For those objecting to how idiot vloggers obsess over the Illuminati when the Bilderberg and Davos groups exist, I feel the concept of patriarchy, encompassing tropes of “daddy dearest” and “father knows best” while incorporating the white savior complex, misses something.
Those who’ve tortured hours on my essays may have caught references to what I deem The Prom Kings Union, which is my personal rebranding of the patriarchy. Consider how the most unrealistic bit about the Superman funny book character isn’t alien heritage or superpowers, but the alpha male as boy scout. Especially when you don’t need a YouTube video to inform you that mushrooms are proof of alien heritage, and that psychic prowess is possible with just some of that grey matter which our genetics long ago disused. A thing aided by mushrooms, ironically, but I’m digressing.
Every year of every neighborhood sees a prom king proclaimed, dedicated not for accomplishing anything grand, much less contributing to the society around them anything of use, but for representing some generic ideal which does not actually exist in the real world. Yet for the duration of their metaphorical 15 minutes of fame they are recipients of all esteem, regardless of whether they fulfill the often accompanying stereotypes of class president or star quarterback or having thoroughly shredded the holy fuck out of the cheerleader squad’s panties. Our culture entertains the long-running, nasty habit of praising as heroes the more self-gratifying among us. Celebrities, worshiped simply for unproductive make-believe. Industrialists, idolized for making workers piss inside cola bottles. Just about anyone has heard of Jack the Ripper, Son of Sam or the Zodiac Killer, but how many of us can name a single one of their victims? Symbols are made to impact us for better or for worse, and making a symbol out of an individual is no different, though always detrimental in ultimate effect.
But where does someone like Ivanka Trump sit in this patriarchy? Or the fanboys jacking it to screenshots of her, are they uplifting the patriarchy or their own personal wet-dream of being players in the patriarchy game? Who is the familial head of the Clinton wing of popular politics, Bill or Hillary? Where do self-addressed royal Saudi billionaires fit into the white savior idiom? Or the psychotic President of the Philippines, who vocally and repeatedly endorses the murder of drug-addicts? Books have covers for a reason, sayeth the advertisers who only say anything when they are paid to do so. In reality, gender, skin-tone and sexual preference are no indicators for what a person is capable of. But this culture thrives on branding. To insist that only certain persuasions are capable of the evils keeping the masses down, is to deny the bulk of humanity its own potential. It denies the origins of evil, the reward system these societies pride.
It is my belief that what many infer by the terminology of patriarchy is decreasingly about some old white guy calling the shots, as enslavers have no power unto themselves. Subjugation is impossible when power-mongers are not empowered into positions of grandeur. It is abundantly clear that wealth is quite exclusively for those who can do considerably nothing for themselves. Arguably this has been the case throughout recorded history, with marketing effectively convincing historians otherwise. In practice however, in reality, the truest threat can be anyone willful enough to accept symbology as real and ideal, and anybody fantasizing for sacrificial offerings token or bloodied to the demigod of the hour. A free ride for those perpetually in want of a boost, forever in power for no other reason but that power is given to them.