It's not like an amateur DJ who follows the old media tradition of targeting ethnic minorities and immigrants to draw an audience. While making a living from pain of subjects, this propaganda is upgraded to shooting the big biggies for a kill. Religion for example is already targeted for paternal hierarchy by tarnishing with filth that seems to stick bolder in white.

The feminist movement for the improvement of women's life is predominantly based on a moral assumption that men are guilty of sex crimes and abuse of women. Men therefore must be round up and brought to justice.

However, women are themselves guilty of the same. So claiming the moral ground on sex while legalising prostitution to improve women's lives is kind of hypocritical and thus absurd. This provides for women to be paid by their husbands every time they have sex.

And sex is legal when it has a commercial value and not a moral one.

Claiming the objective moral ground on a false premise is a delusional ideology after all, the feminist movement is political.

In fact, equality is valid on the inclusion of everyone, not just women. It portrays the impression that men must be tarnished by sex crime association surrendering the reigns for women to take over.

And there reveals before us a shrewd shenanigan in the theatre of politics. But why the waste of time when white men can simply pass on the reigns to their wives and relatives to take over! It merely confirms the fact that gender role reverse is now upgraded to the division of labour.

Soon we shall find traffic lights with women signals, may be pink for women only and red for everyone else. Oh the mess on the road! If that shall improve women's wellbeing, then why not. I give up!

The true type of a genealogical base structure has women now assume tribal rule. Woe to all other men who shall continue to accumulate the prison population.

Still, the reason of order; that is civilisation must verify developments. The top down approach is the quantification of a principle when the valid idea produces an objective outcome that stabilises a social organisation.

Christians are such examples of a top down development with reference that a principle is not meant to harm or destroy let alone deceive. That is why the top down development is objectivism.

The validity of the ground up is where the Underclass prompted the infrastructure of the elite class. If the elite class preceded the Underclass, then forceful impositions to subjugate a people as second-class citizens is the norm. And that is destructive and therefore subjective and invalid.

See where the flaw is: men are tarnished, persecuted, humiliated and imprison for sex crimes while women are paid. It is not a top down development. A part from too much power, I'm nor sure what it is.

The means to an end of such developments involve deceiving the subjects they are something they are not. For example, they are portrayed by media propaganda to associate their image with crime, or illness involving a lot of brainwashing.

If you repetitiously tell a person he/she is stupid that he/she would eventually believe he/she is stupid. Not only so, the danger in political impositions require policies to disadvantage the subjects and thus accumulating data to prove the deceptive development after the fact.

And the research for something already known is just a formality.

The opposite of a ground up development that is deceptive and invalid is nothing more than legalising Fascism. Any ideology based on an invalid top down imposition depends on deceptive methods to lure and subdue subjects. Fascism is a type of ideology that belongs to the ancient right wing archive among the dinosaurs.

That is why Fascism depends on semantics and puns to confuse and deceive the targeted population. If not, then fear the dictator who rule with the iron fist!

It is important to maintain democratic participation and diverse inclusiveness to the civil stability of social organisation. Too much power is uneconomic. In this sense, the few of society may well accumulate 99 per cent of society's wealth. Economic according to me is the democratic participation of production with a somewhat equal proportion of wealth.

What could happen if no one can speak up against the dictatorial regime. Kept well under controlled, the Underclass endure in silence. And that is where we need to look at modern social issues of social organisation - mental illness, crime, violence, sex crime and suicide.

It's not easy to restore rights and attributes when people have been subjected to long term deprivation. And when the group is silent, they make easy targets for amateur DJs.

So, to validate the top down development is to open it for democratic participation such as the vote. To head the Labour Party as the feminist political party is that subjective organisation already termed autocratic.

You see, too much power tends to tarnish democratic procedures with smeared campaigns, but to benefit only one tribal representation is simply autocratic rule. And before you know it, Labour is a one term government.

We are thankful for housing that have somewhat assured a bed for the homeless, meantime workers are working to pay the landlord if a room is found. Otherwise, his wages is spent on administration fees and transport. That type of organisation has transformed humanity into mere units of production to generate profits for the tribe.

Sacrifice for the machine have semi-retired folks enduring illness but they have no choice; either find work or left to forage on the outside.