“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Social issues are usually just distractions, until they start causing real world problems.
Take the “trans movement” for example.
Who would have assumed, (5) years ago, that today would be discussing books about masturbation -- in elementary schools? Not only that, but that there are live shows, at public libraries, where grown men are waving dildos in the faces of young children. And this behavior is considered acceptable?
Do I think that all “progressives,” want this for their children. Absolutely not.
But I do think that there’s a political interest and narrative that’s driving this. Otherwise there wouldn’t be an institutionalized government response.
The California legislature is paving the way to remove children from the homes of Californians that don’t/won’t support gender affirming treatments for their children.
Now Washington State just passed a bill to literally take children from their parents if they don't consent to gender affirming surgery for their child.
That is something to be worried about.
Social issues are often not the end of the world, but sometimes they morph. Throughout history things that started small grew into larger movements that lead to horrible outcomes.
Thinking that things will just blow over or, “They’ll never do that,” is why the US is about to lose its reserve currency status. Lately there are a hell of a lot of things that “They would never do” that they ARE doing.
Which begs the question, “Why pass legislation to allow for things that nobody is going to do?” 🤔
So, who deserves more credit for supporting the dismal charade:
1) politicians who need to continually renew the stock of vixtims and the disgruntled, and who needed to refresh after losing a key voting block when homosexuals were liberated from their cohesive victim sttus to become the individuals they always were.
2) SJWs who won the fight, needed to continue to fight for something to get some meaning in life
3) Nonprofit/NGOs who are cash heavy from wealthy, possibly guilt-ridden donors with savior complex, who delude themselves that their money can convince/coerce everyone into letting them save the world, and who are filled with otherwise unemployable SJWs waiting for their marching orders
3) unelected international organizations (WEF, ?UN) who are filled with #s 1, 2, and 3 but also want to wrest and usurp sovereignty from individual countries and their hapless citizens so they can impose the homogenized masterplan to dictate the way the hopeless masses should live.
4) international businesses spouting virtue signalling (SEG) "shibboleths"(thanks SBF!) to pave a path to international dominance based on posing and not on substantive leadership
Reminds me of this C.S. Lewis quote:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
― C. S. Lewis
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/19967-of-all-tyrannies-a-tyranny-sincerely-exercised-for-the-good
Social issues are usually just distractions, until they start causing real world problems.
Take the “trans movement” for example.
Who would have assumed, (5) years ago, that today would be discussing books about masturbation -- in elementary schools? Not only that, but that there are live shows, at public libraries, where grown men are waving dildos in the faces of young children. And this behavior is considered acceptable?
Do I think that all “progressives,” want this for their children. Absolutely not.
But I do think that there’s a political interest and narrative that’s driving this. Otherwise there wouldn’t be an institutionalized government response.
The California legislature is paving the way to remove children from the homes of Californians that don’t/won’t support gender affirming treatments for their children.
Now Washington State just passed a bill to literally take children from their parents if they don't consent to gender affirming surgery for their child.
That is something to be worried about.
Social issues are often not the end of the world, but sometimes they morph. Throughout history things that started small grew into larger movements that lead to horrible outcomes.
Thinking that things will just blow over or, “They’ll never do that,” is why the US is about to lose its reserve currency status. Lately there are a hell of a lot of things that “They would never do” that they ARE doing.
Which begs the question, “Why pass legislation to allow for things that nobody is going to do?” 🤔
https://canadafreepress.com/article/california-proves-again-its-the-heart-that-circulates-evil-through-the-liberal-bloodstream
https://trendingpoliticsnews.com/just-in-washington-passes-bill-allowing-children-to-legally-be-taken-from-parents-if-parents-dont-consent-to-gender-transition-mace
So, who deserves more credit for supporting the dismal charade:
1) politicians who need to continually renew the stock of vixtims and the disgruntled, and who needed to refresh after losing a key voting block when homosexuals were liberated from their cohesive victim sttus to become the individuals they always were.
2) SJWs who won the fight, needed to continue to fight for something to get some meaning in life
3) Nonprofit/NGOs who are cash heavy from wealthy, possibly guilt-ridden donors with savior complex, who delude themselves that their money can convince/coerce everyone into letting them save the world, and who are filled with otherwise unemployable SJWs waiting for their marching orders
3) unelected international organizations (WEF, ?UN) who are filled with #s 1, 2, and 3 but also want to wrest and usurp sovereignty from individual countries and their hapless citizens so they can impose the homogenized masterplan to dictate the way the hopeless masses should live.
4) international businesses spouting virtue signalling (SEG) "shibboleths"(thanks SBF!) to pave a path to international dominance based on posing and not on substantive leadership
A) 1 only
B) 1 and 3
C) 1, 2 and 3
D) 2 and 4
E) all of the above
1,2,3, and 5.