Incrementalism has been the Left's technique on many fronts for a long time. It will never stop until people just say "no". If you can't say no to a bunch of weirdo strangers with nasal piercings and mental health problems telling you how to raise YOUR kids, while at the same time deliberately destroying the educational curriculum, and being grossly incompetent as teachers, then you get what you deserve. But your kids don't deserve that. Your kids deserve your best effort to protect them from the monsters trying to take your place, when they're not trying to engage in overt sexualization of your kids. Have you also noticed how many teachers are in the news lately for having sex with underage students? The fact that the State of California would try to do this stuff makes sense in the context of the last 4 years of totalitarian control operations being wheeled out for test firing, but not in the context of any kind of decent society. This stuff does work to destroy families. The Soviets were quite successful at splintering families and the sexual mores of the Russian people. This is not about protecting kids. It's about destroying the family and the kids.
The left-facing ratchet is not simply a strategy it is an inevitable consequence of modernity. 'Moving truth' has been pushing the world Left since the Jacobin's practically and Hegel philosophically, it underpins the entire modern world. Essentially, once truth becomes a moving target the world must continually accelerate after it, or else get further and further from truth. Once you unbalance the world like this the whole thing starts moving and can be used as a motor, but we have reached and gone far past the point where the costs outweigh the benefits.
The modern world is basically the dinosaur that Fred Flintstone uses at work. The Left is simply that part of the world that wants to use the dinosaur to accomplish their goals. The Right is all of those people who recognise that the dino can't be controlled and shouldn't be let around anything valuable. Thus, the Left seems to have great power but it can only ever be the power of a rampaging dinosaur. The Right is far less powerful and constantly tempted to use the dino power. Until the world is set right again with Truth as an unchanging constant this cannot be changed.
True but Leninism is nothing but an apparently egalitarian way to move all of the goods of society into the hands of the 1% faster and more completely.
Maybe, maybe not. I was reading Chesterton on Distributism the other day.(interesting like he always is but I am far from whole heartedly endorsing a scheme that I haven't even finished reading about) and was struck by his comments about how quickly and absolutely the aristocracy embraced socialism. With a very few exceptions the great winners of capitalism are...not capitalists. They are bankers and stock traders. They are deal makers not widget makers. And the same families have been accumulating all of the wealth, through socialism, for 100 years. It is not a coincidence that prep schools and ivy leagues are socialist factories. That class excels at knowing on which side their bread is buttered and learned long ago that socialism is great for oligarchs.
Where are the capitalists? Where is the one who actually got rich making a better product at a better price? All of our capitalists are paid by the taxpayers not their customers, either through subsidies on the front end or bailouts on the back. The younger generation has caught on and knows that their only opportunities in this world are in finance or becoming a youtube millionaire. They never even imagine themselves inventing something really useful or genuinely solving a problem and being rewarded for it. Speaking as an engineer who has genuinely solved a few meaningful problems, it doesn't pay.(BTW with all of the real and genuine problems with communism Cuba's fate is mainly an example of a Sanctionslum, the first US Embargoghetto but certainly not the last. Somehow Albright and her successors looked at Cuba and decided that was a great result to replicate all over the world.)
Exactly right! Remember that for the first years after the Soviet Revolution, men could have up to 3 women. Women were looked down upon for refusing to have sex on demand and sexually transmitted disease exploded. This lasted about 10 years before Stalin imposed his own version of the ‘10 Commandments’ putting State approval on monagmous marriage etc. But the damage was done on purpose to destroy the family.
This is totally inaccurate. Can you produce any evidence for this extraordinary allegation?And to attempt to cast the mass murderer and enslaver Stalin in a good light is beyond bizarre.
I was not casting Stalin in a good light at all! The social breakdown caused by the ‘new soviet society” was getting out of control and Stalin was forced to get practical. Of course when Stalin said ‘no’ that meant gulag level enforcement.
What’s fascinating about Marxist Thought’ is the immediate damage done to women and children as social units instead of persons. It’s much like Islam in that respect. You may be too young to have experienced the ‘free love 1960’s’ but the consequences in the US have demeaned women - if you can define one today. And of course breaking down our families has been a leftist goal from the 1920’s onwards.
Given the Orthodox Christian cultural norms in place before the Revolution, these forms were modified into Bolshevik tools to control people. Remember their goal to completely remake their citizens into lovers of the State in their final transformation.
It’ll take me some time to dig that stuff up , but I will go there to get you source material.
It’s simply not true that the Bolsheviks or Marx were believers in any of the things you’re decrying above, nor that Stalin ever did anything for any reason other than to maintain his bloodthirsty grip on power.
Sorry to break it to you. It is true. The stuff about willful destruction of the family... it's been preached by the bolshies from way back. Viz the early kibutz... kids raised collectively, families belittled in lots of ways.
Stalin was a psychopath, but he was not stupid. And he won WWII.
Where’s the evidence? Strangely, none is forthcoming. I don’t believe things that have no evidence to back them up. My husband has a whole library of books about Marx and the Russian Revolution. Not one of them features the Bolsheviks trying to destroy families or turning women into sex slaves.
Liberalising marriage and divorce to bring them into line with, and surpass, the rest of the Western world, as the Bolsheviks did, did not equate to “wrecking the family”. Before that time, marriage was a prison, trapping women in abusive relationships and civil (registry office) marriages weren’t recognised, which was not good for women or kids. These changes helped women, kids and families.
The belief you’re referring to was that ultimately the family would wither away, organically, over a very long period of time, to be replaced by socialisation of the tasks women are burdened with in the family. It was never a blueprint to be followed in the sense of any party being tasked with deliberately attempting to destroy the family.
Go to the source:
“Is Bolshevism, deliberately destroying the family? If one understands by “family“ a compulsory union based on the marriage contract, the blessing of the church, property rights and a single passport, then Bolshevism has destroyed this policed family from the roots up.
“If one understands by “family”, the unbounded domination of parents over children, and absence of legal rights for the wife, then Bolshevism has, unfortunately, not yet completely destroyed this carryover of society’s old barbarism.
“If one understand by “family” ideal monogamy– not in the legal but in the actual sense— then the Bolsheviks could not destroy what never was or is on earth, barring fortunate exceptions.
“There is absolutely no foundation for the statement that the Soviet law on marriage has been an incentive to polygamy and polyandry. Statistics of marriage relations – actual ones – are not available, and cannot be. But even without columns of figures, one can be sure that the Moscow index numbers of adulteries, and shipwrecked marriages are not much different from the corresponding data for New York, London, or Paris, and – who knows? – are perhaps even lower.
“Against prostitution, there has been a strenuous and fairly successful struggle. This proves that the Soviets have no intention of tolerating that unbridled promiscuity, which finds its most destructive and poisonous expression in prostitution.
“A long and permanent marriage, based on mutual love and cooperation—that is the ideal standard. The influences of the school, of literature, and of public opinion in the Soviets tend toward this. Freed from the chance of police and clergy, later also from those of economic necessity, the tie between man and woman will find its own way, determined by physiology, psychology, and care for the welfare of the human race”
Source:
Leon Trotsky: Family relations under the Soviets.
Article published under the title. “is Soviet Russia fit to Recognize?“ In the January 14, 1933, issue of Liberty magazine.
There’s something off here. Leon Trotsky write propaganda until he turned against Stalin. And the date he wrote this was years after they made their initial changes to the marriage and abortion laws which started the problems. At a certain point the Soviets changed direction on the family to some extent when they realized that it was too chaotic even for their socialist paradise.
He didn't just "write propaganda". Next to Lenin, he was the central leader of the revolution in the early years. So he is eminently well-placed to look back at government policies. Everything I have reproduced above is in perfect accord with his earlier writings and speeches. The book "Women and the Family" by Trotsky includes articles and other material from 1923, such as "From the Old Family to the New" (Pravda, July 13, 1923) and "The Protection of Motherhood and the Struggle for Culture", a speech he gave to the Third All-Union Conference on Protection of Mothers and Children on December 7, 1925. He maintained his beliefs right up to the moment Stalin's assassin stuck an ice axe in his head in Mexico City.
Lenin and Trotsky formed a bloc together against Stalin in 1922-23 because they could see his power hungry nature and the beginnings of the rise of a bureaucratic caste inside the party and government but sadly, Lenin became incapacitated and died before Stalin could be removed from his position.
Stalin changed direction on the family, for example, making abortion illegal again. Stalinist policy on the family, imposed in the 1930s, was a major retreat from the early years. Writing in 1936 in his book "The Revolution Betrayed" Trotsky explained: "The marriage and family laws established by the October Revolution, once the object of its legitimate pride, are being made over and mutilated by vast borrowings from the law treasuries of the [Western] countries and, as though on purpose to stamp treachery with ridicule, the same arguments which were earlier advanced in favour of unconditional freedom of divorce and abortion – 'the liberation of women', 'defence of the rights of personality', 'protection of motherhood'– are repeated now in favour of their limitation and complete prohibition. The retreat not only assumes forms of disgusting hypocrisy, but also is going infinitely farther than iron economic necessity demands .... The most compelling motive of the present cult of the family is undoubtedly the need of the bureaucracy for a stable hierarchy of relations, and for the disciplining of youth by means of forty million points of support for authority and power".
Interesting. So the child groomers have adopted the term “forced outing” to describe the desire of parents to protect their children from sexual exploitation, castration and genital mutilation. Good to know.
Aug 30, 2023·edited Aug 30, 2023Liked by Chris Bray
And a scary little Gremlin army of malcontent Social Justice warriors who want to make everyone as f*****d up as they are. (have I put too many *s in there?)
The premise of every public health restriction during covid, and every law coming out of Sacramento lately, is that We The Government know what is good for you better than you do. The obsession with controlling our children is only one manifestation of that. You want to breathe freely? How silly you are, Government will protect you by forcing you to wear a mask. You like your gas stove? How silly, you’re killing the planet, Government has an electric stove for you. You want to raise your children according to your own values? How silly.
Well written and well thought out. All of the famous socialist leaders over the past 130 years or so were sexual deviants of one sort or the other, mostly straight, and most all pedophiles. That explains their bottomless hatred of Christians, Orthodox Jews, and traditionalists of other religions who universally repudiate the socialist fixation on pedophilia.
But they just exploit the apathy and inertia of the public, most of whom are good people but don't pay much attention. That's why we can't ever give up in protecting everyone's kids, not just our own. There are more of us than them but we must all be eternally vigilant.
I can’t help but think of the 1960s chant, “The whole world is watching.” Not cops beating hippies. Watching California. Will enough parents stand up to defend their own children and stop this madness?
As the state threatens and sues school districts over parental notification policies, a growing number of school districts are adopting those policies. Californians are sick of their own government, and showing it. The test is coming in November of 2024, and I'm prepared to be disappointed, but there's a large and growing blue state population that's expressing open disgust for blue state culture war. The population that's awake despises these people. The question is how big that population is.
Same deal in Vermont. There are a lot of conservatives here - I know, you're all shocked - virtually all of them are natives of many generations and they are despised by the lefty newcomers. The woke are mostly from Blue places; they do not understand and do not want to understand the traditional culture of Vermont. If we were a richer, bigger, state, the SJWs in Montpelier would be rushing headlong down the path forged by California. Nevertheless, they're doing the best they can to destroy the place.
Here is an excellent post from John Klar, former attorney and now Vermont farmer, explaining what has happened to this beautiful state.
Interesting read. I’ve only visited Vermont once, it’s a beautiful state and the people where real friendly. I did have a nice chuckle at all the BLM placards out front of the many homes. I think most outsiders just associate Vermont with the cooky Bernie sanders, who keeps getting re-elected. It’s a shame the woke idiots have seized control of the state. I’d still recommend it as a great place to visit.
Bernie is elected largely by the people who are here from NYC, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey. The 'heritage' Vermonters we know can't stand him.
The BLM signs and the 'Hate has no home here' ones are all over the place. I want a sign that says 'Virtue signaling has no home here' to put in front of my house.
not big enough to offset the legalized cheating that has made california a 1 party rule. The same people behind this trojan horse are the same ones that will be harvesting the ballots. California is descending into madness, and stopping it will take a huge effort. The people that oppose this stuff have to learn how to beat them at there own game, which is ballot harvesting. Good luck out there.
conservatives have been slow on this, and it has cost them. They just dont have the soldiers that have the time and ability to undertake this endeavor built into there voting base. The dems have 2 giant unions-SEIU and the teachers to undertake this fraud for them. These people are paid to do this, either earned vacation time or possibly union paid time. Its a well greased machine that already has soldiers on the frontlines and a detailed battle strategy.
Just the opposite - schools should keep their noses out of the inner lives of children. Teachers are not credentialed to handle psychiatric issues. Most of them aren't even fit to educate children.
All color revolutions begin with seizing arms and breaking the bonds between children and their families. There’s no reason why I mention that though... I mean, it’s not like communist revolutionaries are taking over (or already have taken over) institutions…
Aug 30, 2023·edited Aug 30, 2023Liked by Chris Bray
My family who live in LA are living in an alternate universe. An older family member was recently mugged for her smartphone late at night in front of her apartment by a guy with a gun. She was injured by him when he put her in a headlock, showed her the gun and walked off with the phone. When she told me about it she said "well he probably needed it more than me" and "actually it was pretty gentle": and my LA-idiot family nodded agreement and continued their self-righteous "allyship" with violent criminals who are obviously just harmed and dangerous. I would've gone nuts and ran off screaming but I've learned to observe their insanity and just walk away.
It's a fanatical religion for these people.
My hope is that outside the more privileged parts of California, which is most of them and has a lot of traditional Catholics, this stuff is anathema and they will be heard at the voting booth. We've gone through great political and cultural transitions before -- the last being the finance-capitalist ascendancy of the 1980s and I expect we're due for another one soon.
This stuff is anathema outside the more privileged parts of California, but Los Angeles County plus the Bay Area counties have the population to cancel the votes of the inland red zones. San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange counties are wobblers, red for decades but trending blue in a hurry. If they can be pulled back toward sanity, we may have a chance to not go Full Venezuela.
I watched the full Rob Bonta statement and was horrified. My first reaction, which I posted, was to get out of California, because no kid is safe. But, reflecting on the situation, I get that the real squeeze is the middle class. Gavin Newsom’s kids go to private school and I bet they don’t have ‘gender affirming care’ without parental consent at their schools. No, I see that the plan for California is a feudal state - wealthy landowners and surfs who clean houses and manage the landscape - no middle class allowed. So, now I say - stand your ground, you are dealing with cowards and they will surely run when confronted with the truth and the understanding that they are greatly outnumbered, because they are, I just wonder when they get to the point where they are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. Godspeed.
The California AWFLs I know (I lived there for 20 years) believe that crime is a myth, even when they are the victims of crime. I’ve tried to explain to them that once I had kids my focus changed, and that I became much more interested in the victims of crime than on how hard life is for criminal types. The answer I would get would be along the lines on “you just watch too much Tucker.” They are pathological altruists. Their own kid could get murdered and they’d forgive the killer
The opposite of what has happened in the UK, where govt has just declared that schools MUST inform parents if their children decide to use alternative pronouns at school....there was much heated debate by the usual idiots, but most recognised the reasonable position that parents should be the first to know what is going on in their children's lives.
Incrementalism has been the Left's technique on many fronts for a long time. It will never stop until people just say "no". If you can't say no to a bunch of weirdo strangers with nasal piercings and mental health problems telling you how to raise YOUR kids, while at the same time deliberately destroying the educational curriculum, and being grossly incompetent as teachers, then you get what you deserve. But your kids don't deserve that. Your kids deserve your best effort to protect them from the monsters trying to take your place, when they're not trying to engage in overt sexualization of your kids. Have you also noticed how many teachers are in the news lately for having sex with underage students? The fact that the State of California would try to do this stuff makes sense in the context of the last 4 years of totalitarian control operations being wheeled out for test firing, but not in the context of any kind of decent society. This stuff does work to destroy families. The Soviets were quite successful at splintering families and the sexual mores of the Russian people. This is not about protecting kids. It's about destroying the family and the kids.
Incrementalism:
The Leftist makes an extreme Left proposal.
The normal person wants the status quo.
So they compromise, and the status quo moves Left.
Repeat ad infinitum.
Describes immigration policy since 1965. 🤬
The five minutes between legalizing sodomy and National Pride Month.
Also, there is some good news on this front apparently:
https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/08/29/undeterred-sacramento-school-districts-consider-parental-notification-policies-despite-california-ag-lawsuit-board-member-says/
Bring back bullies
... and bring back shame
The left-facing ratchet is not simply a strategy it is an inevitable consequence of modernity. 'Moving truth' has been pushing the world Left since the Jacobin's practically and Hegel philosophically, it underpins the entire modern world. Essentially, once truth becomes a moving target the world must continually accelerate after it, or else get further and further from truth. Once you unbalance the world like this the whole thing starts moving and can be used as a motor, but we have reached and gone far past the point where the costs outweigh the benefits.
The modern world is basically the dinosaur that Fred Flintstone uses at work. The Left is simply that part of the world that wants to use the dinosaur to accomplish their goals. The Right is all of those people who recognise that the dino can't be controlled and shouldn't be let around anything valuable. Thus, the Left seems to have great power but it can only ever be the power of a rampaging dinosaur. The Right is far less powerful and constantly tempted to use the dino power. Until the world is set right again with Truth as an unchanging constant this cannot be changed.
"Progress" means the push towards Leninism.
True but Leninism is nothing but an apparently egalitarian way to move all of the goods of society into the hands of the 1% faster and more completely.
Perhaps, but a different 1%. Communism enriches communists, not capitalists. The nomenklatura in Havana live very well. See: Animal Farm.
Maybe, maybe not. I was reading Chesterton on Distributism the other day.(interesting like he always is but I am far from whole heartedly endorsing a scheme that I haven't even finished reading about) and was struck by his comments about how quickly and absolutely the aristocracy embraced socialism. With a very few exceptions the great winners of capitalism are...not capitalists. They are bankers and stock traders. They are deal makers not widget makers. And the same families have been accumulating all of the wealth, through socialism, for 100 years. It is not a coincidence that prep schools and ivy leagues are socialist factories. That class excels at knowing on which side their bread is buttered and learned long ago that socialism is great for oligarchs.
Where are the capitalists? Where is the one who actually got rich making a better product at a better price? All of our capitalists are paid by the taxpayers not their customers, either through subsidies on the front end or bailouts on the back. The younger generation has caught on and knows that their only opportunities in this world are in finance or becoming a youtube millionaire. They never even imagine themselves inventing something really useful or genuinely solving a problem and being rewarded for it. Speaking as an engineer who has genuinely solved a few meaningful problems, it doesn't pay.(BTW with all of the real and genuine problems with communism Cuba's fate is mainly an example of a Sanctionslum, the first US Embargoghetto but certainly not the last. Somehow Albright and her successors looked at Cuba and decided that was a great result to replicate all over the world.)
Amen.
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/t-is-for-truth/
Exactly right! Remember that for the first years after the Soviet Revolution, men could have up to 3 women. Women were looked down upon for refusing to have sex on demand and sexually transmitted disease exploded. This lasted about 10 years before Stalin imposed his own version of the ‘10 Commandments’ putting State approval on monagmous marriage etc. But the damage was done on purpose to destroy the family.
This is totally inaccurate. Can you produce any evidence for this extraordinary allegation?And to attempt to cast the mass murderer and enslaver Stalin in a good light is beyond bizarre.
I was not casting Stalin in a good light at all! The social breakdown caused by the ‘new soviet society” was getting out of control and Stalin was forced to get practical. Of course when Stalin said ‘no’ that meant gulag level enforcement.
What’s fascinating about Marxist Thought’ is the immediate damage done to women and children as social units instead of persons. It’s much like Islam in that respect. You may be too young to have experienced the ‘free love 1960’s’ but the consequences in the US have demeaned women - if you can define one today. And of course breaking down our families has been a leftist goal from the 1920’s onwards.
Given the Orthodox Christian cultural norms in place before the Revolution, these forms were modified into Bolshevik tools to control people. Remember their goal to completely remake their citizens into lovers of the State in their final transformation.
It’ll take me some time to dig that stuff up , but I will go there to get you source material.
It’s simply not true that the Bolsheviks or Marx were believers in any of the things you’re decrying above, nor that Stalin ever did anything for any reason other than to maintain his bloodthirsty grip on power.
Sorry to break it to you. It is true. The stuff about willful destruction of the family... it's been preached by the bolshies from way back. Viz the early kibutz... kids raised collectively, families belittled in lots of ways.
Stalin was a psychopath, but he was not stupid. And he won WWII.
Where’s the evidence? Strangely, none is forthcoming. I don’t believe things that have no evidence to back them up. My husband has a whole library of books about Marx and the Russian Revolution. Not one of them features the Bolsheviks trying to destroy families or turning women into sex slaves.
Please cough up the evidence.
No he’s right. The Atlantic from 1952
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1952/02/the-soviet-family/640279/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
Liberalising marriage and divorce to bring them into line with, and surpass, the rest of the Western world, as the Bolsheviks did, did not equate to “wrecking the family”. Before that time, marriage was a prison, trapping women in abusive relationships and civil (registry office) marriages weren’t recognised, which was not good for women or kids. These changes helped women, kids and families.
The belief you’re referring to was that ultimately the family would wither away, organically, over a very long period of time, to be replaced by socialisation of the tasks women are burdened with in the family. It was never a blueprint to be followed in the sense of any party being tasked with deliberately attempting to destroy the family.
Go to the source:
“Is Bolshevism, deliberately destroying the family? If one understands by “family“ a compulsory union based on the marriage contract, the blessing of the church, property rights and a single passport, then Bolshevism has destroyed this policed family from the roots up.
“If one understands by “family”, the unbounded domination of parents over children, and absence of legal rights for the wife, then Bolshevism has, unfortunately, not yet completely destroyed this carryover of society’s old barbarism.
“If one understand by “family” ideal monogamy– not in the legal but in the actual sense— then the Bolsheviks could not destroy what never was or is on earth, barring fortunate exceptions.
“There is absolutely no foundation for the statement that the Soviet law on marriage has been an incentive to polygamy and polyandry. Statistics of marriage relations – actual ones – are not available, and cannot be. But even without columns of figures, one can be sure that the Moscow index numbers of adulteries, and shipwrecked marriages are not much different from the corresponding data for New York, London, or Paris, and – who knows? – are perhaps even lower.
“Against prostitution, there has been a strenuous and fairly successful struggle. This proves that the Soviets have no intention of tolerating that unbridled promiscuity, which finds its most destructive and poisonous expression in prostitution.
“A long and permanent marriage, based on mutual love and cooperation—that is the ideal standard. The influences of the school, of literature, and of public opinion in the Soviets tend toward this. Freed from the chance of police and clergy, later also from those of economic necessity, the tie between man and woman will find its own way, determined by physiology, psychology, and care for the welfare of the human race”
Source:
Leon Trotsky: Family relations under the Soviets.
Article published under the title. “is Soviet Russia fit to Recognize?“ In the January 14, 1933, issue of Liberty magazine.
There’s something off here. Leon Trotsky write propaganda until he turned against Stalin. And the date he wrote this was years after they made their initial changes to the marriage and abortion laws which started the problems. At a certain point the Soviets changed direction on the family to some extent when they realized that it was too chaotic even for their socialist paradise.
He didn't just "write propaganda". Next to Lenin, he was the central leader of the revolution in the early years. So he is eminently well-placed to look back at government policies. Everything I have reproduced above is in perfect accord with his earlier writings and speeches. The book "Women and the Family" by Trotsky includes articles and other material from 1923, such as "From the Old Family to the New" (Pravda, July 13, 1923) and "The Protection of Motherhood and the Struggle for Culture", a speech he gave to the Third All-Union Conference on Protection of Mothers and Children on December 7, 1925. He maintained his beliefs right up to the moment Stalin's assassin stuck an ice axe in his head in Mexico City.
Lenin and Trotsky formed a bloc together against Stalin in 1922-23 because they could see his power hungry nature and the beginnings of the rise of a bureaucratic caste inside the party and government but sadly, Lenin became incapacitated and died before Stalin could be removed from his position.
Stalin changed direction on the family, for example, making abortion illegal again. Stalinist policy on the family, imposed in the 1930s, was a major retreat from the early years. Writing in 1936 in his book "The Revolution Betrayed" Trotsky explained: "The marriage and family laws established by the October Revolution, once the object of its legitimate pride, are being made over and mutilated by vast borrowings from the law treasuries of the [Western] countries and, as though on purpose to stamp treachery with ridicule, the same arguments which were earlier advanced in favour of unconditional freedom of divorce and abortion – 'the liberation of women', 'defence of the rights of personality', 'protection of motherhood'– are repeated now in favour of their limitation and complete prohibition. The retreat not only assumes forms of disgusting hypocrisy, but also is going infinitely farther than iron economic necessity demands .... The most compelling motive of the present cult of the family is undoubtedly the need of the bureaucracy for a stable hierarchy of relations, and for the disciplining of youth by means of forty million points of support for authority and power".
If you hate your kid, send to him to a government school run by Randi Weingarten.
All Leftists are Bastards.
I’m trying to figure out the anagram.
This makes me so angry that I become uncorked and froth at the mouth. How DARE they??
Same. Disgusting.
Interesting. So the child groomers have adopted the term “forced outing” to describe the desire of parents to protect their children from sexual exploitation, castration and genital mutilation. Good to know.
Yes, some parents are such monsters that they refuse to castrate their sons. So government needs to step in and help.
This is brilliant.....thank you for the truth..... well said ❤️
"there's something inside that big wooden horse"
Yeah! Horseshit.
And a scary little Gremlin army of malcontent Social Justice warriors who want to make everyone as f*****d up as they are. (have I put too many *s in there?)
We have 3 horses and 2 donkeys – their manure is pleasant compared to the crap inside the Left.
The premise of every public health restriction during covid, and every law coming out of Sacramento lately, is that We The Government know what is good for you better than you do. The obsession with controlling our children is only one manifestation of that. You want to breathe freely? How silly you are, Government will protect you by forcing you to wear a mask. You like your gas stove? How silly, you’re killing the planet, Government has an electric stove for you. You want to raise your children according to your own values? How silly.
Everyone should just say it. The people pushing these ideas want to have sex with your child. And Biden is all in.
Because he does want to have sex with your children. He seems to prefer little girls, though.
Remember the way he fawned over all those trans freaks at the WH?
"You're so brave, so courageous."
You'd think they'd saved a bunch of drowning puppies or something, instead of being a pathetic gaggle of castrated males wearing lipstick.
Abusive parents could be abusive over grades, sports, books or in fact anything at all. Why only “protect” kids from that one thing?
Well written and well thought out. All of the famous socialist leaders over the past 130 years or so were sexual deviants of one sort or the other, mostly straight, and most all pedophiles. That explains their bottomless hatred of Christians, Orthodox Jews, and traditionalists of other religions who universally repudiate the socialist fixation on pedophilia.
But they just exploit the apathy and inertia of the public, most of whom are good people but don't pay much attention. That's why we can't ever give up in protecting everyone's kids, not just our own. There are more of us than them but we must all be eternally vigilant.
Danny Huckabee
Pedophiles and gays will protect the children.
Up is down
Dontcha mean "minor attracted persons"?
(Newspeak for "pedophile.")
I can’t help but think of the 1960s chant, “The whole world is watching.” Not cops beating hippies. Watching California. Will enough parents stand up to defend their own children and stop this madness?
Not in Killifornia. If they do, I'll be shocked.
As the state threatens and sues school districts over parental notification policies, a growing number of school districts are adopting those policies. Californians are sick of their own government, and showing it. The test is coming in November of 2024, and I'm prepared to be disappointed, but there's a large and growing blue state population that's expressing open disgust for blue state culture war. The population that's awake despises these people. The question is how big that population is.
Same deal in Vermont. There are a lot of conservatives here - I know, you're all shocked - virtually all of them are natives of many generations and they are despised by the lefty newcomers. The woke are mostly from Blue places; they do not understand and do not want to understand the traditional culture of Vermont. If we were a richer, bigger, state, the SJWs in Montpelier would be rushing headlong down the path forged by California. Nevertheless, they're doing the best they can to destroy the place.
Here is an excellent post from John Klar, former attorney and now Vermont farmer, explaining what has happened to this beautiful state.
https://johnklar.substack.com/p/the-cultural-appropriation-and-destruction
Interesting read. I’ve only visited Vermont once, it’s a beautiful state and the people where real friendly. I did have a nice chuckle at all the BLM placards out front of the many homes. I think most outsiders just associate Vermont with the cooky Bernie sanders, who keeps getting re-elected. It’s a shame the woke idiots have seized control of the state. I’d still recommend it as a great place to visit.
Bernie is elected largely by the people who are here from NYC, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey. The 'heritage' Vermonters we know can't stand him.
The BLM signs and the 'Hate has no home here' ones are all over the place. I want a sign that says 'Virtue signaling has no home here' to put in front of my house.
not big enough to offset the legalized cheating that has made california a 1 party rule. The same people behind this trojan horse are the same ones that will be harvesting the ballots. California is descending into madness, and stopping it will take a huge effort. The people that oppose this stuff have to learn how to beat them at there own game, which is ballot harvesting. Good luck out there.
We're facing that same issue in New York, especially NYC. Learning how to beat them at their own game needs to be a priority.
conservatives have been slow on this, and it has cost them. They just dont have the soldiers that have the time and ability to undertake this endeavor built into there voting base. The dems have 2 giant unions-SEIU and the teachers to undertake this fraud for them. These people are paid to do this, either earned vacation time or possibly union paid time. Its a well greased machine that already has soldiers on the frontlines and a detailed battle strategy.
...and whether they haven't already moved to Texas.
It’s not he who votes that counts; it’s he who counts the votes.
Joseph Stalin
IF there's a 2024 election and what Jim said (below).
Just the opposite - schools should keep their noses out of the inner lives of children. Teachers are not credentialed to handle psychiatric issues. Most of them aren't even fit to educate children.
Most of them don’t educate children. All they do now is indoctrinate them.
Yes. More than half are unable to read at grade level and perform math at grade level, actually, do math at all. But they are well brainwashed.
As the African proverb goes, “If you take my child, I’ll raze your village.”
Perfect proverb.
All color revolutions begin with seizing arms and breaking the bonds between children and their families. There’s no reason why I mention that though... I mean, it’s not like communist revolutionaries are taking over (or already have taken over) institutions…
My family who live in LA are living in an alternate universe. An older family member was recently mugged for her smartphone late at night in front of her apartment by a guy with a gun. She was injured by him when he put her in a headlock, showed her the gun and walked off with the phone. When she told me about it she said "well he probably needed it more than me" and "actually it was pretty gentle": and my LA-idiot family nodded agreement and continued their self-righteous "allyship" with violent criminals who are obviously just harmed and dangerous. I would've gone nuts and ran off screaming but I've learned to observe their insanity and just walk away.
It's a fanatical religion for these people.
My hope is that outside the more privileged parts of California, which is most of them and has a lot of traditional Catholics, this stuff is anathema and they will be heard at the voting booth. We've gone through great political and cultural transitions before -- the last being the finance-capitalist ascendancy of the 1980s and I expect we're due for another one soon.
This stuff is anathema outside the more privileged parts of California, but Los Angeles County plus the Bay Area counties have the population to cancel the votes of the inland red zones. San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange counties are wobblers, red for decades but trending blue in a hurry. If they can be pulled back toward sanity, we may have a chance to not go Full Venezuela.
I watched the full Rob Bonta statement and was horrified. My first reaction, which I posted, was to get out of California, because no kid is safe. But, reflecting on the situation, I get that the real squeeze is the middle class. Gavin Newsom’s kids go to private school and I bet they don’t have ‘gender affirming care’ without parental consent at their schools. No, I see that the plan for California is a feudal state - wealthy landowners and surfs who clean houses and manage the landscape - no middle class allowed. So, now I say - stand your ground, you are dealing with cowards and they will surely run when confronted with the truth and the understanding that they are greatly outnumbered, because they are, I just wonder when they get to the point where they are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. Godspeed.
I still have hope for Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Please have them stay awake.
The California AWFLs I know (I lived there for 20 years) believe that crime is a myth, even when they are the victims of crime. I’ve tried to explain to them that once I had kids my focus changed, and that I became much more interested in the victims of crime than on how hard life is for criminal types. The answer I would get would be along the lines on “you just watch too much Tucker.” They are pathological altruists. Their own kid could get murdered and they’d forgive the killer
Sad, but true.
Viz Maria Ladenburger's parents.
The opposite of what has happened in the UK, where govt has just declared that schools MUST inform parents if their children decide to use alternative pronouns at school....there was much heated debate by the usual idiots, but most recognised the reasonable position that parents should be the first to know what is going on in their children's lives.