In sum, the history of the West shows that once economic and social advancement translates into the bureaucratization and mechanization of a Western society, the results of the bureaucratization and mechanization of a Western society in turn translates into what Emile Durkheim called anomie along with what Max Weber called the disenchantment of society. And once anomie and disenchantment take hold of a Western society, the inevitable economic, political, and social outcomes of such an ontological state are calamity and disaster on both a domestic and international scale. This particular fact about the impact of the bureaucratization and mechanization of Western societies can be demonstrated by events and occurrences such as World War I, World War II, the Cold War, American global hegemony, and also January 6 (with January 6 being the culmination of the policy of American global hegemony which stemmed from the bureaucratization and mechanization of American society).
Also, when the economic, political, and social impact of the bureaucratization and mechanization of society is felt in a Western society, the brunt of the backlash towards such a state is felt first and foremost by minorities and women. But of all the various minority groups, the minority group which bears the brunt of the backlash more than any other group are Jews. The fact that Jews bear the brunt of the backlash towards the bureaucratization and mechanization of society is demonstrated by the history of the West, particularly in the 19th and early 20th centuries when Western Europe underwent massive bureaucratization and mechanization. What coincided with massive bureaucratization and mechanization in Western Europe during the 19th and early 20th century was the infamous “Jewish Question” amongst academic and intellectual circles in Western Europe. In turn, the “Jewish Question” of the Western intellectual tradition led to what was known as the “Final Solution” of the Nazi regime in the 1930’s. Zionism is thus a direct byproduct of the “Jewish Question” which emerged in the Western intellectual tradition during the massive bureaucratization and mechanization of the 19th and early 20th centuries in Europe.
As a result, antisemitism – along with misogyny – are very much ingrained in Western culture and Western history. Misogyny as a deeply entrenched element and tradition of Western culture and Western history goes as far back as Plato. Moreover, misogyny is rooted in both Anglo-American and Continental European culture. Misogyny as part of Anglo-American culture is evidenced as far back as Shakespeare, given that Shakespeare is essentially the reflection of Anglo-American culture and thus the Anglo-American mind. In a poem titled “Love” – which has explicit misogynistic overtones – Shakespeare wrote:
“TELL me where is Fancy bred,
Or in the heart or in the head?
How begot, how nourished?
It is engender’d in the eyes,
With gazing fed; and Fancy dies
In the cradle where it lies.
Let us all ring Fancy’s knell:
I’ll begin it, –Ding, dong, bell.
All. Ding, dong, bell.”
Also, misogyny in Continental Europe is very much reflected in Schopenhauer, who wrote:
“Only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex: for it is with this drive that all its beauty is bound up. More fittingly than the fair sex, women could be called the unaesthetic sex. Neither for music, nor poetry, nor the plastic arts do they possess any real feeling or receptivity: if they affect to do so, it is merely mimicry in service of their effort to please. This comes from the fact that they are incapable of taking a purely objective interest in anything whatever, and the reason for this is, I think as follows. Man strives in everything for a direct domination over things, either by comprehending or by subduing them. But woman is everywhere and always relegated to a merely indirect domination, which is achieved by means of man, who is consequently the only thing she has to dominate directly. Thus it lies in the nature of women to regard everything simply as a means of capturing a man, and their interest in anything else is only simulated, is no more than a detour, i.e. amounts to coquetry and mimicry.”
One personal story also reinforces the point about misogyny as a focal point of Western culture and history. An Afghan woman who is a hairstylist in this area recently had a conversation with my mother during an appointment. She said that years ago, she decided that she would marry an American man because she was under the impression that an American man would not be as abusive as an Afghan man. She is now divorced, and has said that she suffered more abuse from the American man than she would have ever suffered from an Afghan man. My father – who is a doctor here in the outskirts of Washington, DC – sometimes gets patients from Rural Virginia, where grassroots American culture is perhaps strongest. A number of his patients from Rural Virginia have told my father that wife-beating is a very normal thing in Rural American culture. When one takes all these things into consideration, one arrives at the conclusion that the framing of Islamic civilization and culture as anti-Semitic and misogynistic by the American state over the course of the last couple of decades was merely self-projection.