Interesting coda to the marriage wars: there's no longer much doubt that declining birth rates are closely linked to the decline of traditional marriage. That's not how it was "supposed" to work, according to all the fashionable social theories.
We could argue over the timing of cause and effect: did traditional marriage lose its appeal because marriage was redefined, or did it become politically possible to redefine marriage because it had lost much of its power and appeal among young people?
But whatever the root causes, the results are undeniable. After decades of mad-scientist social tinkering, we've got studies piling up that prove what our grandparents knew all along. It turns out that tradition and common sense were right after all.
Married couples have more children. We already knew, after decades of unbelievable carnage unleashed by social engineers and the welfare state, that marriage is the healthiest environment to raise children - but marriage means MORE children too, across all social groups.
It's pretty clear that healthy societies have a major interest in encouraging young men and women to get married. Large, young families are the only way to ensure demographic growth. And our gigantic, rickety, insolvent "entitlement" system absolutely depends on growth.
But we no longer have any means of encouraging young men and women to get married. They've been told - "programmed" would not be too strong a word - to believe there's nothing special about that arrangement. They see no reason to put marriage ahead of career.
Indeed, young people have some pretty solid, dollars-and-cents reasons to put work and income first, not least being their titanic student loans in the post-Obamacare nightmare of higher education. Marriage is a boutique good to be enjoyed by older, successful people.
No young married couples means no healthy large families with children raised in a stable environment, with the attendant educational benefits and boost to starting their own families and careers. No generational wealth accumulated and passed down a growing family tree.
We're setting ourselves up for a horrific societal and fiscal crash, all so we can enjoy a hideously painful lesson in how our forefathers were right all along about the importance of marriage to the social and economic strength of a nation. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Has a single piece of false information peddled by major media outlets about the fake "Haitians whipped by Border Patrol" story been labeled as disinformation by our Big Tech overlords? Has a single account been flagged or suspended for spreading it?
This is exactly the kind of propaganda that disinformation labeling SHOULD be used for, if we're going to have it at all. Verifiably false and deliberately misleading posts are being used to attack the American political system and the rule of law.
People are being mercilessly defamed by the false story, and this particular spew of Fake News has a very good chance of getting people injured or killed. It's a textbook example of dangerous disinformation. Aggressive flagging and banning by Big Tech would help slow it down.
Milley's treason is a landmark in the evolution of the Great Reset, which began with the formation of the Deep State: the notion that a sizable amount of government power must be protected from voters. As I like to say: Democracy rebooted with an authoritarian core.
The totalitarian Left passionately believes there should be an elite core of government bureaucrats, with correct ideology and Party credentials, who are not subject to the whims of voters. There are issues of such importance that idiot voters cannot be allowed to interfere.
Of course, that list of issues that should not be subject to the will of the American electorate grows longer all the time. The Great Reset is a whole new political operating system, not one of the authoritarian patches the Left has been uploading every few years.
Vaccination rates were damaged in the long run by misleading people into thinking the vaccines prevent coronavirus transmission, rather than reducing the severity of infection. (Yes, that impression was definitely given, no matter how much revisionists claim nobody ever said it.)
Overselling the vaccines goosed inoculations early on, making for some nice headlines, but in the long run it hindered the effort, because it gave the public more reason to distrust the authorities and question the value of vaccination.
It was profoundly demoralizing to be told, "Never mind, we're still in permanent panic mode, we'll still have restrictions, you still have to wear masks, this will probably never be over." Earlier this year, everyone up to Biden was pushing vaccines as the ticket to normal life.
If you're applauding someone losing their job because they privately expressed a political idea you disagree with, you are either implicitly conceding that YOU could be punished the same way by those who disagree with you... or you are a totalitarian and flirting with fascism.
Imagine what would happen if a company fired someone because they privately expressed support for the transsexual agenda, and some of the company's business partners complained. The howls of Hitlerism would be deafening, the repercussions severe. Government would step in.
The correct term for a system in which only political views in line with the ruling party's ideology can be expressed without fear of punishment is totalitarianism. If corporate muscle is employed by the ruling party to punish dissidents outside the law, it is fascism.
Abortion was the first sacrament of the modern Church of the State, which later incorporated global warming, critical race theory, trans extremism, and most recently coronavirus hysteria. Abortion is the rock upon which it was all built. The faithful go berserk at threats to it.
Roe v Wad was crucial to the rise of government-as-a-religion for several reasons. It was an act of raw judicial power, of transcendence over democracy and the Constitution by the elite priesthood. It's hilarious to hear anyone who defends Roe blather about "defending democracy."
With Roe, the elite priesthood declared that something it wanted was Good, and therefore must be made Lawful. It worked backward with comical clumsiness to cobble together a legal rationalization for imposing its will, using religious terminology like "penumbras and emanations."
"America First" policy was ignorantly caricatured as isolationism, but in the end, nothing leaves the American people as isolated as globalism.
China, Russia, and the other bad actors swooping in to capitalize on Biden's hideous debacle in Afghanistan have a valid point buried in their opportunistic rhetoric: governments that claim not to act in their own national interests are irrational, and therefore undependable.
There is a remorseless logic to the arguments employed by the Chinese Communist Party to build their new worldwide Axis of Evil. They're unabashedly nationalist, China First all the way, but they present themselves as tough but honest and reliable business partners.