The defence of the family and of the institution of marriage is simply not a solely Christian thing – it precedes that faith by thousands of years and is the cornerstone of all other societies to a greater or lesser extent. Read this for a summary of ancient civilizations in a nutshell. To defend the Family is actually a highly political act because it is acting to oppose the forces in society who are not far away from their victory.
This is what the blogosphere is all about – there are so many sites out there trying to preserve our way of life under assault from outside [terrorism] and from within. Yet the more invidious assault is on the very fabric of society and this was what the Brown government was caught out doing – using immigration as one tool to socially re-engineer us.
And to what end? Seven points were listed in the previous post on this matter, points which not only were published by the people behind them but were then taken up by Marx and incorporated in the manifesto. They are still the stated goal of the Labour Party, though it’s not in the manifesto, it’s hidden away in their home page About, e.g. here and here.
It is committed to the breakdown of the institutions in our society and people who only read the manifesto swallowed it hook, line and sinker and voted them in, with the consequences you now see around you.
If you wish to reconstitute society, you must first break down its building blocks and the main building blocks are the family, religious faith, patriotism to a heritage, property and inheritance because it is through these that power descends.
Look at the Great Families in history and the obstacle they presented to the attempts to unify the country under one monarch. Families are power bases and through the way they are interwoven, they give the roots and binding power to the society and its handed down culture.
Obviously, if you are attempting to socially re-engineer, you need to have control of all means of values being passed down generation to generation. Therefore you must control what new children are exposed to. You can only do that in a nanny state where people are separated from their natural bonds, from the self-actualizing tendency to join, marry and procreate.
That is just not borne out by history.
The notion of marrying for love is relatively modern outside of Shakespeare and other authors and composers – even in Victorian times, one married to advantage. The family was not nuclear either but extended. Each family was a little Empire and as Thatcher indicated, that’s from where society gains its strength – in the same way that the grasses and roots bind the soil.
There are many ways to attack and take control of people. One is to play on the natural discontent of women with their state and thus Feminism is a high and noble undertaking, its ultimate consequence, unintended by devotees but quite intended by the Blavatskies of the world, is to sew disharmony and discord, to set men against women and women against men.
This is its evil – the way it plays on natural resentments and so is assured of greater success.
Another way is to present to the upcoming generation, through education, film, the law and medicine, the constant notion that there exists some sort of “sexual orientation”, that there are equal and opposite choices when in fact, this is a statistical fiction. The most extreme result of this re-engineering of society is the notion of gay marriage, equally as noble as real marriage.
We could argue that point forever but what it does, in real terms, is syphon off as much natural bonding into ultimately unproductive unions as possible, seen in terms of the survival of the society as a whole, that society heavily dependent on procreation and the natural bond of child to both parents.
A third way is to break down religion, where that religion demands that two people join in a legally binding union, either for love or not, with the ultimate result of producing children and thus the society’s mores, values and survivability are also passed down.
Societies in their death throes abandon such things and thus we have today’s situation of people increasingly living in their little boxes, alone, bringing in the opposite gender for sexual purposes but not binding in any sustainable or wholesome way. “Wholesome” here entails “commitment” and “responsibility”.
This creates a huge vacuum and financial burden for the tax payer and no prizes for guessing who steps in to replace the Family. Of course – the State. This is what the Mentoring programme is all about. As usual, people will say it is only for the most vulnerable families and that it is a noble and worthy cause. It always is that way at the start, just as FEMA is a noble and worthy emergency service … on the surface.
It is not by accident that Orwell called his departments Ministry of Truth, Ministry of Love. It is not by accident that the USSR called its media organ Pravda – Truth.
Who is the Mentoring Programme for? For the dysfunctional. And who decides that? Social workers in the department, according to sets of criteria. And who decides these? The State, through its agencies. It’s highly incestuous.
As Britain goes onto the dole, more and more families are under extreme duress and the State is ready to step in with the cash – our cash. We ourselves are personally destitute in the sense of owing credit issuers, unemployed as businesses crash and the State assumes the role of Mother Pig, with her millions of teats.
So, the credit issuers, the Central Bank authorized minor banks, get us into penury through the disconnect between prices and incomes and who steps in to pick up the pieces?
But who is the State? In America, it is the formers of policy – the double-headed CFR, TLC et al on the one hand and the money issuers, the private Fed on the other. And lo and behold, the names of the firms and the Great Families behind and in a controlling position in each are the same names, the ones who’ve been bailed out and who have just posted near record profits.
Dave Cole says I go off on a tangent. No, what I do is proceed to the next link in the chain, chains interwoven like spaghetti. It’s just a case of which ones to focus on at any one time.
Make no mistake, people – there is social engineering going on, it has goals [as stated above and in the previous post on the matter], they are working towards those goals and have almost got there. They will by about 2020.
What can the common man do under this assault? Very little but he can start by reaffirming the institution of marriage and the family and if enough people work hard to preserve their family units, then the global cause will ultimately be defeated and subside for another 30 years.
If we ignore this or refuse to heed the clear warning signs, one tangential consequence is that we are heading for war, for a start.