Dr. Emmet Scott, whose works on the true origins of the Dark Ages and the long-obscured origins of the Islamic “faith” have had a profound impact on my understanding of the world, turned his critical eye toward the long-held feminist trope of matriarchal cultures that brought peace and plenty to all.

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that the notion that successful matriarchies existed and thrived and held off the competition is, well, a myth:

Perhaps the most prominent high priestess of the Great Goddess was Lithuanian archaeologist Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994). During the 1950s and 60s Gimbutas developed her so-called “Kurgan Thesis;” basically the idea that the archaeological marker of the arrival in Europe of Indo-European-speakers was to be found in the Bronze Age Kurgan mound burials of the Pontic Steppe, a vast region incorporating most of present-day Ukraine, southern Russia and northern Kazakhstan. Controversially, Gimbutas further claimed that these nomadic Indo-Europeans brought with them a warrior-culture dominated by male sky-gods, which supplanted earlier matriarchal and goddess-worshipping cultures. In this, she echoed ideas already expressed at great length by Robert Graves in his 1948 book The White Goddess. Over the next three decades Gimbutas developed her ideas further in a series of books, articles and lectures delivered at campuses throughout America and Europe, where she was immensely influential amongst the burgeoning women’s movement. Three major works, The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe (1974), The Language of the Goddess (1989), and The Civilization of the Goddess (1991), presented an overview of her conclusions regarding what she saw as Europe’s primeval matriarchy.

The importance of Gimbutas in the development of the matriarchal myth, and also by extension in the development of modern radical feminism, cannot be overstated. Her archaeological experience and expertise, together with her wide knowledge of linguistics and anthropology, seemed to give academic credibility to the romantic and poetic ramblings of Arthur Evans and Robert Graves. Yet in retrospect it is hard to imagine why anyone with even a modicum of common sense could have been taken in. There were warning signals everywhere. Right from the beginning, for example, many historians were critical of Evans’ interpretation of Minoan Crete, and a devastating blow was delivered in 1974 when German author Hans Georg Wunderlich published his Wohin der Stier Europa trug? (Where did the Bull carry Europa? published in English in 1975 as The Secret of Crete). Here Wunderlich, a trained geologist, examined the structure of the “palace” of Knossos in Crete in detail and came to the conclusion that the building could never have been a palace for the living. It was, instead, a charnel house, a massive necropolis which doubled as an arena for human sacrifice. For the happy-go-lucky “bull vaulting game,” said Wunderlich, was nothing of the sort: it was a ferocious form of human sacrifice which involved young men and women being gored and trampled to death by a sacred bull. This, said Wunderlich, was the origin of the legend of the Minotaur. Since Wunderlich’s time human sacrifice has been confirmed as an integral part of Cretan religious practice, whilst the supposed “pacifism” which Evans and others had imagined, was exposed as nonsensical.

And so it has proved in region after region. Neolithic Europe, for example, which Gimbutas tried to portray as some form of matriarchal utopia, has been shown to have been just as warlike as later epochs of European history. The most prized possessions found in Neolithic burials are invariably weapons of war, such as bows, spears, axes and maces.

Indeed, throughout the planet, it has emerged that in the earliest epochs of culture and civilization war was universal and human sacrifice widespread (if not also universal). Modern “Druids” and Neo-Pagans, strongly influenced by the Matriarchy myth, have rejected Christianity in its entirety, and every solstice sees historic sites such as Stonehenge besieged by thousands of Wicca and Druid practitioners colourfully garbed in flowing vestments and jewels. But the tree-hugging, touchy-feely, feminist religion of the Neo-Pagans bears no relationships whatsoever to the actual religion of Europe’s Celtic and Germanic ancestors. In fact, notwithstanding the occurrence of the odd unusual character such as Boudicca, both the latter peoples were warlike in the extreme and practiced human sacrifice on a grand scale. Nor were women considered even remotely equal to men and all the evidence suggests that a husband or father had the power of life and death over all the female members of his household. Homosexuality too, as Tacitus informs us, was a criminal offence punishable by a horrific death.

The harsh reality that fantasists and feminists (Lord, forgive us our redundancies) refuse to face is that matriarchy simply does not work. The basic natures of both men and women dictate that a female-dominated society would very quickly turn into Hell on Earth for all concerned.

I have pointed this out several different times. I once tackled the idea by noting that every time any female author has tried to create a realistic matriarchy, she has always failed. Another time, I pointed out that when women have been put in charge without masculine leadership and dominance to guide them, disaster has inevitably followed.

Both of those previous articles linked to a really quite excellent video once referenced in a Return of Kings article on a similar subject. Here it is again, in case anyone missed the point:

There is simply no getting away from the fact that, as a general rule, women do not want to lead.

Give any modern STRAWNG EMPOWAAAAH’D WIMMENZ a chance to jump up and grab the brass ring of leadership, and she will almost certainly take it. But almost immediately, she will begin to hate the role that she has been thrust into and the burdens that it imposes upon her.

There are very, very few women who genuinely enjoy the challenges and stresses associated with leadership. They do exist, in small numbers, but those unusual “Alpha females” are the exceptions that prove the rule. And even those women find that they dislike having to be in charge all of the time. No matter where you look, women strongly prefer being with men who take charge and make decisions as the heads of their households.

And what applies at the household level applies even more strongly at the general societal level.

The promised idyllic matriarchy would in fact be Hell on Earth because women are not generally capable of resolving conflict through force, persuasion, or reason. They prefer to resolve conflicts through consensus instead- which is a huge problem because asking a group of women to agree on just about anything is nearly impossible.

It is with very good reason that Camille Paglia, lesbian feminist that she is, argues that “if civilisation had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts”.

Now, feminists inevitably blow their tops whenever shitlords and dissenters like me raise any of the points above. They shriek about how sexist and misogynistic it is to argue that women cannot take charge of anything and cannot make decisions. They wail and weep and gnash their teeth about how a society that values more feminine qualities, such as consensus, empathy, and nurturing instincts, would be more peaceful and less quarrelsome.

Yet every time we actually put their harebrained ideas to the test, the result is always stagnation, chaos, and eventually war.

No matter where we look- whether it be the archaeological record of Minoan Crete, or the social experiments of reality TV shows that pit tribes of men against women, or modern-day examples of matriarchal culture like the Mosou of China, we find the exact same pattern.

The women cannot agree on anything. They cannot take charge of themselves. They cannot build a functioning society based on voluntary cooperation and mutual open respect with a clear hierarchical structure of command. When strife and war are inevitable, their response is pacifistic in the extreme- which simply means that they get ground into dust by male-dominated cultures that actually are interested in conquest and rapine and pillage.

Not only that, but societies where women are in charge, or are at least given disproportionate levels of political power and influence, tend to produce butt-ugly girls.

The lessons of history correlate perfectly with our understanding of human nature. Stable, peaceful, powerful, functional matriarchies did not and do not exist. The exceptions, such as the Mosou, referenced above, are geographically and culturally isolated and are frankly not even worth the effort required by male-dominated cultures to conquer and secure their resources- mostly because they don’t have anything worth pillaging.

This reality should, by rights, make the Western world extremely hesitant to hand over political power wholesale to its women. Unfortunately, that transition to a female-dominated society, run for the benefit of women at the expense of the rights and responsibilities of men, has been taking place for decades now. And we are seeing the consequences of female-dominated society before our very eyes.

The result is a sick, lame, and dying Western civilisation that has lost its sense of masculine pride and purpose. The West no longer knows what it stands for- because it doesn’t really stand anymore, but instead sits down when its women say so.

The current state of Western civilisation, which denies its masculine roots and refuses to stand up for itself and is therefore now being invaded by barbarians from far more savage lands where masculinity still holds pride of place, can be perfectly summed up in this image, which has been making the rounds through the Manosphere and elsewhere:

The fact is that matriarchy does not work. It starts out badly, gets worse, and ends up exactly as you see above: with a castrated, effeminate, defunct, and hapless civilisation lying prone on the wretched refuse and wreckage of its previous greatness, being invaded and and used and abused by far harder, more savage, more masculine cultures that have not forgotten the proper uses of force, control, and fear.

Not for nothing did the columnist Walter Bagehot coin the epigram: