Quote Originally Posted by denuseri View Post
One must point out that the patriarchal family unit was a well entrenched foundation when the United States became a country, just as it was when all but the most recent other democratic nations were established, the Founding Fathers never imagined it would be abolished or undermined in the fashion it has becuase the concept of total political equality between the sexes to them was quite literally insane.
One could say exactly the same of slavery. That, too, at the time of the founding of the Republic was considered not only normal, but essential for the health of the nation. The States that went to war to keep the right to own slaves were not fighting merely for their own interests, but from a principled belief that the insane idea of giving equal rights to inferior races would undermine civilisation.

And yet, slavery ended and the Republic survived. Nor did the warnings that Europe would be impoverished by the abolition of slavery come to pass. A final attempt to re-establish the principle of superior and inferior races died in the ashes of Berlin. Today, slavery survives only in economically backward nations.

Institutions have their time, and then pass. While they last, they are considered as natural and inevitable as the seasons. Afterwards, they are seen as quaint archaisms.

It has been the social model for all of known human history and every nation that has attempted to abandon it (soviet union case in point as well as other comunist nations )have indeed fallen if not in title in practice; China for instance has embraced a socialist view of captitalism despite its nostalgic clinging to the title: so to argue that it shouldnt be the social model for the 21st Western society is naive and one-sided conception of not only history (becuase it so obviously ignores history) past and present but of sociological and political future as well.
It's not clear here whether you are speaking of patriarchy or capitalism. You appear to consider them equivalent, which explains your equation of feminism with communism.
No system of Democracy has ever held principles that granted all members of the society equal access to power nor have they allowed all members universally recognized freedoms and liberties
I beg your pardon? This would appear to contradict every serious definition of democracy I have ever encountered.

Please explain which members of your democracy are barred from access to power or from generally recognised freedoms? Barred on principle, I mean: there are politically powerless and oppressed classes in every society, but this is generally seen as a failing of democracy, not a necessary part of it.

Utopian ideals don't hold up to logic. Patriarchy works becuase it indeed works in practice as well as theory.
As clearly shown by the poverty of those misguided Western nations that allow women into positions of power (even sometimes make them Heads of State!), as compared to the wealth and strength of places such as Africa and the Middle East where women are kept firmly in their place. :-}

Where as feminisim, just like comunisim before it, threatens the moral basis of our democratic society in a way that will lead to the fall not only of our country but of western cizilization as a whole.
Um, I thought you had just evidenced communism as a failed ideology that collapsed from its own weakness?