The pretext of free-market capitalism is that economic competition
places upon the producers the pressure of competing companies to
provide for the consumer the correct goods at the correct price.

Because of this, the anti-trust legislation has come into effect to
prevent companies from colluding into cartels and monopolies that would
dominate industries and, by being the dominant players, prevent
competition from other companies and individuals. It occurs to me that
the same logic that applies to companies must also apply to cultural
and social entities, and that means the following:

Competition among multiple cultures, within framework of statutory and
legally defended liberty.

Exposing wrong ideas and practices in each culture to competition from
better ideas in other cultures.

Incorporating knowledge and wisdom from each culture into other
cultures.

Providing people cultural alternatives that are right for them.

And, through competition among the cultures, as in competition among
companies, creating real and meaningful climate in which cultural goods
are improved and refined and provide the best and ever-better cultural
goods to the individuals.

This means: Competition among cultures for people's attention and
loyalty - like competition among enterprises - making the best of
these entities and the best result therefore for the people.

And pursuant this mechanism, the best lives for the people around the
world.

This means of course, as in case of capitalism, protection for rights
and liberties of people. It means preventing anti-competitive tactics,
from bullying to blackmail to barbarism. And it means this also:
Destroying cartels, at whatever level they may exist.

This brings me to an issue I've been trying to address for a long
time, and that is: That in America, there is such a thing as a feminist
cartel.

The beautiful women are attacked; ones with a heart,
maliciously and horribly so. The men who have it within them to
appreciate beauty and heart and tenderness are attacked still worse.

The goal: To bludgeon people into believing that beauty is
unachievable, and that people have to settle down with harpies and live
a life of hideousness and misery.

You may deny it all you want; it is all around you. The cities of great
American cities are filled with malicious dykes, as are its schools and
universities and even churches.

A pretty and sweet-hearted girl born in
this set of conditions has low to none chance of survival (and less so
of survival as this: A pretty and sweet-hearted girl). And men who have
any kind of romantic sensibilities - well, the viciousness that comes
their way makes Gerry Springer look like a saint by comparison.

So here comes the following: Attack on those who rightly evoke
beautiful feelings; and attack further on those who rightly feel them
and seek to transmit them. The goal? To make people think such things
impossible and acquiesce to a horrible and oppressive existence. To go
out into such climate with any kind of purity or goodness is to put a
bull's eye on oneself; which is why for example Brenda Lee, who came
with precisely such intentions, got the treatment she got. The goal? To
interpose between the soul and the existence, that people be made to
believe soul inaccessible and then fall into the net of one or another
usurpatory entity or usurpatory construct!

And in the process to make soul's treasures unavailable for the
soulful and the people who desperately need such treasures!

So do you think then that I, with my economics and psychology
education, would stand by to see a feminist cartel go on destroying
women who have beautiful things to offer while making the climate so
horrible that the most loving men either fall into one or another trap
or are otherwise shattered? How could I? A malicious cartel is a
malicious cartel, whether it be Medellin drug cartel, OPEC or American
feminism! First they claim to speak for women and for womanhood as
such; then they tell women what to be and what to do and how to act and
how to think and how to dress and what it means to be a woman! Do you
see a power grab of cosmic proportions? And are the people who
participate in that power grab worthy of power and trust?

Who indeed creates greater crime against women: Someone who tells them
they have to be excellent or someone who tells them they have to be
nasty poisonous mouthy shrews with an attitude and an agenda against
all men? Whose way is more oppressive? Indeed we see in American
feminism the same qualities we've seen in the worst Third World
dictators: Combining the worst of their people and of their colonial
masters. The sense of victimization which they share with their people
leading to irresponsible and blame-placing action when they in fact are
the ones in power, while the same viciousness and abrasiveness and
hideousness that they've inherited from their colonial masters making
them doubly ruinous to the people they claim to serve!

Now I keep hearing again and again, from just about every person I
meet, how they HATE having the feminists tell them what to do and what
to be; that no, feminists do not speak for them; and that no, feminists
do not represent women or indeed even people. I repeat: Do you see a
power grab of cosmic proportions? Who on earth has elected feminists to
tell everyone what to do and how to behave? If people claim to speak
for women then they will exercise also double power over men, the bulk
of whom need some kind of female company. So what do we have then? What
we have is a set of freaks claiming to speak for all women, and other
women - either being nice and not liking fighting, or believing they
must love everyone, or anything else - not challenging them in their
lies. Which lies keep growing, becoming monstrous, and eating up
America.

This of course we have seen before, with unions claiming to speak for
the workers. Their power kept growing as well - until some smart
folks figured out that there are billions of people, for whom the
chance at a fraction of the income American union workers were making
would be greater chance of a life they would ever have. So these folks
gave these people a chance at a life. With the result that over two
decades more than half a billion of people rose out of poverty in China
and India alone. With the result that now right goods are again
produced at right price. With the result that consumer has money in
pocket and can buy other things and produces jobs upon jobs worldwide.
With the result that business prospers, government prospers, and so
does the world.

The feminist cartel will be broken in the same way as was the union
cartel. It will be broken by exposing American women to competition
from women abroad. It will be broken by bringing American men, who have
worked like dogs and suffered under feminism and refined their habits
and thoughts and approach to life, in contact with cultured, beautiful,
intelligent and warm women from Latin America and Eastern Europe. For
whom a life with an American man and in America is a dream worth dying
for - and which American men with these women will have a life that
is worthy of them.

The pretext of free-market capitalism is that economic competition
places upon the producers the pressure of competing companies to
provide for the consumer the correct goods at the correct price.
Because of this, the anti-trust legislation has come into effect to
prevent companies from colluding into cartels and monopolies that would
dominate industries and, by being the dominant players, prevent
competition from other companies and individuals. It occurs to me that
the same logic that applies to companies must also apply to cultural
and social entities, and that means the following:

Competition among multiple cultures, within framework of statutory and
legally defended liberty.

Exposing wrong ideas and practices in each culture to competition from
better ideas in other cultures.

Incorporating knowledge and wisdom from each culture into other
cultures.

Providing people cultural alternatives that are right for them.

And, through competition among the cultures, as in competition among
companies, creating real and meaningful climate in which cultural goods
are improved and refined and provide the best and ever-better cultural
goods to the individuals.

This means: Competition among cultures for people's attention and
loyalty - like competition among enterprises - making the best of
these entities and the best result therefore for the people.

And pursuant this mechanism, the best lives for the people around the
world.

This means of course, as in case of capitalism, protection for rights
and liberties of people. It means preventing anti-competitive tactics,
from bullying to blackmail to barbarism. And it means this also:
Destroying cartels, at whatever level they may exist.

This brings me to an issue I've been trying to address for a long
time, and that is: That in America, there is such a thing as a feminist
cartel. The beautiful women are attacked; ones with a heart,
maliciously and horribly so. The men who have it within them to
appreciate beauty and heart and tenderness are attacked still worse.
The goal: To bludgeon people into believing that beauty is
unachievable, and that people have to settle down with harpies and live
a life of hideousness and misery.

You may deny it all you want; it is all around you. The cities of great
American cities are filled with malicious dykes, as are its schools and
universities and even churches. A pretty and sweet-hearted girl born in
this set of conditions has low to none chance of survival (and less so
of survival as this: A pretty and sweet-hearted girl). And men who have
any kind of romantic sensibilities - well, the viciousness that comes
their way makes Gerry Springer look like a saint by comparison.

So here comes the following: Attack on those who rightly evoke
beautiful feelings; and attack further on those who rightly feel them
and seek to transmit them. The goal? To make people think such things
impossible and acquiesce to a horrible and oppressive existence. To go
out into such climate with any kind of purity or goodness is to put a
bull's eye on oneself; which is why for example Brenda Lee, who came
with precisely such intentions, got the treatment she got. The goal? To
interpose between the soul and the existence, that people be made to
believe soul inaccessible and then fall into the net of one or another
usurpatory entity or usurpatory construct!

And in the process to make soul's treasures unavailable for the
soulful and the people who desperately need such treasures!

So do you think then that I, with my economics and psychology
education, would stand by to see a feminist cartel go on destroying
women who have beautiful things to offer while making the climate so
horrible that the most loving men either fall into one or another trap
or are otherwise shattered? How could I? A malicious cartel is a
malicious cartel, whether it be Medellin drug cartel, OPEC or American
feminism! First they claim to speak for women and for womanhood as
such; then they tell women what to be and what to do and how to act and
how to think and how to dress and what it means to be a woman! Do you
see a power grab of cosmic proportions? And are the people who
participate in that power grab worthy of power and trust?

Who indeed creates greater crime against women: Someone who tells them
they have to be excellent or someone who tells them they have to be
nasty poisonous mouthy shrews with an attitude and an agenda against
all men? Whose way is more oppressive? Indeed we see in American
feminism the same qualities we've seen in the worst Third World
dictators: Combining the worst of their people and of their colonial
masters. The sense of victimization which they share with their people
leading to irresponsible and blame-placing action when they in fact are
the ones in power, while the same viciousness and abrasiveness and
hideousness that they've inherited from their colonial masters making
them doubly ruinous to the people they claim to serve!

Now I keep hearing again and again, from just about every person I
meet, how they HATE having the feminists tell them what to do and what
to be; that no, feminists do not speak for them; and that no, feminists
do not represent women or indeed even people. I repeat: Do you see a
power grab of cosmic proportions? Who on earth has elected feminists to
tell everyone what to do and how to behave? If people claim to speak
for women then they will exercise also double power over men, the bulk
of whom need some kind of female company. So what do we have then? What
we have is a set of freaks claiming to speak for all women, and other
women - either being nice and not liking fighting, or believing they
must love everyone, or anything else - not challenging them in their
lies. Which lies keep growing, becoming monstrous, and eating up
America.

This of course we have seen before, with unions claiming to speak for
the workers. Their power kept growing as well - until some smart
folks figured out that there are billions of people, for whom the
chance at a fraction of the income American union workers were making
would be greater chance of a life they would ever have. So these folks
gave these people a chance at a life. With the result that over two
decades more than half a billion of people rose out of poverty in China
and India alone. With the result that now right goods are again
produced at right price. With the result that consumer has money in
pocket and can buy other things and produces jobs upon jobs worldwide.
With the result that business prospers, government prospers, and so
does the world.

The feminist cartel will be broken in the same way as was the union
cartel. It will be broken by exposing American women to competition
from women abroad. It will be broken by bringing American men, who have
worked like dogs and suffered under feminism and refined their habits
and thoughts and approach to life, in contact with cultured, beautiful,
intelligent and warm women from Latin America and Eastern Europe. For
whom a life with an American man and in America is a dream worth dying
for - and which American men with these women will have a life that
is worthy of them.

Ilya Shambat.

The pretext of free-market capitalism is that economic competition
places upon the producers the pressure of competing companies to
provide for the consumer the correct goods at the correct price.

The pretext of free-market capitalism is that economic competition
places upon the producers the pressure of competing companies to
provide for the consumer the correct goods at the correct price.
Because of this, the anti-trust legislation has come into effect to
prevent companies from colluding into cartels and monopolies that would
dominate industries and, by being the dominant players, prevent
competition from other companies and individuals.

The feminist cartel will be broken in the same way as was the union
cartel. It will be broken by exposing American women to competition
from women abroad. It will be broken by bringing American men, who have
worked like dogs and suffered under feminism and refined their habits
and thoughts and approach to life, in contact with cultured, beautiful,
intelligent and warm women from Latin America and Eastern Europe. For
whom a life with an American man and in America is a dream worth dying
for - and which American men with these women will have a life that
is worthy of them.