The Woke Obsolescence of Parenthood

     The greatest enemy of the oh-so-woke forces of Progressivism and the broader hard Left is, and always will be, the one thing that stands in the way of total dependency on the enlightened state: The family.

     The Left have been waging war on the family for over a century in one form or another, and has increasingly been bold enough to claim that all parents’ children are actually just the state’s, with the state taking the role of mother and father non-gender specific parental figure.

     This is no mere exaggeration, with Scotland even going so far as to consider having the state appoint a “super-parent” to act a child’s guardian with more power than mere parents. Even in the United States parents are increasingly being considered an afterthought.

     Children are quickly becoming nothing more than extensions of the state’s control, with the Left increasingly being vocal about severing the ties of parent and child. Now, that almost prescient vociferous musing aims toward abolishing parenthood altogether:

“There is something deeply and fundamentally wrong with the way our society raises children. In the current state of things, children are reared, fed, taught, and disciplined by adults who may or may not be good parents, and who, in nearly all cases, have a great deal of external obligations and emotional needs that take them away from the work of parenting. These adults have unequal access to key resources—such as wealth, income, time, housing, and education—which tend to be reproduced in the children under their supervision. Opportunity and success is largely decided by who your parents are, by whether or not you even have them. Growing up in this country is governed by a lottery system we call the nuclear family.

“The nuclear family is an ideology that has largely evaded public debate because it is so thoroughly embedded in our lives. Few scholars or policy experts bother to defend it, at least as an ideal way of life, because its appeal is largely taken for granted. At the same time, the nuclear family is so intrinsically particular—you can belong to only one—that every family is treated as immune to critique: ‘How dare you criticize my family! I love my family!'”

     This, of course, ignores the fact that the nuclear family is not only the cornerstone of civilization, and a force of good that combines the normal sexual desire to reproduce and the need for a stable and loving environment for the children of such sexual union in a way that is beneficial to society by pairing up men and women—giving both a bond of mutual support—as well as distributing the raising of the next generation such that mores that are detrimental will become evident while those that are beneficial will evidence a just reward.

     But no, rather than welcome the collective wisdom of the ages, an elite few will impose their delusional fantasties of how to raise the New New Soviet citizen…

“It doesn’t have to be this way. We could raise children collectively, by people whose full-time occupation is parenting. We could raise children in groups of ten, so that no child would be an only child or ever lack for friendship. We could give every child—regardless of disability, race, ethnicity, or gender—a safe and happy upbringing.

“To do this, we could also establish facilities far away from cities, in the wilderness, where children could be raised in peace, with enough space to do anything they want. Cities are not designed for kids, at least not under the modern parenting system: Anyone who’s ever watched a hapless parent maneuver a stroller through a subway station, or witnessed the residents of a wealthy neighborhood resist school integration, or listened to a family brag about uprooting their lives to get their children into a better city school has understood something about the fate of children in hyper-competitive metropolises. Besides, much of what makes a city great—including the sense of tolerance that develops among those raised within a diverse population—could be replicated in these groups of kids.”

     This will not bring forth a utopia, but, at best, a dystopia, as “Cultural Marxism has replaced traditional Marxism, the Left doesn’t just want the poor to be poorer, they wand to destroy all social mores and traditions that lead to happiness and prosperity just because not everyone is partaking of it equally.” At worst, the new Nomenklatura will enjoy their parenting privilege while the childless serfs are forced to depend on the stingy largess of the state…

     Oh, but it gets even far more totalitarian for these self-deemed intelligent designers:

“All of this would require radical changes to society. The regulation of human reproduction would entail requiring contraception for the vast majority of the population. The government would need to employ people whose full-time job is raising children. Finally, this system would need an application process for women who do want to bear children—to ensure, at the very least, the basic ability to carry to term—and the funds to pay them enough money so that they don’t have to work elsewhere.

“What exactly would this look like? For starters, we would pay women who bear children a salary commensurate with the physical and emotional toll of pregnancy and birth. So at least a hundred thousand dollars per year. Bearing children would be less of an occupation and more of a tour of duty lasting a few years, like the Peace Corps or City Year. While these women would be free to do what they want while pregnant, their salary would be designed to ensure that they felt no pressure to work for income. And, because of this income, they would be much better equipped for working or studying, during or after their tenure.”

     And that entire “reproductive rights” schtick? LOL, they’ll have no use for that anymore.

“To ensure diversity, the government would have to limit the number of children any particular woman would bear. The same principle would apply to the collection of sperm samples from the male population, whose members would also have to apply to donate their sperm and be paid (albeit significantly less than women) for the trouble of doing so. The fertilization process would employ in vitro fertilization with a woman’s own eggs, a technique with a greater chance of success than intra-uterine insemination. (And there would be no point in using a different woman’s eggs.)

“This system would require compulsory—but reversible—surgical sterilization of the rest of the populace. Right now, that would mean vasectomy for men and tubal ligation for women. But it may be possible, in the future, to ensure a similar degree of sterilization by adulterating the water supply with contraceptive drugs. Same for the entire process of pregnancy. Bioethicists are already exploring the implications of artificial wombs, known as biobags, that would eliminate the need for women to bear children with their own bodies.”

     Yes, these lunatics are considering so separating the sexual act from the natural result of sexual reproduction that they are considering artificial wombs and mandated sterilization to the degree that not even genocidal manic Margaret Sanger would approve!

Continue reading

Posted in Progressives | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

European Christianity as Cultural Cosplay

     Some attribute the rise of Islam, and before that the faith in the state, to the apostasy or even weakness of Christianity in these “modern” times and its inability to fit in with [CURRENT YEAR]. The truth of the matter is that by and large, Christian churches—especially the state established churches—are not Christian, but merely “cultural Christians” whose leadership effectively participates in religious cosplay.

Meanwhile… In Europe.

     Rather than provide anything to appeal to the religious hunger to those starved of faith, some, such as Sweden’s first openly lesbian Bishop, are filling the secular hole they not only created, but maintained, by aiding and abetting in the euthanasia of any remnants of Christianity with such actions as removing crosses from churches and building Islamic prayer rooms for use of the imported replacements of not only the Swede’s (former) faith, but of the Swedes themselves.

     Not to be topped by Sweden, a Church of England reverend is calling upon his flock to make Prince George, 3rd in line to the throne after his father and grandfather, Gay.

     Even (anti-) Pope Francis believes that it is better to be an atheist than a devout Catholic who doesn’t embrace his “liberation theology“.

     Even an atheist could recognize that Christianity has been part and parcel of Europe’s civic and cultural heritage, and consistent both with that heritage and the future. Even absent absolute faith, the Christianity’s mores and values are integral to the rise of Western Civilization as a paragon of human achievement. Rather than embrace this, the state-worshipping Left in Europe have substituted their own heritage with a delusion of creating a Heaven on Earth via a Technocratic Dictatorship, bereft of any spiritual succor other than the false teat of a shriveled and soulless society. This, of course creates a void that the E.U. is filling by importing and submitting culturally to, even if they do not fully grok the ramification of their actions.

     Perhaps a revivalist or evangelical “Great Awakening” could arise in Europe as it arose many times in America’s past, but unlike in America, Christianity in Europe has been killed, gutted, and worn as a skin suit while demanding respect.

Continue reading

Posted in Progressives | Tagged , | 1 Comment

News of the Week (December 10th, 2017)


News of the Week for Dec. 10th, 2017

Continue reading

Posted in News of the Week | Tagged | Leave a comment

Public Lands, Not Elitists’ Trophies

     A distinction long ago recognized, but increasingly forgotten, is the differentiation of public land and the government’s land: The former is the people’s who of right may use it without needing to beg for permission; the later is restricted to government’s use and limited in the public’s ability to use to what the government grants.

     Public land under the aegis of the Federal government, though far from any de-Normanized ideal or paragon, still allows at least a modicum of access, use, and advantage for the public that is denied them when such land is transformed into a “monument” or a “park”. President Donald Trump has reversed the land grab that transformed a plethora of acreage into a restricted monument for a distant elite to wax poetic about.

“‘Some people think that the natural resources of Utah should be controlled by a small handful of very distant bureaucrats located in Washington,’ Mr. Trump said, speaking at Utah’s State Capitol beneath a painting of Mormon pioneers. ‘And guess what? They’re wrong.'”

     While transferring management to the more local authorities of the states, or even transfer to Indian Nations via treaty, would be an even better option, this is at least immediately possible without need of haggling.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Quick Takes – Genderless Education: Genderless Research; Genderless Bathrooms; Genderless Students

     Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.

     The focus this time: Academic Eunuchs

     First, a little bit of mood music:

     Carrying on…

     Transgenderism has been declared “settled science”? Does this mean that research into the possibility of regrets over “sex change” operations doesn’t exist?

     Of course not.

“A researcher has been refused permission to study cases of people who have surgery to reverse gender reassignment by a university that said it risked generating controversy on social media sites.

“The proposal was rejected with an explanation noting that it was a potentially ‘politically incorrect’ piece of research and could lead to material being posted online that ‘may be detrimental to the reputation of the institution’.

“James Caspian, a psychotherapist, who wanted to conduct the research for a master’s degree in counselling and psychotherapy at Bath Spa University, accused it of failing to follow ‘the most basic tenets of academic and intellectual freedom of enquiry’.”

Continue reading

Posted in Education, Progressives | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Sinicization of Neocolonialism

     With the rush to “decolonize” Africa starting from the abandonment by France, Belgium, and the United Kingdom, to the aftershock of the Carnation Revolution, and onto the beginning of de facto one party dictatorship of the ANC in South Africa, the blind obsession to eschew all the influences of Western colonial powers created a vacuum that was soon filled up with Marxism (both classical, and more recently cultural)—ironically enough thus embracing a European originating philosophy that was even more alien to their own (despite the claim that the world was a socialist utopia before those eeevil White people showed up.

     Even then, the excuse for the various African leaders/dictators as to their failure upon eschewing Western colonial influence and embracing outright submission to European ideas (i.e. Marxism) was to blame it on “neocolonialism” of companies who wished to impose “colonialism” by engaging in commerce and pursuing other business opportunities in Africa.

     However, not all the new external “neocolonialism” comes from Europe. Oh, it still does have Marxist origins, but this “neo-neocolonialism” is far more Eastern in it’s origin:

“The men who plotted the overthrow of Zimbabwe’s long-serving President Robert Mugabe asked China for permission first, according to The Times of London.

“The Times reported Tuesday that one of the coup leaders, General Constantine Chiwenga, had met China’s defense minister Chang Wanquan in Beijing last Friday, in what it styled as a sounding out of the country that has kept Zimbabwe’s economy afloat in recent years.

“It is a stark illustration of how China’s huge expansion of overseas investment and trade is translating into hard power, especially in a continent that was previously the playground of Cold War superpowers and, before them, European colonial powers such as Britain and France.”

     With Mugabe now having resigned, the old Marxist influence, being Soviet in nature, is being replaced with the long grasp of Communist China: The dragon has superseded the bear.

Continue reading

Posted in Progressives | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

The New Feudalism of the Enlightened Technocratic Overlords

     A hallmark of Fascism is a disgust with both the individual ipso individual and for democracy. This hallmark is shared and enthusiastically endorsed by the New Republic in an article that celebrates an enlightened technocratic elite.

     Ah, the elite that fancies itself as new Feudal Lords, to take and give based not upon any rational basis but upon Progressive ideology so contrary to reality and human nature

     Let us, if we may, grok yet again the depth of the Left’s ideological obsession:

“It is hard to make out, but there is a deeper dialectic at work in the Progressive mind, not unlike that more famous dialectic conjured up by that hairy German fellow. The purpose of the Administrative State—best understood with Saint-Simon’s famous single sentence description about how ‘the government of men is replaced by the administration of things’—is to create a new people.

“The late, great Martin Diamond—a former Leninist—understood this clearly. I ran across this old passage from Diamond over the weekend, writing back at a time (the late 1960s) before the more accurate term ‘Progressive’ had re-emerged (hence his use of ‘liberal’ here, which means the same thing as today’s ‘Progressive’):

“‘The liberal aim is thus clear. In order to transform the human condition, which is his deepest aim, the liberal seeks to make the political order fully dependent upon a transformed people. To achieve the transformation, he seeks the right kind of constitutional institutions to produce the right kind of party to produce the right kind of majority. At the very center of liberalism there is the theory of the truly democratic party—unified and coherent and thus capable of summoning up from the unformed mass the majority acquiescence in the liberal goals that, the liberal believes, is the natural inclination of the true majority. To such a majority, the Constitution with its “auxiliary precautions” does indeed obstruct the way.’

“Yes, this is a polite way of saying Progressives are indistinguishable from totalitarians. An elitist minority defines a priori what the majority must believe to be truly ‘democratic.'”

     With that in mind, let us yet again Fisk the rambling idiocy of the Left

Yes, you must give us all a good fisking!

“‘The point of politics is policy,’ Ezra Klein explained in the happier days of spring 2014. The statement could be a credo for the Beltway’s wonk class—the congressional staffers, anonymous bureaucrats, and think-tank fellows whose careers rest on the belief that all the histrionics of campaigning and the hyperventilating of cable news are just a freak show that distracts from the real work of governing. Spin might sustain a political movement for an election, but eventually voters will want to see results, and the technocrats will have their day.”

     IOW, “oh lordy how can those ‘freak shows’ upon which any legitimate government rests, being upon the consent of such ‘freaks’, dare impinge upon the enlightened revelations of the Beltway class???

     Can’t the hoi polloi keep their own serfdom kind?

“Underpinning this argument is the conviction that, as Barack Obama put it, the government has a responsibility to ‘get stuff done.’ From that simple premise follow the many issues that consume political debate today: foreign policy, economic policy, immigration, health care, education, environmental policy, and on and on. However disparate the subjects under consideration, once they have been elevated to the realm of policy, a set of assumptions clicks into place. A policy is a commitment to use government power to achieve a specific goal. Policy needs policymakers, trusted experts with the discretion to carry out the tasks they have been assigned. The policymaker’s work is never done: foreign affairs, the economy, and all the rest are issues to be managed, not problems that can be resolved once and for all. Think of Janet Yellen at the Federal Reserve, constantly monitoring the economy’s performance to ensure that it is growing at a sustainable rate.”

     Ah, so once the incompetent dregs somehow form a holy and divine “Volonté Générale” the self-declared overlords must impost the will as they have divined it! And, after all, who else could scientifically and divinely determined such holy writ!

Continue reading

Posted in Elections, Progressives | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Venezuela’s Socialist “Success Story”: Where Some… Are More Equal Than Others

     Venezuela slips ever more easily into the typical “success” story of all socialist regimes: Where the Nomenklatura live in opulence, and the great unwashed masses who are supposed to be the masters of their socialist utopia enjoy the lack of healthcare, feasting upon emaciated zoo animals, and the joys of hyperinflation.

     All this socialist “success” has wrought the economic miracle of… economic default and a bailout from Russia. Yet this oh-so-socialist state doesn’t throw out the dictator Maduro? It’s not for a lack of trying.

     Opposition was purged, and elections have been questionable at best. No wonder, then, why the opposition to Maduro doesn’t see any reason to keep joining in on this charade.

Continue reading

Posted in Elections, Healthcare, Progressives | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

News of the Week (December 3rd, 2017)


News of the Week for Dec. 3rd, 2017

Continue reading

Posted in News of the Week | Tagged | Leave a comment

Peak Guardian: Socialism is Far Right Ideologically

     The Guardian, a British newspaper that has shifted from more traditional hard-Left pro-Communist fare towards outright Social Justice Warrior mode, decided to give everyone a lesson on two icky “right wing” German political parties

“Adolf Hitler only joined the Nazis after being rejected by another political party, a leading historian has learned.

“Thomas Weber, a professor of history at the University of Aberdeen, unearthed a previously unpublished document that reveals that in 1919 the newly formed German Socialist party shunned Hitler, telling him that it did not want him in the party or writing for its paper.

“Weber said that history would have taken a different path if his membership had been accepted. Although also far-right, the German Socialist party was at the time bigger and more successful than the Nazi party. Hitler might have settled for a more minor role and would therefore ‘have been unlikely to ever come to power’, Weber added.”

     Now-a-days it has become common to ignore the fact that “Nazi” was slang for the NSDAP (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, AKA the “National Socialist German Workers Party”). But to then declare the German Socialist Party (Deutschsozialistische Partei, or DSP) a “far right” group but begs the question: Does the Guardian believe that socialism is just too “right wing” for their tastes?

Continue reading

Posted in Progressives | Tagged , , | 1 Comment