The political power vacuum of the original collective of ‘Woman Suffragist’ of the 19th and early 20th century rendered a public space for the manipulation of ‘women’s rights advocacy.’ The leadership of this plural congregation had sought after the elevation of a woman’s right to be educated, own land, and vote for elected representatives. To attain such constitutional rights, they became social activists in the community, taking such actions as writing and publishing their opinions, and being an organized presence on the street level. Their understanding that they would have to create their own social media platforms in order to get the word out on the constitutional rights of women to be equal citizens was pivotal to their success in creating awareness and demanding political acknowledgment.
The full-stop of their campaign in 1920 was taking advantage of and re-directed on a path that the original woman suffragist seeked to eradicate.
All through the last half of the 1800s, these same woman leaders, Elizabeth Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Lucretia Moss, Victoria Woodhull, and Elizabeth Blackwell, took literary aim at the practice of abortionism, effectively distancing themselves from it, and even railing against it with the utmost contempt. Abortion, they would say, was a method to create a cultural mindset which cheapened human life as something that could be discarded, and also sent a message to woman that they could have sexual relations and have a way to stop any possibility of taking on the responsibility in raising children that resulted from such relations. That is how it was historically typified by the woman suffragists in their writings. After the U.S. constitution was amended in 1920 to give woman right to vote, and be equal legal citizens, ‘organized money’ afforded the land ownership of the first human abortion facility in the state of New York, with a woman, Margaret Sanger, being placed as its founder, and lead spokesperson refashioning abortionism as a ‘reproductive right’ of women to have the legal power to destroy the human life in their womb, irrespective of the father’s desire, or any law in the land. Great financial wealth went into supporting this idea on an international level, that although human abortion was never a political theme supported by most women or men at the local, community level in the United States society of its time, it was nonetheless given both money and growing clout through social media, with the re-steering of a new industry, the so-called ‘entertainment’ industry, to help promote a cultural mindset that gave allowance to notions of sexual promiscuity, and the inculcating of secularized societal norms.
It was the social media political power vacuum of the woman suffragists that signaled how the human population control abortionist agenda was to refashion people’s thinking away from Christianity and towards the beginning of the secularized, entertainment-driven society we have today. With the rise of the entertainment motion picture industry in the 1920s, Americans were given a secularized, recreational past time that was for lack of a better word, entertaining. Informational control of what was thought about and not thought about, was now longer a construct of newspapers, books, public speakers, and photography, but of pictures in motion at movie theaters. In like manner, the entertainment industry grew rapidly with the rise of singers and musicians. The secular age of entertainment had entrenched itself, not as a direct attack on christianity and conservative society, but as a distraction and amelioration to America’s economic woes found therein in with the World War in 1916-1919, the stock market crash of the 1920s, and the new international political order that surged forth. Like in the time of ancient Rome, the entertainment industry became the Roman Colesseum, distracting the people with ‘cheap thrills.’
Within forty years of the seminole achievement of the woman suffragist movement, the abortionist human population control agenda had firmly established itself as the subtle bastion of social media outlets, the entertainment industry, and the legal-political order. At the dawn of the 1960s, it was primed to unfold its biggest cultural shift, and that was the open, yet indirect declaration that a sexual revolution would be had. One where the new societal message to young Americans would be that sexual relations without marriage was okay and healthy. Such a signal was carried on the back of the entertainment industry and given wide social acceptance by the increasingly secularized, and internationalist social media establishments of the time. With near constant manufactured global war engaging American life during the 1900s, the cultural norms that had been made very much American, served as outlet vent releasing pressure. Drugs and alcohol flooded everyday life as the entertainment industry glamorized sex and idolatry or what is known as ‘being famous.’
Nearly 100 years since woman achieved the power to be educated, own land, and vote, a new movement of human rights has begun where that of the woman suffragists left off. Driven by the leadership of woman once again, it has begun to reclaim an American ideal long lost and drowned out; that of the sanctity of life, the honor of womanhood, and the importance to safeguard life at its most vulnerable stage, within the womb. The financial power of the abortionist lobby emanates from $550 million a year afforded from U.S. tax payer money to support the idea of ‘reproductive rights,’ and is protected through a phalanx of (1) social media organizations, (2) politicians who receive direct or indirect support from abortion and entertainment political organizations, (3) judicial and academic ideological backing.
Their is then a ‘shadow war’ in the United States of America wherein two competing views of what is best for America are set in battle array. Conflagrations are censored and cloaked under the guise of other issues, and methods of attack in favor of the abortionist agenda are steeped in the tactical use of what are known as ‘identity politics.’ This is a strategy that targets and undermines people’s character or persona within the local, national and global community, with the desired effect of neutralizing the ability of their message to be successful. Sadly, such a shadow war has been ripping American unity at its seams, with even the historical narrative of what is happening being under the powerful influence of the established media outlets who control the information most people receive of what is actually occurring.
Growing awareness that the informational narrative is being censored and controlled is leading to the realization that the very social media organizations are working in unison with the abortion industry. Elected officials in the U.S. Congress, the Executive Office, and even the U.S. Supreme Court are beginning to respond in favor of the constitutional protection of the sanctity of life in the womb, thus once again beginning to address the notion of exactly what kind of American society we want to have as a whole, one where life can be easily discarded at the official rate of 2,500 babies a day, or one where every life matters, starting with our humanity in the womb, no mater what.