BBC – If women ran every country in the world, there would be a general improvement in living standards and outcomes, former US President Barack Obama has said.
Speaking in Singapore, he said women aren’t perfect but are “indisputably better” than men. He said most of the problems in the world came from old people, mostly men, holding onto positions of power.
Speaking at a private event on leadership, Obama said while in office, he had mused what a world run by women would look like. “Now women, I just want you to know; you are not perfect, but what I can say pretty indisputably is that you’re better than us [men]. “I’m absolutely confident that for two years if every nation on earth was run by women, you would see significant improvement across the board on just about everything … living standards and outcomes.”
For now, we will overlook the point that Obama said, “old people are a problem” – not to show respect for the aged. Before people go off on a misogynistic rant about women, we need to take on the honest question, what would a world ruled by women look like? To answer this question, let’s get into the data on a few issues from a women’s perspective to see what the world would like:
More open borders – according to many studies, they consistently show that women are more receptive to open border policies or at least more pro-immigration policies than men. Here and here are a couple of studies. The differences are about 5 to 15%, in favor of women. Being that illegal immigration is predominantly single military-age males, one does have to wonder if women would support illegal immigration if most of the illegal immigrants were predominantly young females. Perhaps it is the making of our neanderthal ancestors, being that men naturally tend to white knight and are protective of females – but I will let the psychiatrists and philosophers drill into that thought.
More socialist – according to many studies, they consistently show that women lean left more than men by about an average of 8%. Here are studies from Gallup and Pew. Perhaps you think 8% is not much, but considering that women are 50% of the population, this means that leftists views have a natural uplift. Then there is the issue of fewer couples living together than before – 6.9 per 1,000 today vs. 9.8 per 1000 back in 1990. Often in past years, women would follow the voting and policies of their husbands – this is not the case today. So not only the leaders but the overall population will be more socialist in their ideology.
Less innovative – STEM degrees lead to careers in science, technology, engineering, and other cutting-edge fields. Here is a report that shows that only 7% of women who graduated from college in 2016 earned a degree that could be classified as STEM. Perhaps this study overstates the situation, but by most studies, men seek STEM careers more than women. Is it a result of women freely choosing among many options because of women’s preferences, or are there stereotypes and biases that are holding women back from entering these fields? Regardless, it is what it is today. The point here is that if the focus of men on “things” takes a lower priority from a policy and budgetary consideration, innovation would suffer. Some might say, so what – do we need more of these man toys of innovation? I suppose it depends if you like the modern innovations of the last 200 years.
Please understand that these points are not all the potential issues to consider – just a few. Perhaps you could add your thoughts in the comment section of this post.
So in a world ruled by women, we are looking at a world with more: open borders, socialism, and less innovation. I will let you do the final analysis from here, whether these policies are good or bad – you know where conservatives stand (see Our values). Note that this is not to say that women can not be leaders – we need a proper balance. Something Obama and leftists have a difficulty understanding. Obama is merely sowing the seeds of social divisiveness via Identity Politics – a strategy that punctuated his presidency.