What is feminist justice and how is it different from patriarchal injustice? That is an essential question to ask before even considering the possibility of justice as justice needs be considered in epistemological, hermeneutic and teleological terms before the ontological possibility of justice may even be considered.
- Injustice of Patriarchy
- Justice as Redemption
- Judgment and Prejudice
- Justice in Virtual Reality
1. Injustice of Patriarchy
What is systematically misnamed as so called “justice” is mostly simply part of patriarchal more or less formalized systems of injustice as solely intended for the purpose of upholding structural oppression in cultural hegemony. Of course that is a definition of injustice rather than justice.
Structural oppression as performed by social agency exists in three forms, namely economic structural oppression, social structural oppression and statist structural oppression. Patriarchal systems of injustice are precisely concerned with upholding those very anthropological systems of physionomism specifically and discrimination, oppression, lies and prejudice (DOLP) generally.
Is it therefore simply all a play of power of discourse and signifiers whereby everything is relative and where lie equals veracity, where happiness equals suffering, where virtue equal oppression, where everything is undeterminable and where “everything” is equally performative and where organism does not exist because of nefarious social construction?
Of course that pertains to a certain “holistic” ontology of being, the notion of everything being linear and comprehensible, much like a street pattern in an inner city as planned with rectangular patterns of streets and blocks of houses.
Feminist justice thus needs consider that Para-Christian metaphysics itself is a pattern of patriarchal injustice and hence the possibility of rather than endless deconstructing Para-Christian metaphysics instead endeavor towards escaping the metaphysics of cultural captivity that is ethnocratic patriarchy.
It is thus insufficient to merely operate within that system of cultural captivity and so to speak “reform” it from within. But what is the alternative to egalitarian political reform of mainstream feminism and gender separatism of radical feminism?
2. Justice as Redemption
Ethnic culture legitimizes itself by claiming to constitute virtue such as for example the patriarchal misconception of ‘justice’. As the question of justice is thus one of virtue need we consider justice in anthropological terms in studying “modern” Eurocentric (i.e. Para-Christian) systems of injustice from the perspective of Queer anthropology, meaning studying modernity as an ‘exotic culture’ with “outlandish” and “bizarre” social practices masquerading as cultural ostensible “normality”.
Judaism brings the essential insight to the world that things are not as they ought be and hence the revolutionary message of Judaism and its fervent hope for future political redemption and ultimate establishment of justice. It is essential to understand that Judaism’s hope for the coming of redemption is essentially political in nature and “religion” as we now know it was only invented with the coming of modernity whereby aspects of non-Christian cultures as considered “parallel to Christianity” by European social scientists of the time became increasingly socially constructed as phantasmatically separate from other cultural expression.
If we study the Babylonian Talmud from the perspective Queer anthropology will we quickly discover that it mostly deals with what we today would describe as as simply culture and that what we today refer to as so called “religion” was always marginal within Rabbinic Judaism. The attempts to remake Rabbinic Judaism in the image of Christendom of course led to widespread auto-destruction of Rabbinically Jewish culture, similar indeed to tragic experiences in other fourth world indigenous cultures.
In order to fully understand this predicament need we also understand its structure of modus operandi, its very aporia indeed. Eurocentric Para-Christian culture operates by bisecting everything into binary opposites pair, also known as dichotomy. A structural dichotomy is obviously a social construction although falsely seeming obvious due to Para-Christian ethnocentrism. Of course subdividing something into two matters may be appropriate as depending on the situation just at it may be appropropriate to subdivide something into three matters, four matters, five matter or for that matter any number of matters. However routinely subdividing “everything” into two matters by default is of course a particularly stupid thing to do. And so the silly primitive mathematics of 2-1=1 as simplistically and imperialistically imposed on “everything” hence to a very significant extent structures Para-Christian culture and to significant extend many ethnic cultures worldwide as subjected to modernization. Another example is the color black which humans invariably perceive as a single color due limited optical vision of the human animals when in fact what is known as black constitutes a tremendous diversity of color which are not consciously discerned by the human eye.
It could of course be argued that default dichotomy is structurally inescapable within current European language and that is true to some extent in the sense that extensive new vocabularies need be devised for expressing things which current language does not allow expression of such as female intimate desire which is currently usually communicated secretly, both by semi-subconscious and subconscious communication as well as by emotionally suggestive, yet virtually always discreet hints.
This brings us back to the question of justice where we need identify obstacles to justice. We need consider that justice may not be reducible to pseudo-mathematical rationalism. Justice in the tradition of Rabbinic Judaism is perceived of as a process of redemption which is attained by means of incremental discursive progress and hence the existence of the Jewish science of Critical Theory in constituting an academic continuation of the Talmudic tradition. Of course epigones and obstructors in the nonsensical discourse of so called “postmodernism” have endeavored to divert Critical Theory from its teleological course of justice.
While the possibility for justice is structurally pre-existing in discourse (meaning that the hope for redemption is fully justified) is redemption hard intellectual labor and something which is not achieved by a mere conclusion of stroke of a pen but rather by an incremental communal process of attainment of nobility in intellectual virtue. That is what yeshiva study is about and so need we understand the yeshiva method of learning and its history and origin.
The yeshiva method of learning is known as chavruta which means studying a text together in pair. Rather than assuming a “natural” metaphysics of dichotomy is the text instead studied from two idiosyncratic perspectives of two different human beings.
Chavruta is an Aramaic term which means “friendship” as originally referring to practices of secondary marriage between two couples as already in a state of primary marriage. Dönmeh Judaism which is part of Alevi-Bektashi Judaism still practices this and this is in Turkey commonly referred to as “Dönmeh wife-swapping” when in fact secondary marriage between two couples is a refined and sacred institution of elaborate and gynocentric Sumerian sacred ritual sex.
Chavruta partners may be temporary and especially so for tutoring and coaching purposes, but most yeshiva students study with a permanent chavruta partner as essentially based on psychometric compatibility. Chavruta partners thus choose each other on the basis of intellectual and psychological matching.
Chavruta was however not invented by rabbis but is rather the study method of Plato’s academy and so Para-Christian default dichotomous thinking is simply a Para-Christian derivation of mass theological distortion of Hellenistic philosophy which in turn was founded in ancestral insights Greek Median Judaism of Antiquity. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle although no doubt original thinkers however mostly continued to communicate insights of a pre-existing tradition as having originally emerged in Sumer, the world’s first civilization.
The same perception can be observed in how Christians continue to systemically misinterpret the curiously misnamed Hellenistic Jewish anthology of the “New Testament”. To begin with is every rabbi fully aware that the so called “New Testament” if understood in historical context contains precisely nothing new since it simple presents Judaism itself with minor influences from Greek philosophical speculation of so called “metaphysics”. The misnamed “New Testament” is however a magnificent and extremely detailed documentation of Roman-era Jewish life in the land of Israel and is studied as such in history classes in the secular Jewish school system in Israel. That which in the “New Testament” is attributed to the famous Pharisaic rabbi of Christianity is simply what every pulpit rabbi teaches and was neither new then, nor now.
The notion of eschatological paradigm is introduced by means of Para-Christian binary thinking in epistemological time rather than as usually in epistemological spacing. The problem here is the conception of epistemological eschatology as taking place in rare collective leaps as well as purportedly “original” discoveries of what are actually pre-existing possibilities which of course already existed within the prior discourse from which the “invention” took place. Para-Christian carno-phallogocentrism thus turns into structure of the ostensibly personal which is of course would be simply ridiculous were this misunderstanding not so fundamentally tragic indeed.
This of course is not to underestimate the importance of empowering talent for the purpose of spearheading groundbreaking intellectual advancement. Para-Christian “academia” as an essentially repressive and authoritarian institution does however in many ways unnecessarily impair the trajectory of scientific progress by various irrational Para-Christian practices of paradigm, genre, discipline, narrative, ethnocentrism, metaphysics etc.
Eminist feminist theorist Donna J. Haraway has suggested that Israeli and Palestinian feminist scholars ought create a feminist intellectual space outside of the cultural captivity of the Para-Christian, namely barely secularized Christian metaphysics.
Feminist theory, Critical theory in general; science generally and human discourses of modernity generally need break free from the unnecessary discursive strictures of the Para-Christian as imposed by academic terror as insanely organized by the patriarchal intelligence world which closely monitors academia so as to prevent encroachment into the much less formal but in other ways highly methodologically problematic fields of intelligence science.
Patriarchy in modernity as an ostensibly invisible structure of power is centered in the thoroughly criminal and Frankist patriarchal intelligence world and hence need the annihilation of Frankism generally in every form and shape precipitate feminist social revolution of universal emancipation for the simple reason that universal emancipation cannot practically speaking be introduced unless nefarious ethnocratic patriarchy is first destroyed.
The Jewish process of redemption is one of continual trajectory of intellectual advancement while the Christian/Para-Christian process of salvation is one of leaps with often Para-Christian Jesus-style founders of discursivity heralding intellectual progress when in fact cognitively capable human beings generally should become involved in the attainment of increasing scientific/intellectual progress. The ideal of yeshiva study through chavruta needs thus be brought to humanity generally in carefully studying many different types of texts and other semiotic presentations/representations with the purpose of advancing the process of justice, namely redemption which is also in contemporary American Rabbinic Judaism referred to with the kabbalistic term tikkun olam. This obviously needs become gender-diverse and not gender-segregated as typically in Orthodox Judaism.
3. Judgment and Prejudice
The so called modern ‘system of justice’ is an evolved and superficially secularized culturally Christian and now Para-Christian system of injustice as based upon the notion that judgment as typically mediated to varying degrees by prejudice should be delivered by usually prejudicially disposed ignoramuses as enacting daily doomsday. How is it possible that persons without any education in gender science whatsoever are still tasked with “judging” in cases involving misogynistic crime such as systematic police persecution of transgender females as systematically covered up by thoroughly criminal, Frankist police intelligence through their effective control over prosecutors as protectively recruited by police intelligence.
Transgender females are subjected to horrendous crimes by Frankist police intelligence and are severely sexually exploited within Frankist police intelligence sects where they are considered inherently ‘satanic’.
Of course the ‘system of injustice’ is not limited to what is narrowly known as the ‘system of justice’ but the ‘system of injustice’ includes modern government bureaucracy generally. Government bureaucrats deliver their verdicts even without formal court proceedings and especially entrepreneurs are vulnerable to systemic abuse of power, including by thoroughly criminal Frankist police intelligence agencies.
How is possible that European-American members of courts of law in the United States are allowed to pass systematically prejudicial judgments against African-American persons whose systemic humiliation in color-based structural oppression they may be sympathetic towards but in actual practice have little interest in genuinely understanding?
Why are LGBTQI people so afraid of courts of law? That is rather understandable considering that members of a court of law typically have no training whatsoever in Feminist Theory and Queer Theory of gender science and so why should LGBTQI people reasonably expect impartial judgment?
Courts of law even as strictly and properly abiding by procedural rules for legal process are no less influenced, formed, shaped and colored by physionomism specifically and DOLP generally than is society at large. They pass “judgment” as based upon their own imagination of the other as part and parcel of structural prejudice of oppressive cultural hegemony.
It needs be clear that the so called “system of justice” is part of the wider bureaucratic system of injustice which hence needs simply become abolished with universal emancipation. That of course opens the question as to what ought come in its stead?
4. Justice in Virtual Reality
Most bureaucrats as many other mass professions of the dying era of capitalism will need to become phased out in the increasingly approaching Talentist economic era of Virtual Reality (VR).
The online world in being heavily globalized is essentially lawless with almost zero law enforcement with the exception of course of illegal extensive police intelligence entrapment operations as targeting innocent citizens and residents for purposes of coercive intelligence recruitment to ruthless, brutal and thoroughly criminal Frankist police intelligence agencies.
The old systems of patriarchal exercise of power have no real answers as regards law enforcement on the Internet other than pervasive surveillance and illegal online police methods of harassment, intimidation, provocation, entrapment and extortion.
What is instead needed is almost complete transparency. This means that every human being should have a legal electronic identity to which all other online and mobile identities should be tied. While it should be possible to use aliases online will it be possible for anyone to find out the real identity behind the respective assumed alias. Every person should have a unique internet domain name and it should become easy to create corporations, each one with a further domain name. It will be fully public however which person(s) who stand behind any particular corporation. A domain name should contain at least two combination of letters with one dot between each combination of letters.
Surveillance is only a threat if the surveillance is withheld from the public. Public surveillance cameras should thus broadcast online around the clock in the interest of public safety. Law enforcement should be under constant public surveillance so that the public will be able to follow their every word and action online in real time. Citizens and residents should be fully entitled to demand copies of their full surveillance records at any time.
Citizens/residents would each have two legal jurisdictions of residence. The first would be residence IRL and the second would be the online municipality. Physical municipalities should be abolished and a citizen/resident should be able to freely choose her own virtual municipality as subject to acceptance by that virtual municipality.
Virtual municipalities should be formed as voluntary corporations with democratically elected organization. Virtual municipalities should be intentional communities of particular ethico-aesthetico-political lifestyle. Virtual municipalities should however be legally disallowed from engaging in illegal discrimination of any kind. This means that virtual municipalities ned be inclusive of all member provided that all virtual municipality residents as subject to democratically legislated municipal law abide by democratically legislated axiomatic community standards.
A member of a virtual municipality will be able to freely participate in the life of the virtual municipality in online social life generally and through realistic participation in Virtual Reality in municipal life in particular. Any person should irrespective of her number of citizenships only be legally allowed to a member of one single municipality worldwide. A virtual municipality would not be subject to national law as it would be open to humans generally irrespective of citizenships or lack thereof but would however need to fully comply with international law.
Joining a new municipality will be a comprehensive review process whereby the applicant is vetted for social compatibility with standards of democratically legislated municipal law.
It will be public record as to which virtual municipality any particular human person belongs and it will be illegal to use any other identity than one’s own identity within one’s virtual municipality. Virtual municipalities will be global as unlimited by national borders and so will municipal membership not be limited by physical residence.
Virtual reality should be based in virtual municipalities although it should of course become possible to communicate and interact in VR between virtual communities. Any corporation must also be legally, formally and practically based and incorporated in one single virtual municipality.
Virtual municipalities are essential for online law enforcement which needs be no less transparent than law enforcement IRL. The globalized nature of the online world has made is essentially lawless and practically speaking unaccountable. Virtual municipalities are an essential part of bringing rule of law to the online world as victims of crime will turn to their own municipal law enforcement officers for purposes of attaining legal accountability.
It is essential that law enforcement acts on behalf of victims rather than as of now the corrupt patriarchal police invariably being criminal perpetrators themselves. Municipal law enforcement will therefore prioritize the security and wellbeing of members of the virtual municipality and that will also help create cohesion, solidarity and communitarianism within each and every virtual municipality.
The principle of subsidiarity requires decentralization, yet there is no reason why decentralization ought be geographic rather than communitarian.
Virtual municipalities means that citizens/residents will live much of their lives in their own safe and secure intentional communities. Social media will adapt as social media providers such as Facebook Inc. will become providers of municipal communal space for virtual municipalities, including VR work space.
Democratically legislated municipal axiomatic law also means that citizens will participate in the democratic development of the very community in which they indeed spend most of their time in life.
The internet needs become anarchistic rather than as of present essentially anarchic and so will the establishment of compulsory membership in a legally incorporated virtual municipality mean that progressive libertarianism will establish the realization ethico-political visions of diverse projects of communitarianism.
A member of a virtual municipality will spend most of her online interactive social time (including in VR) in her own virtual municipality for the simple reason that the risk of bullying, mistreatment, abuse and exploitation will be minimal in the virtual municipality. Online worlds have unfortunately served to reinforce female vulnerability in public space and making sure that everyone will feel safe and secure online needs therefore become an essential task of every virtual municipality.
A virtual municipality will need to conform with all provisions of international law also in terms of its founding spirit which importantly needs be ethico-political in nature. This means that although in principle anyone can form a virtual municipality will there need be a comprehensive prior review process so that its founding charter is established in accordance with the noble tenets of emancipation, freedom and democracy in accordance with the principles of dignity, respect and liberty.
It is essential to be cognizant that a virtual municipality will be subjected to international law but not to national law as a virtual municipality will at least in principle be universal and global in nature. Virtual municipalities therefore will not be subject to national law which will have jurisdiction IRL only.
Virtual municipal law will thus apply within the online space of the virtual municipality and national law will only apply IRL. What then about non-municipal online space and VR integration between virtual municipalities? This is an essential question to ponder. Any online misdemeanor against a member of a virtual community will be considered as if an attack on the entire virtual municipality and the community of the victim will bring charges against the defendant in the community of the offender.
This means that the virtual community of the defendant will become responsible for the legal defense of the defendant against the charges of the claimant.
A virtual municipality could have any size demographically speaking as this too should be elective as properly for an intentional community. Many virtual municipalities will have an upper limit on the size of the demographics of its membership while some will be comprised of millions of persons. This will be possible as long as members strictly abide by the communitarian ethico-political standards of democratically legislated law of the virtual municipality in strict conformance with requirements of non-discrimination of international law.
What then will be included in the realm of the virtual municipality? VR gainful labor will mostly be performed from within the virtual municipality. Communitarian life will mostly be performed within the safe and secure space of the virtual community. Everyone will select a virtual municipality of their own specific choice which means that online social interaction will become far more comfortable within the virtual community itself which essentially in social terms will be one vast family.
A virtual municipality will be a safe and secure social space for both VR and other online social interaction. Most online social activity will for this reason be performed within the virtual municipal community and social media corporations will adapt themselves for this purpose by providing intra-municipal safe social space.
The Eurolect – Politics of the Para-Christian documentation project
The Intelligence Entrapment Methods documentation project.