Gang violence is not the problem

[godelian]

The feminist State is a very serious threat to the nuclear family.

Gang violence is not.

Gang violence is merely somewhat inconvenient. Furthermore, their protection fees are substantially cheaper.

When an unofficial mafia is less of a problem than the official one, substitution is a natural process.

Therefore, gang violence is not the problem. It is rather the solution to the problem.

[Gary Childress]

Therefore, gang violence is not the problem. It is rather the solution to the problem.

Sucks to be an innocent bystander caught in the middle of gang violence, though. Same way with governments that get their people involved in wars. Gang violence is no solution to any problem, any more than national violence is. It's just violence at a more intimate level.

[godelian]

Therefore, gang violence is not the problem. It is rather the solution to the problem.

Sucks to be an innocent bystander caught in the middle of gang violence, though. Same way with governments that get their people involved in wars. Gang violence is no solution to any problem, any more than national violence is. It's just violence at a more intimate level.

There is still one important difference: Unlike the feminist State, the gangs do not seek to destroy the nuclear family.

In Afghanistan, the gangs became militia. They successfully eradicated the Soviet feminist state out of the country. After that, they successfully deported NATO, i.e. the western feminist state, from Kabul Airport. Now the Taliban are themselves the government. As long as they do not degenerate into a feminist state that seeks to destroy the nuclear family, the regime can last for a very long time. The dead bodies are the price to pay for survival from generation to generation. It is a rather small price to pay, if it successfully leads to the complete eradication of the feminist State.

In my opinion, a good bout of rule by gangs is necessary. A national state may sooner or later return, decades later, but not a feminist one.

In the context of eradicating the feminist State, I begin to see gang violence differently. For example, the gangs in Haiti are undoubtedly necessary too. It is against the laws of nature and biology to allow the feminist State to return. In that sense, the Haitian gangs fulfill an important biological role. Violent gangs emerge to save humanity from worse.

[Iwannaplato]

The feminist State is a very serious threat to the nuclear family.

Gang violence is not.

Gang violence is merely somewhat inconvenient. Furthermore, their protection fees are substantially cheaper.

When an unofficial mafia is less of a problem than the official one, substitution is a natural process.

Therefore, gang violence is not the problem. It is rather the solution to the problem.

1) anything that leads to the death of family members is a threat to nuclear families.
2) gang violence is associated with absent fathers to children, thus undermining the nuclear family.

[godelian]

1) anything that leads to the death of family members is a threat to nuclear families.
2) gang violence is associated with absent fathers to children, thus undermining the nuclear family.

Humanity roved the planet in hunter-gatherer gangs for 250 000 years. These gangs engaged each other in battle.

The occasional dead body obviously did not make any difference to their long-term survival.

A national state can theoretically be better than gang violence but it can also be much worse. In my opinion, gang violence is vastly preferable to the feminist State.

[Gary Childress]

In my opinion, a good bout of rule by gangs is necessary.

Necessary for what, violence? What "laws of nature" is a "feminist state" running counter to?

[Iwannaplato]

1) anything that leads to the death of family members is a threat to nuclear families.
2) gang violence is associated with absent fathers to children, thus undermining the nuclear family.

Humanity roved the planet in hunter-gatherer gangs for 250 000 years. These gangs engaged each other in battle.

Tribe had extended families and lacked absent father and fathering that is present in gang culture.

The occasional dead body obviously did not make any difference to their long-term survival.

Your comparing a subculture with an entire society. If we had a gang society, it would be vastly more than the occasional dead body.

A national state can theoretically be better than gang violence but it can also be much worse. In my opinion, gang violence is vastly preferable to the feminist State.

Well, yes, you said that.
Is there a feminist State we can compare it to?

[godelian]

In my opinion, a good bout of rule by gangs is necessary.

Necessary for what, violence? What "laws of nature" is a "feminist state" running counter to?

Starting from scratch is necessary again.

Just like the Roman empire was eventually taken over by gangs, that later on formed kingdoms, the western feminist State will be eradicated, probably also by gang violence.

Feminist governments that stick their noses into private nuclear family affairs needs to be eliminated. The gangs will solve the problem. It could also be solved by geopolitical wars but that is more dangerous. But then again, ultimately, even that outcome would be preferable.

[Gary Childress]

In my opinion, a good bout of rule by gangs is necessary.

Necessary for what, violence? What "laws of nature" is a "feminist state" running counter to?

Starting from scratch is necessary again.

Just like the Roman empire was eventually taken over by gangs, that later on formed kingdoms, the western feminist State will be eradicated, probably also by gang violence.

Feminist governments that stick their noses into private nuclear family affairs needs to be eliminated. The gangs will solve the problem. It could also be solved by geopolitical wars but that is more dangerous. But then again, ultimately, even that outcome would be preferable.

What is it that you perceive "feminist" governments do that brings the need for them to be eradicated? You just keep repeating that something you call "feminist governments" need to be eliminated but you don't seem to give an actual reason for it. What do you have against so called "feminist governments"? And what is a "feminist government"?

[godelian]

What is it that you perceive "feminist" governments do that brings the need for them to be eradicated? You just keep repeating that something you call "feminist governments" need to be eliminated but you don't seem to give an actual reason for it. What do you have against so called "feminist governments"? And what is a "feminist government"?

Western governments break up the nuclear family by incentivizing divorce. In the meanwhile, marriage rate and birth rate are dropping far below replacement level. The feminist government must be removed from family matters. I think that replacing it by gangs will turn out to be a solution.

[Gary Childress]

What is it that you perceive "feminist" governments do that brings the need for them to be eradicated? You just keep repeating that something you call "feminist governments" need to be eliminated but you don't seem to give an actual reason for it. What do you have against so called "feminist governments"? And what is a "feminist government"?

Western governments break up the nuclear family by incentivizing divorce. In the meanwhile, marriage rate and birth rate are dropping far below replacement level. The feminist government must be removed from family matters. I think that replacing it by gangs will turn out to be a solution.

OK. Are you being serious or are you being facetious? I can't really tell at this point.

[godelian]

OK. Are you being serious or are you being facetious? I can't really tell at this point.

It is probably a bit early.

The financial-economic crisis has not yet started in full earnest.

There is already a cost of living crisis but that is just the beginning. It is the inevitable hyperinflation that will kickstart the chaos.

In fact, China is currently also going down that path.

In both cases, it will naturally lead to regime change.

[godelian]

A national state can theoretically be better than gang violence but it can also be much worse. In my opinion, gang violence is vastly preferable to the feminist State.

Well, yes, you said that.
Is there a feminist State we can compare it to?

Every western state is a feminist State that seeks to destroy the nuclear family.

So, how will they go under?
Nuclear war or gang violence?

In the best case, the gangs take over.

[Harbal]

What is it that you perceive "feminist" governments do that brings the need for them to be eradicated? You just keep repeating that something you call "feminist governments" need to be eliminated but you don't seem to give an actual reason for it. What do you have against so called "feminist governments"? And what is a "feminist government"?

Western governments break up the nuclear family by incentivizing divorce. In the meanwhile, marriage rate and birth rate are dropping far below replacement level. The feminist government must be removed from family matters. I think that replacing it by gangs will turn out to be a solution.

OK. Are you being serious or are you being facetious? I can't really tell at this point.

I think you are overlooking a third, and much more obvious, option; he is just being plain stupid.

[Iwannaplato]

Every western state is a feminist State that seeks to destroy the nuclear family.

So, how will they go under?
Nuclear war or gang violence?

In the best case, the gangs take over.

Yes, nuclear war is very feminist. I think I'm beginning to agree.
Gang culture is a culture of rape - and nothing brings a family or clan together like the rape of one of their members. Of course, in gang culture the women around the gang members are often raped and sexually abused by their own gang, but this kind of trauma can foster empathy between people, well at least the women in the gangs.
Gangs, of course, traffic in drugs, weapons and sex slaves/prostitutes. None of these are challenges to the nuclear family.
Naive people might think that the kinds of loyalty expected by the gang leader and his nearest supporters undermines the nuclear family, since you need to love and do the bidding of the gang leader before your own and your family's interests. But really, the gang leader is a good role model for the father in the family. Violently enforcing rules centered on increasing his wealth, power, and the number of sexual partners.
Gangs replace individual industry, among their members, with violence, or the threat of violence. For example, in their family-oriented affection for both blackmail and protection rackets. IOW instead of government taxation, that feminist nuclear family destroyer, we have blackmail payments and protection paid to people so they don't hurt you. This is great role modeling for the children of gang members, acknowledged as legitimate or not acknowledged such as those born to the women who are raped. They learn that working is the pussy way of getting money. Better to use occasional violence and constant threats of violence to earn money. This of course will reduce the amount of weak, feminized men and women who try to earn money via offering services and products.
The constant fear and stress related to gang violence is also good. No sissy men here. Well, not openly. Families thrive in this kind of environment. It's not unlike how citizens feel in authoritarian regimes, but it's better micromanaged and more surprising.
Male on male rape, more common in gang culture, not as sex but as domination also increases. This will train the children to avoid being low in the hierarchy and it fits nicely with nuclear families and the Abrahamic religions.
Speaking of which, while gang members are about as atheistic and secular as possible as most cultures run by psychopaths are, this will lead to many people calling out to God for help on a regular basis. The culture is atheist/secular, but individuals are given a lot of encouragement to cry out for God's mercy, even those without a religious bent.

Godelian, you're really on to something here.
بالفعل! قد قال كلمات حكيمة. **مُبَارَكْ** على حكمتك العميقة والملهمة. Marshallah!

The relevant quote from the Koran apart from the above praise that is merely in Arabic is....

Quran (2:191-193)
“And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing… but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone.

Of course with gangs it's not Allah they need believe in but the gang leader or for those not in the gang the gang members in general.
But the spirit of Islam shines through (in a secular version) in gangs.