Father=Property=Civilization

—“So was Gimbutas, the woman behind the Kurgan hypothesis, which postulated that the Proto-Indo-Europeans originated on the East European steppe. She said that the Old Europeans were peaceful, matriarchal goddess-worshippers while the Proto-Indo-Europeans were warlike, patriarchal nomads in an attempt to construe their invasion as a negative event, and yet the opposite ensued and people were glad that they got rid of the degeneracy of the previous population. She wanted things to be a certain way and it backfired.”—Alexander Zavialov 

Well, (a) yes it’s gimbutas that ‘discovered’ the urheimat. But (b) her feminist (matriarchy) theory I’m pretty sure went out the window. (c) it is true that in very primitive (early) societies households consisted of women and their men ‘rotated’ to fuck what they could. In this sense it was matrilineal. But that’s because YOUR MOTHER IS ALL YOU KNOW IS TRUE in a consanguineous band.

It’s once you have property and divide up property and women that you get paternalism. Why? Because PROPERTY AND EXcluSIVITY IS KNOWABLE. (mostly).

There aren’t any consanguineous bands left. Why? They can’t survive and compete without property.

Advertisements