We are superseding towards the society of “angry dummies (AD)”. AD are a form of zombies who feel that they have rights “over others” THAN “with others”; they shun ANY opinion which does not act in sync with their bias beliefs and would walk an extra mile to ensure that your opinion is faced with “ad hominem” argumentation. This tribe is lenient towards herd thinking or collective beliefs. Teaching them about individualism is like administering medicine to a dead person. They think individualism is about “celebrating yourself the way you want to, till the government permits your action or society acknowledges your standard.” This is logically incorrect, in my view, because it does not set you free or liberates you from the chain of servitude. Therefore, I am responsible to premise that modern feminism is transcending over the principles of liberty and ego. Modern feminism a.k.a feminazism is a doctrine or movement that advocates “equal rights” for women. This type of feminism suffers from “selective bias” syndrome too. This type of feminism is responsible for 1) turning away many women from joining it, 2) promoting the culture of “political correctness”, 3) censoring “free speech” selectively, 4) maximizing the arbitrary power of government, and 5) minimizing the quality of liberty.
Instead of ceding to collectivists the essential conversation about how to overcome cultural and institutionalized sexism, Ludwig von Mises took the problem seriously and offered his own solutions. And Mises’s argument on gender equality sounds revolutionary even today.
Woman’s struggle to preserve her personality in marriage is part of that struggle for personal integrity which characterizes the rationalist society of the economic order based on private ownership of the means of production. . . . All mankind would suffer if woman should fail to develop her rational ego and be unable to unite with man as equal, freeborn companions and comrades.
His reconstruction of the history of sexual relations puts a fine point on what the principle of violence meant for the status of women in history. In practice, modern feminism means not the empowerment of women or “others”. In fact, they want the government (a legal thug of collective association) to arbitrate over all spheres of her life (including yours). See argumentum ad baculum.
And, as Mises explained many times, the state only has one means at its disposal: violence over person and property. In other words, libertarian feminism can free women from “violent relationships” as a social norm. Individualist feminism is, in practice, the way to realize the vision of feminism in practice.
Modern feminism is a movement of false consciousness. They should examine the following theses, first:
“While some would say women are superior to men, others would say women are equal to men. While some would want laws favoring women, others would want laws to protect women, and still others would want equal laws for men and women. While some people think women behind veils are not liberalized, others think women in burkhas are not liberalized. While some demand police protection, others demand protection from the police.In such a scenario, how do we subscribe to one definition of feminism?”
My libertarian girlfriend Deeksha Gehlot puts, “The important thing is, how you demand those rights back? Do you want those rights because you are a woman, or do you demand those rights because you are an individual? If those rights are sought as an individual, then feminism is not killing individuality for sure. But when such rights are demanded by virtue of being a woman then one has to take special care that individuality is not lost. If we explore what happens when rights are demanded as a ‘woman’, there are two possibilities. Either women are treated like any other individuals or women are given special treatment. If, despite demanding rights by the virtue of being a woman, women are treated like individuals, then there is no issue. However, when women are placed into a victimized, vulnerable, disadvantaged special category, it is from that point that the problem begins. Giving a person a special ‘right’ entails taking away an existing right from someone else.“
To fight the current menace of collectivism and modern feminism, individualist feminism is a panacea. Individualist feminism encourages women to take full responsibility for their own lives. For example: liberty of opportunity is greater than equality of opportunity. It also opposes any government interference into the choices adults make with their own bodies because, it contends, such interference creates a coercive hierarchy. If women are treated as individuals, all the pro-women, protectionist, special laws and policies would vanish and all human beings will be seen as individuals. Isn’t that equality?