Well from what I understand. The age of Aquarius is supposed to explain all the technological advances..computers and such. Uranus is also supposed to be "the exposer"..when truths are revealed. I would say that a whole lot of lies from the past are now being revealed. Also ..under the influence of Uranus..tables turn. In other words.. whatever is on top goes to the bottom and visa versa. So that could mean that the people who are the underdogs of our world (blacks, people of color, women, the poor) will rise to the top under this influence and the people who are on top (europeans, whites, men , the wealthy) will take 2nd place in this age. Is it possible that the elite is aware of this and explains thier desperate and quickening attempt to push thier agenda? Maybe they know thier time is up? Your application of Aquarius's character to predict what that might mean in the Aquarian age was very interesting.
Um. "Blacks" being on the bottom was a localized issue in the United States. Women were actually treated like royalty; they didn't have to labor, they didn't have to go to war, they could be at home by themselves or with friends if they wanted to. There were certain times where the gender roles limited both men & women from doing varying things—equally oppressive and offensive to both.
The fact that women are now trying to handle capital is simply the merging of the two gender roles, so naturally the blasé political & career junk of men is contrasted with a predominance of men.
You really need to know what you're talking about before pushing the racism against whites & feminist man-hating agendas. For one, America is not the only country in the world, and it's very young at that as well as something that in its inception was actually extremely chaotic all around.
Whites have been imprisoned by people of color in history. By your theory, if somewhere in the world there are echoes of an oppressed people wherever you are presently living, it means it is going to be a global issue as well as a universal lesson dominating the entire globe for the next two thousand years just to make a statement?
That doesn't even make any sense.
Also, once the poor become wealthy, who's poor now? It is a constantly revolving cast of people. I will say there are some major families who need to be removed from their power, but I think more importantly I advocate people to question the systems and not just trade places.
Also, question those who "are the biggest victims of all time ever poor little us help us and beat up our oppressor". You don't have to be abusive about it, but quite frankly women have always been treated superiorly. They were treated first, doors held for them, ushered in, people tended to their needs, fought to the death for them, protected them, worked hard to earn money for them; they are allowed to dress however they want. Women are collectively and have been for a very long time allowed to dress unisex; they wear pants, dresses, any hair style & color they want, primp themselves up, argue whatever they want, play the victim, express a full range of emotion, go to war, still be a stay at home mom, girth birth, raise children, not raise children if they don't want to, wear make-up, get any job they want. It's a lot more acceptable for women to be LGBT.
They fact that men are born physically stronger because they have testosterone is not a fault.
The fact that during the times of gender roles (which were upheld by both men and women equally) which exist even still today supported by both parties displayed men in politics was just a part of the fact that men were considered women's little creative slave monkeys. When certain women said they wanted to do what men were doing, it wasn't women who were oppressed; both men & women were and are held captive by the division in the realm of "what function a man serves and what function a woman serves", and "what is feminine & what is masculine".
Of course there are a lot of older men in politics; there are many reasons for this, and the least of which was some collective one-sided open enslavement of women.
No, men & women created the paradigm of genders collectively. At some point however some women said they wanted to do what dudes were doing; in fact, women have achieved more in blurring the gender roles for their sex than men have for their own—and that is why you keep hearing the overwhelming notion of all these "female oppressions"—because feminism is winning, not losing, and shoving their agendas in your face (ie. constantly pointing out the remains of older men in politics during the days of the gender gaps, exaggerating, lying, and blowing up the ideas of rape by aggression while dismissing rape by fraud).
It is the power of femininity to overcome what they lack in physical dexterity with emotional illusions in order to gain an upper hand.
You're not as knowledgeable as you think you are.