You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
-1

[–] 21894087? 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

  • [Would it be] 'leftist' [if OP said] "fuck the patriarchy" in reference to aforementioned families/entity?

It would, we agree.

1
0

[–] 21894186? 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

we agree

Not necessarily. The underlying point I was alluding to acts as the TL;DR. (Excuse the long sentence (shitty grammar) ahead)

If OP, let's change it up slightly and go down the hypothetical route, a hypothetical right-winger who called the families/entity in question, "patriarchy", and our hypothetical leftist were to be specific in naming who they consider "patriarchy", chances are good that they'd both have so much overlap that all left/right lines would blur and they'd both finally realize that the same broader entity (by any name) is trying to pit them against one another.

At most you could split hairs and say the term "patriarchy" is popularly a leftist soundbite.

0
1

[–] 21894769? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Not necessarily.

No problem.

There's the left's (re)'definition' of patriarchy, a boogie man of sorts, defined by wealth and power, for which the aforementioned families fit the bill.

Then there's the original definition of patriarchy as a system of society or government by fathers or elder males of the community, for which none of these families are a representative.

I believe a right winger, at least a red-pilled one, will not recognize those families as part of a real patriarchy but as imposters that are not legitimate rulers.