Social Justice theory has defined a great many different types of activist communities, including Feminism.
Social Justice theory often refers to the notion that a given group of people have a diminished or unequal distribution of a given commodity. “Freedom” is one of the commodities which Social Justice activism concerns itself with. Other times it has more to do with representation in visual media, which the Bechdel Test seeks to resolve. However, and more often, Social Justice theory concerns itself with the re-distribution of material goods, wealth and employment.
Feminism is one of these movements which has defined itself through the demands for equal distribution and enjoyment of materials, wealth and employment results (as opposed to employment opportunities). Make no mistakes, Feminism is an argument in favor of capitalism. It does not promote Traditionalist values, it does not promote religion, nor does it respect Patriarchal roles.
Traditionalism promotes the idea that we should all strive to fulfill our most basic stations in life, and part of that means respecting the inherent functions of our body. A woman should strive to fulfill those stations in life which are unique to herself as a consequence of her body. Alongside this is the idea that children should be raised by women. For a variety of reasons, a woman’s tutelage and guidance during a child’s early years is critically important.
Motherhood has a special matriarchal role in a Traditionalist society, as do mature and well educated women. This is not simple lip service or loose hyperbole in reverence of obscure philosophical theories. Society is a means towards enlightenment and a higher spiritual development which rejects materialist interests. Feminism, as a societal means, does not help a woman to fulfill her basic stations in life, nor does it help her to achieve a spiritual development.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again– If Traditionalism rejected the teaching and influence of women, then you wouldn’t find me in the Traditionalist camp.
Maturity, personal development and self realization are some of the concepts which Traditionalism promotes. We contend that religion and spirituality are an integral part of a healthy identity and a normal society, and that Feminism detracts from these possibilities. While Feminism rejects the authority of Patriarchal roles, it is also a rejection of certain Matriarchal roles which are essential to a society.
One of the more extreme implementations of Feminism, or something entirely different, is the degenerate anti-Christian group called Femen. They reject Patriarchal authority, Traditional roles of womanhood, and Christianity. This, of course, is in strong opposition to Traditionalism.
While the “activists” of Femen run around Europe defiling themselves and defaming Christianity, Christian Women Against Femen defends Faith, Race and Nation. Priests are, apparently, unable to respond to Femen protesters in any meaningful way, and short of kneeling in prayer while being assaulted— you won’t see them doing much to stop Femen.
Once, just once, I would like to see a priest take up a Cat ‘o Nine Tails and drive those Femen whores back to the brothels from which they came.
Until then, Christian Women Against Femen is our only answer. These women aren’t interested in arguing about Social Justice theory. They aren’t interested in solving the problem of “equal pay for equal work” or the dozens of other problems with capitalism. These women are interested in one thing only– the future of a people.
Religion is an integrally important part of one’s life, and it is equally important in the development of a State. Without belief in religion and the aspiration for a higher spiritual development, we will drift deeper into degeneracy.
Italian philosopher Julius Evola helps to put this concept into perspective, describing how a secular State cannot ever legitimately rule over a people, and that it’s only conclusion is degeneracy.
“… a State that lacks a spiritual dimension and a legitimization from above cannot be called a State; not to mention that it is powerless against the arguments advanced by the rationalist, revolutionary, social, and subversive polemics. The problem that needs to be solved is particularly difficult, considering that today the continuity of dynastic and traditional lineages is broken, [and] we must begin from a pure idea, without the basis of a proximate historical reference.”
Evola’s description of the problem is rather grim, but it’s not hopeless. He gave us a model for a solution to the problem. Somewhere, from inside a glacier atop Mt. Rosa, Evola is rolling in his grave and shouting, “Why didn’t you listen?! You could have stopped this!” In all seriousness though, Evola told us how to deal with this very problem.
“As in many other domains, here too we will have to settle for provisional solutions. On the one hand, we will have to uphold principles that have been rigorously formulated; on the other hand, practically speaking, we must be strong enough to follow and to assert them even when the basis they may now have is inadequate. This is what happens, more or less, in the institutional context, as in an interregnum or a regency. Thus, the symbol remains, preserves its prestige and authority, is acknowledged, even if temporarily there is no one who can embody it fully and the real leader has only a vicarious position.”
The solution is that we must continue to apply the principles of Traditionalism, maximize on our victories where we make them, and occupy until His return. We cannot sit idly and “wait” for somebody to lead us into battle against the forces of world degeneracy, and we must take actions in our daily life.