Courtesy of the New York Times

At the end of the first week in January, the world seems eerily drifting once again towards the brink of international war, and likely so in more than one region.  It’s all redolent of the year 1938, when predatory dictatorships in Germany, Italy, Japan, and Soviet Russia were all either maneuvering diplomatically, warring militarily, or engaging clandestinely in infiltration into governments with the goal of territorial expansion.   By that year’s end, the Nazis had absorbed all of Czechoslovakia and annexed Austria, Mussolini’s fascisti had earlier subdued Abyssinia (the old Ethiopia), Tojo’s imperialist military was brutally subjugating Manchuria (China), and Russia’s Comintern agents were clandestinely fomenting discontent, diffidence, and appeasement elsewhere in Europe, not to mention in Great Britain and America.  

Today, the Red Chinese are saber-rattling against Taiwan, the North Koreans are acting with provocation against their free national counterpart to the south, the Russians are readying manpower and materiel on their border with Ukraine, and Iran’s ayatollahs are moving inexorably to develop an offensive nuclear weapons capability, presumably with Israel and Saudi Arabia in their immediate strategic target sights.   Irredentism, a state’s drive to reclaim lands once held by a former national regime or its religion — whether as factual history or some fancy ideological mandate – is making a comeback across the globe. 

Just as in the 1930s, this comeback is being enabled by the appearance and reality of a complex of weak resolve in leadership, fading allegiance by elites to democratic values, dwindling economic and fiscal health, and fraying military readiness and strength in the nations of the West in general, and America in particular.  In a signal distinction from yesteryear, however, the United States as superpower is now the sole tentpole of the Free World, and without its unparalleled excellence in all of these dimensions, the history of the mid-twentieth century is about to repeat itself.  The appeasement mindset, and actions and policies of accommodation that flow from it, being demonstrated by America’s current rulers constitute surefire catnip to aggressors everywhere.

It appears to be just a matter of time now before “the balloon goes up” and the shooting starts.  Several years ago, Russia, China, and Iran created the Shanghai Cooperative Organization, aiming to coordinate military exercises at the very least, and presumably for the purpose of strategizing about how best to undermine and upset American global power in pursuit of their own foreign-policy objectives.  This appears to have gained impetus since Joseph R. Biden became president in 2021.  If ever there were any doubt as to the incompetency of the O’Biden regime or — what’s more likely — its insidious globalist agenda to emasculate America on the world stage, “desovereigntize” the nation, and deconstruct its republican form of government from within, the debacle of our withdrawal from Afghanistan last August and the unrelenting federal efforts since February to facilitate a rank invasion by foreign migrants into the homeland has dispelled it forever.   With increasing divisions and polarization amongst the American populace now the order of the day partly as a result (by design, no doubt), the advent of open civil strife appears very likely to occur in our near future. 

If such a scenario does come to pass – and even if it doesn’t result in widespread civil violence – the enemies of America will certainly be quick to capitalize on the distractions that it will create for the nation as a whole and its civilian and military leadership circles in particular.   Coordinated, concurrent military campaigns by America’s main adversaries, and perhaps others, against their strategic targets could easily overwhelm this nation’s ability to respond in any efficacious way, diplomatically, economically, or militarily.  The geopolitical order of the world could well be transformed virtually overnight, with a desperate resort to nuclear weapons by our leaders being the only cognizable way of addressing all of the seismic assaults decisively.  But what sane person would advocate for such a Wagnerian Götterdämmerung?   Even dedicated conservative patriots have to wince hard at the prospect of such a holocaust. 

The only rational way to avert such a global catastrophe is to organize Americans to face the threat posed by weak leaders in the administration and their plans for appeasement abroad and deconstruction at home, and to act civilly and lawfully in political advocacy and, as necessary, lawfare to oust Democrats from control of the Congress in the elections to be held this year.   And then to work to impeach this president and his ideologically aligned successors and key cabinet officers as soon thereafter as practicable.  If dedicated patriots succeed in their efforts, this   nation and its great republic can likely be preserved.   And millions of Taiwanese, Ukrainians, Israelis, Saudis, and South Koreans will sleep the night and breathe a whole lot easier.   And just perhaps, they will be joined by many more millions of other Europeans, Asians, and Arabs.   It’s well worth working for, for sure — and praying for, mightily.

Today is the first day of the new year 2022, and it’s vital to reflect on what autocratic Democratic rule (yes, rule, not governance) in Washington, D.C. has meant since Joe Biden’s inauguration in January 2021 and the assumption of near-total Democratic control of the national legislative agenda in Congress a few weeks earlier.  Any such reflection can be made from a myriad of perspectives, both mundane and esoteric, but there is a quasi-spiritual lens I’d like to peer through at the start of this critical election year.  Framing public-policy issues rationally and with resolute honesty is essential to discerning (i) likely outcomes of enacted policies and (ii) their efficacy in delivering their intended beneficial results.  To this end, moral clarity and the ground truth of all premises assumed are key to be established.      

To those who value fact-based realities over “social constructs” meant to facilitate and justify ideological imperatives like identity politics and tribalism, we accept that there are two — only two — genders among human beings.   Male and Female.  That’s it.  Social “innovations” such as “gender fluidity” and the heated efforts exerted by their proponents to normalize them are designed to confound, disrupt, and ultimately destroy the organic social order that has evolved over centuries of experimentation across many societies.  These proponents euphemistically label this “fundamental transformation”; those who are well acquainted with world history and the relentless delusions of social utopians, whether foreign or domestic, more accurately call this “social engineering.”  Usually, decadence in all forms attends their drives towards “perfecting” society by “perfecting” all of the people who live in it.  Rampant rank amorality, the debasement of all civilized norms of behavior, and the successful elevation — and even glorification — of perversions of all manner become milestones on the way to the new Utopia.   Narcissistic elites prosper, and everyone else slides into misery and poverty, mere tools for the formers’ aggrandizement of power and lucre.        

Even cursory reviews of history disclose that coercive force must ultimately be resorted to by those in power in order to gain the totality of obedience and compliance necessary to defy the common sense and objective views of reality possessed by Everyman and Everywoman.  Cancel culture, defamation, public shaming, banning, job loss, academic-admission denial, lawfare, social isolation, internment camps – this has all been done before, in one way of another, in many places.  Inevitably, it is certain prelude to horrendous end-of-the-line destinations such as mass incarceration and even liquidation of those who refuse to surrender their minds, wills, and bodies.

One of the modern whipping boys (so to speak here) for the advancement of this savage menace has been “toxic masculinity”, embodied in and epitomized by white, hetero, generically Christian, middle-class, working males.   Traits of this supposed scourge include overt tendencies toward emotional aggression, physical intimidation and violence, attitudes of patriarchal disdain and supremacism, and the usual laundry list of demoniacal supposed isms and phobias:  racism, sexism, various LGBTQ-centric phobias, and Islamophobia.  In a word, men are the problem, and particularly white heterosexual men who possess natural masculine attitudes, values, and predispositions.

This perspective, intentionally, ignores the positive traits of masculinity that have long been esteemed, honored, and celebrated not only in America but throughout all organized societies since at least ancient Egypt, Persia, Greece, and Rome.   These include the capacity to design and build structures and organizations; the ability to preserve, defend, and protect through exertions of physical strength; the ability to produce and amplify material wealth by the use of rational thought and physical labor; and the ability to utilize natural law to produce food and water supplies.  These are all “doing” activities — and lest the thrust of this piece be mistaken, these activities and the characteristics they represent are not possessed by biological males solely; many women embody them in widely varying degrees as well, particularly in cultures that have prized individual rights and liberties over group-identity rights and powers.   So “toxic masculinity” is really just a propaganda meme of the utopian Left created for the purpose of besmirching the strong individualism and independent mindset of society’s motivated producers, who predominantly just happen to be male.  

So, what of femininity?   Positive cardinal feminine characteristics are concerned primarily with the core attributes of “being” rather than doing:  Receptivity, inspiration, artistic creativity in its many forms, nurturance, and the activities of emotional and educational sustenance such as caregiving, pastoral work, teaching, and training.  Again, such qualities and pursuits are hardly the exclusive domain of biological women – many men are endowed with “feminine energy” and its associated traits, and without regard to their sexual orientation.  They pursue careers as physicians, nurses, social workers, and therapists; dancers, writers, composers, actors, singers, musicians, and designers; religious and spiritual leaders, and mystics; and teachers and academics, all of which exemplify the best feminine qualities.  There is nothing invidious about distinguishing these qualities and representative pursuits from those of the masculine type; in fact, both are essential for a fully functional society and well-balanced human beings. 

The central point is that men and women, and their most natural predispositions and drives, are discernible and categorizable as a matter of rational observation over many centuries in societies around the world.    

But if in fact there is a tangible phenomenon known as “toxic masculinity” beyond its just being an inflammatory meme designed to divide and alienate people from one another for purposes of accumulating social and political power, is there a correlate that could rightfully be labelled “toxic femininity”?  I aver there is.

If “toxic” males can be overly aggressive and intimidating, then “toxic” females may be overly passive-aggressive and covertly conniving, working behind the scenes to get what they want by subterfuge.   If “toxic” males can be too direct and “in your face” with their demands, needs, and wants, then “toxic” females may be intentionally indirect, coy, sly, and even deceitful to get whatever they want.   And, if “toxic” males can be physically violent based on their emotions gone awry, then “toxic” females may be emotionally manipulative towards others, playing on their personal fears, vulnerabilities, and sensitivities.   Now again, if all men and women share both masculine and feminine traits and energies as described above, in varying degrees in each person, then this disquisition can hardly be defamed as a diatribe aimed invidiously at women as women.   Rather, it reflects modes of behavior that exist in our politics and the ideological conflicts and rivalries that bedevil our nation’s society today — modes that are employed by both men and women.

Today, Democratic politicians and officeholders, at virtually every level of government, and many of their ideological cohorts in the major media, academia, Hollywood, and Big Tech are increasingly being regularly outed as serial liars, deceitful spin advocates, charlatans, subversives, and cynical panderers and manipulators of vulnerable people’s basest emotions and instincts.  Their predations certainly did not start with the November 2020 election and its aftermath; they antedate it by three decades at least.   However, they have gained greater normalization over the last dozen years or so and now threaten to overthrow our civil society and constitutionally republican, federalist forms of government.   

And, if not checked decisively this coming year by the sane, the rational, the historically literate, and the spiritually conscious, historians of the future may well ascribe America’s disintegration and eventual collapse as a free, democratic, independent, and sovereign nation to a rampant, popularly sanctioned pandemic of raging “toxic femininity.”  And it will be the men in power that are toxic feminists who will be largely to blame.  Like Biden/Obama, Kerry, Blinken, Austin, Garland, Mayorkas, Milley, Schumer, Durbin, Sanders, Schiff, and Nadler.  Move over Pelosi, Clinton, Warren, Feinstein, Hirono, Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Tlaib, Pressley, and Booker.