A permanent lapse of reason

You can be sure that when there are people doing this kind of thing that they really are quite bright, that public life just doesn't matter very much to them anymore, and see political life as nothing more than a way to project one's personal issues on others.

Wether a patriarchy actually exists is questionable. That this idiot wants a few women to form a matriarchy is unquestionable.

Party aims to ban marriage

«A new political party in Sweden says it will abolish marriage if it gets into power.

The Feminist Initiative, which expects more than 20% of the vote in next year's election, claims marriage "is not about love, but about ownership".

FI founder Tiina Rosenberg, said: "Instead of marriage we want to promote a co-habitation law that ignores gender and allows more than two people in a partnership."

But she said in allowing relationships to involve more than two people, the FI did not want Sweden to fall back into a "patriarchal structure" with one man having a harem of women.

"A man who lives with eight women in a patriarchal structure, where the man decides and the women obey is not what we are aiming for," said Rosenberg.

And in order to encourage men to vote for them as well, the party's all-female board is also calling for the introduction of a six-hour working day.»

This is a classic pattern of the far left. To get into power, give a faction here or there something they're Jonse-ing – apart from the fact that the part of the agenda that they aren’t telling you about (but provide a small hint at), is sandbox Marxism.
All is seen through the prism of power, wielding a great deal of it, and emotionally blackmailing society by weeping that you have none.

It’s bad enough that Scandinavia is drifting toward requiring a percentage of legislators to be of a certain sex requiring official to be of a specific sort, and rewarding non-winners in elections – when will they ask themselves why they’re disposing of democracy altogether for the sake of these political fetishes?

Destruction of the traditional family pattern for the sake of the state ideology’s power is something even the early Soviets abandoned. You can also tell that their economic skills are stellar.
After all, they don't want to free anyone from a social stricture at all - they want to force everyone else to live in their special little social dictatorship. It's obvious that Rosenberg and he party see people as nothing more than children that should be told what to do - after all, if a woman and man wanted to be married, why shouldn't they? If they're Christians then the state would be forcing them to commit a sin against their own belief system, on the theory that they should be forced to live by Rosenberg's personal philosophy for their own good. Besides, who would want to live in a country where they could only work 6 hours a day even if they want to work more to get ahead in life? It could be that she's just talking about men working 6 hours, but nevertheless...

Leftist feminism shows itself for what it is, totalitarianism, not liberation of any sort. The solutions it seeks are Marxist-Leninist because of their simplicity, and the prospect of labor free promises that are a lie. There ain’t no free nothin’ in this world. Even if the price to one person is zero, there is still a cost borne on someone.

Make no mistake about it, this is a risk of political repression that includes any other life choices as well as the repression of religion. Can you
think of any traditional philosophy that doesn't have marriage and parenting by a mother and father at the center of it? I wonder too how will they maintain the sham of "multiculturalism" if immigrants can't marry? Will existing marriages have to be dissolved? Will any owner/enterprise need to be dissolved if it requires more than 30 hours a week of anyone's time? They should call it the creation of misery through mass poverty plan, and put it on a game show called “who want to be a third world failure?”

A forced world view which had atheism as its' centerpiece was the Nazis' organizing principle. Rosenberg's view is no different.