RE: The man's right movement funded by the CIA?
The OP seems like he's being a little facetious, or maybe not. Regardless, this is one of those questions that straddles the humorous and legitimate for me.
It's humorous in that such a thing seems implausible, and so even asking the question may rank up there, for some, with flat earth talk, moon landing conspiracy talk, etc.
For those that watched the first years of Roosh's first PUA blog grow into what it is now (my word buddy, good job), it is ridiculous to insinuate that Roosh, for instance, is CIA.
However, I also take another view. My overwhelming hunch is that history, for quite a while now, is more or less scripted since at least the two World Wars. Whether that script primarily came before or after is up for debate. I think that the script was much more controlled after those wars, but some people would make an argument for it being generally present before those wars, perhaps using a suspicious financing trail as evidence. To clarify, a "scripted" war might be one in which the length and outcome of the war was more or less determined by its financing before the war started. Of course, conditions would have been made such so that a war was inevitable.
What all of this means is that I don't believe for a second that any type of social movement is allowed to prosper nor affect change for long without it being condoned in the context of a greater plan for what the world will look like in the future.
I don't believe that the 1960's and their political consequences were an actual revolution, adhering to the common definition of the grassroots nature of such.
I don't believe that feminism, drug culture, free love culture, slut culture, academia culture, frat culture, college drinking culture, or anything else is purely spontaneous.
Now, that does not mean that I think that there is a CIA program that starts and maintains all of these cultures. What it means is that I think that there is an effort to shape culture and movements.
To illustrate, a government agency would not have to directly start a men's rights movement. What it would have to do is make the environment for men so inhospitable and one sided against them that such a movement is inevitable as communication becomes more democratized. I think that social engineering research is sufficiently advanced enough that starting seemingly grassroots "revolutions", especially in the nations of whatever organ is manipulating the social climate, is trivial.
Feminism could have been continued to progress more or less smoothly and without much notice by men, if the media and judicial system wasn't belligerent about it. The same goes with race relations in the USA. The same goes for ME and African emigration in Europe. The media's irrational racial agitation and the mass migration of single Middle Eastern Men to Europe are designed to provoke reactions. Neither was necessary to achieve the desired results that these actions superficially imply.
If there was not supposed to be opposition to these things, then they could have more or less kept things progressing as they were roughly up until the end of the 1990's (though feminism was pretty belligerent before then). The frog was boiling largely unaware for most issues. They could be much more strict in terms of taking down popular opposition youtube videos and facebook pages. They could be much more strict in terms of letting opposition-favorable news stories be released. I think that the opposition is cultivated, and that's the only reason why Trump might be our next president. Think about it. He comes out of the gate saying all of the "right" things and pushing all of the popular way-politically incorrect buttons with certainty of effect and zero worry. Why does his popularity exist? Precisely because of the absolutely nonsensical actions of the Media and the DOJ over the last 8 years.
I think that the conflict is the plan, but to what end I'm not certain.
To think that the world is a cultural free for all, I believe, is naïve. If you had unlimited cash and control, would you leave the world's cultural future to chance?
|