https://youtu.be/JDtsOcaSq4A
Imagine for a second what's actually going on here.
You have governments that specifically implement policies that cause mental health issues. The destruction of the nuclear family we know causes mental health issues. This is not up for debate, the data is overwhelming.
In the story Tim talks about, isis was basically created by government policy in the west, and further enabled by policies essentially crafted to deny the existence of isis, obviously not directly but indirectly.
So you have all of these policies that specifically and directly create mental health issues, then you have the government implementing euthanasia for mental health issues.
These people want to call us ontologically evil, perhaps that's because they've mistaken their mirror for a window.
Imagine for a second what's actually going on here.
You have governments that specifically implement policies that cause mental health issues. The destruction of the nuclear family we know causes mental health issues. This is not up for debate, the data is overwhelming.
In the story Tim talks about, isis was basically created by government policy in the west, and further enabled by policies essentially crafted to deny the existence of isis, obviously not directly but indirectly.
So you have all of these policies that specifically and directly create mental health issues, then you have the government implementing euthanasia for mental health issues.
These people want to call us ontologically evil, perhaps that's because they've mistaken their mirror for a window.
- replies
- 1
- announces
- 2
- likes
- 0
The alternative to not having a nuclear family in practice is not some idyllic extended community, its having a tenuous grip to a single parent who is barely propped up by the government.
The data shows that like 90% of violent rapists come from single parent households, as well as an overwhelming majority of violent crime, despite being a minority of individuals.
The data shows that like 90% of violent rapists come from single parent households, as well as an overwhelming majority of violent crime, despite being a minority of individuals.
You can subtlely promote the nuclear family without forcing people to stay married, and you can dissuade the nuclear family without ever coming close to forcing anyone to break up, alternatively it's quite easy to point people in the direction of making bad choices. It's quite easy to train people such that they can never be a good husband or a good wife or good mother or a good father, ensuring that the most toxic form of relationship dominates.
In one of the chapters my book, I talk about how some relationships just need to die, so of course when a relationship is just totally toxic it just needs to end. On the other hand, there's quite a few times where a good relationship just had some hard times and our society tells us to throw that away the moment that it becomes remotely difficult.
In the black community for example they used to have one of the highest marriage rates and the highest rates of marriages staying together of any group of people, and that was a big problem for the ruling elite. So in the name of helping them, they created a whole bunch of incentives to split up a marriage that might otherwise have been functional.
The thing is, family is anathema to the state. Most people would die for their husband or their wife or their son or their daughter before they would die for their country, and while people may tolerate Injustice towards themselves, many would be ready to pick up arms when they witness intolerance against their loved ones. For this reason, authoritarian regimes either co-opt the family or seek to dismantle it. The Soviet Union was famous for pitting children against their parents. Of course the "trained marxists" at BLM explicitly attacked the family, because how are you supposed to mindlessly pick up their self-destructive ideology and burn down your apartment building when you know that the people you love the most live in that apartment building?
It isn't an exclusive or operation here. The basis for a lot of strong communities is a strong family. A strong family where one parent can provide for their children and for one of the spouses to be able to spend time raising the children and participating in the community. When you look at it from this lens, it becomes clear what's been done to the family: everyone has been turned into a worker for the benefit of corporations, to the detriment of the community and the family, which has driven down wages and therefore ensure that most families are required to have the postmodern family unit of a worker and another worker in the state to deliver them from all of the crises caused by constantly being on the brink.
It isn't an accident that as the more traditional family unit disappears, so has community and mental health issues have exploded.
In one of the chapters my book, I talk about how some relationships just need to die, so of course when a relationship is just totally toxic it just needs to end. On the other hand, there's quite a few times where a good relationship just had some hard times and our society tells us to throw that away the moment that it becomes remotely difficult.
In the black community for example they used to have one of the highest marriage rates and the highest rates of marriages staying together of any group of people, and that was a big problem for the ruling elite. So in the name of helping them, they created a whole bunch of incentives to split up a marriage that might otherwise have been functional.
The thing is, family is anathema to the state. Most people would die for their husband or their wife or their son or their daughter before they would die for their country, and while people may tolerate Injustice towards themselves, many would be ready to pick up arms when they witness intolerance against their loved ones. For this reason, authoritarian regimes either co-opt the family or seek to dismantle it. The Soviet Union was famous for pitting children against their parents. Of course the "trained marxists" at BLM explicitly attacked the family, because how are you supposed to mindlessly pick up their self-destructive ideology and burn down your apartment building when you know that the people you love the most live in that apartment building?
It isn't an exclusive or operation here. The basis for a lot of strong communities is a strong family. A strong family where one parent can provide for their children and for one of the spouses to be able to spend time raising the children and participating in the community. When you look at it from this lens, it becomes clear what's been done to the family: everyone has been turned into a worker for the benefit of corporations, to the detriment of the community and the family, which has driven down wages and therefore ensure that most families are required to have the postmodern family unit of a worker and another worker in the state to deliver them from all of the crises caused by constantly being on the brink.
It isn't an accident that as the more traditional family unit disappears, so has community and mental health issues have exploded.
The state says a lot of things that arent true. Just look at "don't worry, we aren't spying on our own citizens" or "we really hate racism" or "we are temporarily suspending convertibility of the dollar to gold"
Actions speak louder than words.
Actions speak louder than words.
I could come to agree on a structure stronger than a mere nuclear family, such as a multi generational home (I grew up with my grandma living with us, it was great), but as long as they're actually throwing us in radioactive waste that's the problem.