Started feminism as an effort to destroy the nuclear family.
Pushed homosexuality in an effort to justify paedophilia and destroy the nuclear family.
Chemtrailed the skies to keep us all getting bugs.
Pushed large amount of immigration to suppress wages.
Control the money supply and create inflation so peoples money is worth less.
Started bizarre trading laws and done strange things like burn food to keep prices high.
Allowed rape gangs to operate unchallenged. The judicial system supports them.
Vaccinated people to cause autism and other awful things.
Discouraged and opposed alternative health so people don't get well and have to resort to inefficient medicines.
Started wars to gain and control resources.
Destroyed food so there are many bad and unhealthy options available.
Polluted the populace mind with caffeine, alcohol and illegal drugs.
Infiltrated hollywood to promote shallow ideals.
Funded and encouraged pornography to break up the nuclear family.
Controlled technological advancement so we cannot have 'nice things'.
Suppressed research into things like psychic abilities.
And so on...
And... They're still losing!!!
Pretty much the only point I have today. One other thing quick was a question I saw on Gab:
Do they? Well I didn't know that. However, I have noticed that the liberal viewpoint is held up by women. Who, on top of outrightly promoting liberalism, have a huge control over men via sex, affection and similar methods. This is why the libertarian right is not as stronger force as it could be and in my view why many people are less involved in politics than they otherwise might be.
The way I see it is this;
The fundamentals of female and male psychology are as follows:
Female babies stare longer at a human face than of a mechanical object, while in men this is reversed.
In junior school boys rush off and play football together while girls spend long periods chatting.
Statistically, men are more inclined towards STEM subjects and financials. Whereas women are attracted to caring industries, or homemaking.
Female magazines are focused on areas such as who wears what clothes and who broke up with whom. Male magazines are directed to some sort of interest (such as perhaps weight lifting) and towards money.
So when it comes to forming political opinions. Womens first instinct is towards empathy and caring. 'Those people must be helped', and there is no effort to understand how wealth is created and other such things because this is more 'mechanical' type thinking. Women in general are not programmed to think of danger from an incoming aggressive force. The reason being simple. If a woman is part of a tribe that gets taken over by another tribe, her genes die out if she is loyal to the previous tribe. There is no benefit to her in protecting one tribe over the other thus there is no benefit to her wasting energy scanning the horizon for threats. Even if the threat does move in it does not decrease her genes ability to reproduce. The 'threat' involved in giving government too much power is not a natural one that her mind might look out for.
Also, being left is EASY. Someone once said about the black lives matter movement that different from real black empowerment movements all you have to do to be a member of black lives matter is to be black! Unlike other black empowerment movements that disengage from the Beyonce type crap and teach people to speak properly and be respectful. Black lives matter requires none of that. It is pure identity politics.
The same might be said of the left. All that is required for someone to be left wing is to be emotional!
Recently in the UK, there has been a woman who was kept for 13 years and raped every day. When the 'cabal' is overthrown these people will get their karma and so will many other people.
This is a pretty gruesome and direct crime but there are loads of other nasty things people have done that would also require some confrontation and action if things were to sort themselves out.
For instance, one out of ten men in the UK are looking after children that they think are biologically theirs but are not. In the US, it is illegal to get a paternity test done without the consent of the mother. So, this means, clearly, that it is likely that many men are paying child support to children they know are not theirs but cannot prove it.
This is a particularly passive crime. The woman has not done anything that is obvious, she has not gone out and stabbed some guy to death and taken the money from his wallet. But her behaviour is still sick. Like a vice grip over humanity there are many such things where a woman's lack of taking responsibility is the thing causing the damage. She may justify this to herself that she needs the money to look after her children etc. But that means nothing, however she justifies it to herself. It is wrong.
I would personally like things to change in such a way that each of these women was confronted. Perhaps some sort of telepathy would become available or a simple change in the law. Or a new technology or knowledge that would make the process of deducing paternity to be easier. Or all of these!
As I have said before I would also like karma, through the free market, to get to employers that are crying out for some free market justice. Seriously, who has a high turnover rate in the current employers market? You'd have to be pretty awful. This is why these corporates are struggling so hard against Brexit!