight and stuff like being able to maintain a horse or by war equipment.

Basically that is the right track.

But what I think is the most important is to have a "nobility" or upper class actively dependent and interested on the well being of the Nation and its citizens. You only can do that if:
1) The elite will gain if the country keeps doing well / will keep their elite status;
2) Simultaneoulsy, they have to understand that *most* of their direct descendants will not have elite status, so they can feel and bleed for the average person as well.

There is much more to say about that.

Basically, it is unthinkable under a Traditionalist lens to equate the mother of a family to a common whore, slut or prostitute, as universal suffrage does.

As it is not fair to make a police officer have the same de facto power as thief.

>>131919988
>The classes were based in how much land you owned, and therefore how much food you could provide
how would that work today? technology and automation allow a single farmer to produce more food than multiple farmers combined only 100 years ago

>>131919344
>There are lots of people who do nothing for the future of their nations, but still who demand and who are given a say in terms of their vote

Exactly.
Like we see in sex related things this is as stupid as allowing equality to women, and especially allowing them to vote.
I think the population should be divided into "orders" and some votes should count more than others, women shouldn't vote. Niggas, Jews and those kind of people should vote only in their own associations and poor people should not be allowed to vote in the same way as non poor people (those who produce economically and contribute with their taxes to the state).

Yes, the way we vote is related to the push for equality. And I speak mostly based in my country and how I think it would work better.

The fact that our votes count as much as that of a recent immigrant, of a whore or of criminals who don't care about us - both at the top echelons of society and in the low ones - is antiethical to freedom.
In my modest opinion it is, indeed, a form of tyrany.

------------------------

Also, Romans had one thing called "jus connubium" or "the right to marry.

We really need to bring that back. I don't want women not being able to chose who they'll marry... but to allow them the option to marry whoever and keep on being "normal(ised)" citizens is ridiculous. And offensive. And is destroying us, not because they will not marry us, but because they will fuck us all and our neighbours before they have children.

And a normal, respected citizen should not have to pay for literal sons of bitches.

>>131920817

I have thought about what is better for *my* country, which is kind of difficult to implement in the United States.

However, when I wrote that, I was thinking about how the Romans had different classes and orders while performing an electoral event to elect an assembly.

It wouldn't work today, except that a lot of left wingers (and non whites) would be excluded from the "democratic body" or the Nation, as well as their "give me that" ideas/attitudes, if only those who contribute economically to the Nation (pay taxes) votes would count more than those who do not.

>>131920841
>And is destroying us, not because they will not marry us, but because they will fuck us all and our neighbours before they have children.
>
>And a normal, respected citizen should not have to pay for literal sons of bitches.
this is a cultural issue, not a legal one. western women identify themselves via their vagina, they are not legally required to do so, but rather like to do so, and then men are content to play along because free pussy lmao. both sexes need to reexamine themselves in this scenario.

>>131919583

Thank you, I agree.

>>131921234

Yeah, except... who cares if one man fucks around?
It's women being sluts that is unacceptable.

And by the way, Western woman identify by whichever Western men tells them to identify by. Never forget that.
It's either that, or they can get the fuck out and be sold to Mexico/North Africa with no property whatsoever.

Never forget that in the Natural world - and men must respect nature - women hold no power whatsoever.

>>131921619
>Yeah, except... who cares if one man fucks around?
>It's women being sluts that is unacceptable.
ridiculous, women take after their men. if a man is unable to be virtuous he will corrupt the people around him as well. a hypocritical man is also dangerous to society

>Never forget that in the Natural world - and men must respect nature - women hold no power whatsoever.
also untrue, across numerous species females decide who they will mate with. males go through extensive lengths to prove themselves as worthy to mate with the female. female lions are responsible for food and maintaining the pride, that is power. wolves have alpha females which run the den, that is power.