I had a revelation about this a few years ago. In our current education system, we're essentially taught that ideas can go bad, that certain viewpoints can become "antiquated."
This stems from the marxist thought that's been injected into the U.S. for decades. We're taught to look at everything our ancestors valued as "antiquated."
"A nuclear family where the man and the woman have defined roles? It's the 21st century."
"Some groups of people are better than others? That's an outdated world view."
In reality there's no sense in thinking that ideas have expiration dates. For thousands of years Europeans had families with defined roles, only now in the last 100 years is it suddenly outdated. Just like views on race, everyone knew that people are unequal, only recently is the belief outdated.
For thousands of years Europeans had families with defined roles, only now in the last 100 years is it suddenly outdated. Just like views on race, everyone knew that people are unequal, only recently is the belief outdated.
You make a point I wish more peoplel could understand. For thousands of years, homosexuality has been rejected as a perversion that was destructive to mankind and an abomination in the eyes of God. Suddenly, since about 1980, it's become not only acceptable, but something to be celebrated. How does that work? Were our ancestors, who survived for thousands of years under terrible conditions, so wrong? Or is the present view an anomaly, an aberration, that cannot sustain itself because it is self-destructive? I think it's the latter.
It's childish and simple-minded to think that choices that worked for thousands of years can be thrown into the trash with no averse consequences. We need to know history, and learn from it. The moral code of behavior codified in the Bible didn't come from nowhere. It came from the collective wisdom and experience of hundreds of thousands of people over a span of thousands of years, under all possible kinds of living conditions, facing every possible danger and adversity. The nuclear family works. Separate roles for men and women works. Women devoting most of their energies to child rearing and caring for the home works. Marriage works. Faithfulness to one's spouse works.
The easy counter to that argument is: What is the current-better replacement that makes this old way antiquated? Antiquated implies that something better has come along. Harnessing fire is eons old yet the technology still fuels so much of modern life. The horse and buggy as a main mode of transportation is antiquated because ICE vehicles are so much better at the task. If EVs can do it better than ICE (and honestly I'm not sure they can), ICE will be antiquated.
So what model performs better than the nuclear family in terms of childhood outcomes? There is no current model; single-mother households are pretty much the predictor for crime and negative outcomes; you're considered to have "beaten the odds" if you succeed or even break even in that circumstance. Faggot households tend to beget more faggots and in one breath people will tell you "there's nothing wrong with faggotry" and in the next say "Western civilization has declining fertility rates so we need to import niggers."
Consistently, historically, the nuclear family has been valued in all societies that succeeded. And it will come to pass again, but I'm pretty sure it's going to be after the Great Reset. I think the "Great Filter" that prevents civilizations like ours from becoming galactic masters (or even multi-stellar civilizations) is that, once the K-selected (smart animals capable of passing on knowledge and development in low-population, high-investment offspring) create a certain level of comfort and technology, the R-selected (dumb animals essentially capable of breeding and breathing - low investment in offspring beyond shitting them out) are free to grow unencumbered by the pressures that would normally cull them and keep the population in check. The K-selected are overrun in this scenario, and the R-selected consume and destroy everything the K's created. Eventually R's die en masse from overpopulation and scarce resources and either become K's or the few remaining K's survive and rebuild from the scarce resources.
Or everyone dies. That could happen too.
(post is archived)