Karl Marx cunningly said "social progress" should be measured by what women wanted. Hmmmm...

Great social changes are impossible without feminine upheaval. Social progress can be measured exactly by the social position of the fair sex, the ugly ones included.”   --Karl Marx

As should be obvious to anyone with an IQ over room temperature, people who have "an agenda" only say and write things that advance that agenda.

In the quote above it should be obvious that Marx--who advocated a revolution to destroy existing societies and replace them with "socialism"--is NOT criticizing women.  Instead he's praising the idea that "social progress" can be measured by how closely a society pleases (caters to) women.

Average American: "Dat perfectly reasonable!  After all, women are fair, gentle.  Compassionate.  Non-competitive.  Tolerant.  A society based on those qualities would be just faaabulous!"

Seems plausible, eh?  But let's actually examine that claim.

A "tolerant" society would demand that we tolerate people who sit on their ass instead of working.  And then "compassion" would demand that society not let those who refused to work starve.  Indeed, compassion--a key demand of a female-led society--would require that the government force people who worked to support those who refused to work.

Wait...isn't that exactly what we've got now?

Some people--mostly awful males--have found they can get money by theft or robbery.  In male-run societies such thugs are imprisoned or executed, which signals others considering such a "career" to revise their plans.  But in a female-led society, "compassion" merely gives the robber or thief a stern letter of reprimand.  Jailed thugs are released after serving a month or two--and almost invariable resume robbing and theft.

Wait...isn't that exactly what we've got now?

In older times children were raised mainly by women.  But feminists complained that this was unfair!   Men had rewarding, interesting careers!  Saddling women with the bulk of the task of raising children made it harder for women to have rewarding, interesting careers!  So, unfair!

Since a female-run society prizes fairness, regardless of logic, that was intolerable.  But since few men are well suited to raising kids, how would society satisfy the female demand that they not be tasked with that role?

The obvious fix is daycare and turning the raising of children over to the government school system.  Works like a charm, eh?  Good outcomes, right?

Wait...isn't that exactly what we've got now?

Marx published the first volume of "Das Kapital" in 1867. Just over 120 years later his cunning message to women that the best society would embrace the "social position of the 'fair sex'" had been embraced by the U.S. and other western nations--and the seeds of destruction were planted.

If there's a life after death, Marx must be laughing his ass off at his own cunning and brilliance.

We're still alive (I think).  So what's our excuse for allowing this cunning bastard's scheme to destroy us?

(For the record: I love women.  I just think only one in a hundred-million is well suited to run a country.)