By: Christopher Maffei
To begin with, we can never lose sight of the fact that United States Courts are roughly a 1.2 trillion dollar industry. For these budgets to be sustained the courts need criminals to fill the prisons. Therefore, the courts in the US have an interest in policies that induce societal failure and their policies are to protect themselves as a business.
There are many policies in the United States that are meant to fail to inflate government programs. The most obvious failure is the catastrophic failure of the war on drugs. It infuses a never-ending supply of so-called criminals to inflate the budgets of the US Courts.
A war that can never be won. A war on society.
In the beginning, criminal policies regarding drugs were targeted at the urban and rural poor by the Nixon Administration to appease their southern bigoted base. These laws were helpful in oppressing southern blacks, sadly. The logic being, this helps the Ford administration and the republican party gain the southern conservative vote. Which, of course, ended up being meaningless.
In the past, the criminalization of marijuana was the key to oppressing southern blacks. Politically, this issue has been collapsing for some time.
Now the US courts need a new class of people that can be defined as criminals. In the 2020s that would be the urban and rural poor regardless of skin color. A class of people that can easily play into social conflict. Much like the drug war, the US courts need crimes that have no solution. A crime that uses the natural social conflict between a man and a woman. Or the human sexuality between two people as defined by intersectional feminists. In this way, the lawmakers will play middle-class intersectional feminists against the urban and rural poor.
Whereas the Nixon administration used drug laws to appease southern bigots in the 1970s. In the 2020s the laws regarding consent are to appease the bigots of intersectional feminism. It’s the same bigotry just a different class of people.
When talking about intersectional feminism it is important to understand that there are many women that have fought very hard for their rights. And there are others that have used the movement for their own personal gain — I assure you that I am referring to the latter.
That being said, intersectional feminism ideas can be used as a passive racist strategy by others. For example, the hardcore base of feminist philosophies is a group of women that view men as the “oppressor” – or the enemy. Many senators see this as an opportunity and have taken note of the evolutionary psychology of female aggression and are now passing laws that revolve around the definition of consent during procreation.
The lawmakers, leveraging the natural human need for procreation, are structuring human conflict between a man and a woman in a way that consent can be withdrawn after consent was given. Making the man guilty of a crime. By reversing the burden of proof – retroactively. Which is obviously against the rule of law and is simply a way to give power to one class over another. To generate conflict for the financial benefit of the US courts and their associated businesses.
Some of the most obvious cases regarding consent are professional athletes and the women that prey upon them is a case and point. Imagine a beautiful woman stalking a bar frequented by professional baseball players.
A dead giveaway, this woman is not known by the other athletes. Next, she finds an athlete, they go home together, consent is given and then the next day it’s withdrawn. This woman that is committing fraud goes to the police and then files a police report. At this point, the athlete needs to get a lawyer to defend himself – criminally.
The only objective of the woman that is committing fraud with her civil lawyer is to gain a civil settlement. They use the criminal court’s conviction to justify a civil judgment against the athlete. In some cases, it’s been shown that these women that are committing fraud have cases against professional athletes all over the country. Whether the man is falsely convicted of a crime is meaningless to the woman or the lawyer.
One of the thousands of false convictions involving consent.
In reality, the court system (meaning everyone involved) has an intellectual understanding that this legal fraud is happening. They all know they drink from the same trough and will get paid regardless of the outcome.
What is even more obvious, the US courts do not care what happens to American society. That is one of the many reasons why courts in the United States are a threat to its National Security. The courts and their policies compromise US national cohesion. The Floyd riots are a case in point. The anger and resentment is simply directed at the law enforcement portion of the system. Unfortunately, the court system is seen as some sort of solution. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I’m in Norway now and was talking about this subject with a friend. And she asked me: ” Why would Americans do this to each other? It does not make any sense to me. ” she said.
I told her, at least from my perception, Norwegian society is an egalitarian society that is homogeneous in nature and culture. In contrast, Americans have a multicultural society that is the epitome of existentialism. From my experience, many Americans –not all– like to lie to each other to make themselves feel better about the world around them. Phrases such as “diversity is our strength” is a case in point. This hypocrisy creates anger and resentment from a multicultural standpoint. In many ways, America can be viewed as Samuel Huntington’s idea of the fault line between civilizations. In the case of the United States, the sources of the conflict are micro fault lines between class, culture, ideas, and identity. From my point of view, this is the major catalyst for domestic American human conflict.
In this way, the Judiciary – which in many ways is just a consortium of business interests or simply a guild of lawyers. Can pass legislation that helps forward its interest. For example, when US lawmakers pass laws regarding human sexuality and consent. The lawmakers can conduit female aggression through intersectional feminism. Leveraging the psychology of social exclusion and alienation toward a particular social class – men. Men in turn, – in existential reality – have no time to stop their lives and fight for their political and social rights, as men. This forwards the illusion that intersectional feminism is moving forward to its Utopia. A Utopia that will never be. A reality in which, women eventually die alone with no one to care for them.
From my perspective, this is yet another example in which the US courts are destroying social cohesion for the profit of their constituencies. Simply using the Nuremberg trials as a baseline. The defense that “I was just following the law” is not an appropriate defense. Sure, they can pass laws to burn witches on the White House lawn. But, that is the moment when you resign your position with extreme prejudice regardless of the money or the benefits.
Otherwise, one day, you may find yourself on the opposite end of the bar with a group of people that are far less merciful.