Thursday, May 25, 2017

Sexual Liberation is Fascism

Sexual Liberation is Fascism

Unfortunately, once sex and reproduction are divorced from Marriage the State will replace the family as our basic social grammar. This is the logic of liberalism, its concept of equality ends in biopolitical terrorism. Because the inequality of men and women concerning birth rights cannot be reconciled, the state will step in, and we will officially have to adopt our children from the State.

This is also why the state and corporations care so much about gay marriage - it exhibits the same problems, a homosexual couple cannot give birth, this is unjust and unequal because biology no longer defines us (transgender rights) therefore the simple biological linkage does not make one a father or mother. Thus the state will expand its power over our reproductive rights.

The third Factor is screening for diseases before the baby is born, since it costs taxpayers money to care for these children. As we speak artificial wombs are being created in Australia where scientists can screen and grow fetuses in a optimally healthy manner.

All three factors together make necessary the state to govern birth instead of the family. This results in a totalitarian fascism where human relationships are mediated by an all encompassing State.

As Heidegger said, technology will not be used by an elite to change our behavior to fit into an economic or cultural system that benefits them like in Brave New World, rather, we ourselves will internalize these ideologies and beg the technicians to make us like that. 

So, women themselves fight for these arrangements, fiercely arguing that this is what they want, while their happiness plummets and the sexual marketplace they themselves fought for eats them alive.

The great majority of people ± men as well as women ± are today integrated through seduction rather than policing, advertising rather than indoctrinating....The overall outcome is the rapid emaciation of human relations, stripping them of intimacy and emotionality, and the wilting of the desire to enter them and keep them alive
The weakening of bonds is an important condition of successful social production of sensation-gatherers who happen as well to be fully ̄edged, effective consumers." 
-  Zygmunt Bauman

John Milkbank has explicitly called sexual liberation a form of fascism, when asked why this is what he said :

JM:  Human fulfillment lies more in the direction of faithful love and inserting oneself in the continuity of generations. Marriage and the family, for all their corruption and misuse, are at base democratic institutions. Fascism for me comes into the picture because I think (following Adorno, amongst others) that the gradual separation of sex from procreation is regarded naively if we do not realize that this is what the state wants. Covertly, it wants to secure “Malthusian” control over reproduction and to deal with the individual directly, rather than through the mediation of couples. Much of liberal feminism is actually, in practice, on the side of economic and political neoliberalism. It is too rarely noticed that sexual permissiveness has today become a kind of opiate that covertly reconciles people to the loss of other freedoms—both in relation to the state and to the workplace.

Monday, May 22, 2017

Destroy a peoples memory and you destroy a people; the Confederate Question

I look at the destruction of confederate statutes as a case of progressivism vs traditionalism, the opposition between inherited identities vs chosen identities, the notion of being allowed to have an organic, communal historical identity vs the demand of liberalism that one choose ones identity as an individual by affirming or condemning allegiance to a historical narrative or moral ideology . 

For the traditionalist one honors ones mother out of loyalty to her, regardless of her ideas or viewpoints, which may in fact be loathsome. Liberalism, essentially anti-family, diminishes all culture down to ideology that the individual is then free to merely condemn or affirm.

As Alain de Benoist writes, 

“Modernity rests on a drastic reduction of the value of the past in the name of an optimistic vision of the future, which was seen as a radical rupture from what was before (ideology of progress). The prevailing model describes a man who has to be emancipated from his origins, not only because they dangerously limit his “freedom,” but also and more importantly because they are not considered as part of the self. This same individual, however, removed from the context of his origin is essentially similar to any other, which is one of the conditions of his insertion into a developing market.” 

The connection to a group as inherited, not based on individualist choice, constitutes this traditional identity, which capitalism demands be destroyed, and for which liberal/enlightenment ideologies proffers the ready excuse, armed with bullying threats of “racism” and all the rhetorical violence of political correctness to aid in its creation of atomized a-historical little consumption units, demoralized and easily manipulated.

De Benoist again, 

“Identity presupposes memory, which is as much an intellectual faculty as it is a collective exercise: it is not a coincidence if the theme of “duty of remembrance” accompanies the new rising identities. The man or the group who has lost his or its memory cannot apprehend identity in terms of continuity. Memory implies a look back in the past, which in return allows anticipation and a projection into the future. Nobody can survive if there is no clear consciousness that the present is an extension of the past.” 
This should not be confused with nostalgia, a pining for the way things used to be.

Sam Francis once wrote, 

“The end result of the attack on Confederate symbolism, in other words, is not merely the disappearance of the Confederate flag, “Dixie,” and other symbols and customs of interest mainly to Southerners and Civil War buffs but, in time, the eradication of all symbols from pre-1960s America that suggest a white-based or “Eurocentric” public identity.”

Indeed, schools named after Washington have had to be renamed, plans for the removal of memorials to Lincoln are underway, the American Flag itself, having flown over a slave owning nation, is being condemned.

As Nietzsche said, “The future belongs to those with the longest memory.”

Once historical monuments are gone, history becomes much easier to falsify, and weaponize, propagandize, and demonize. The Native Americans knew this - destroy a peoples memories and you destroy a people. So puzzling, this epidemic of White despair and suicide in the south - why so demoralized I wonder ? ...Isis is famously adept at this. Afghanistan used to be Buddhist after all, with marvelous statutes, now in the rubble heap. Old Lee joins them...

Well, I'm sure the great myth that these peoples grandparents had any qualities or heritage worth preserving, that they had any honor worthy of memory, or sacrifices or accomplishments had any meaning, will be razed to the ground with their monuments, and these people will forget any pride or esteem they thought they had, and will continue on burdened only with the memory of their ancestors mistakes.....They have been taught to hate themselves, their very existence an offense to decency, a war on any shred of dignity these poor people possess - and it is literally killing them. Ah, they deserve a good lynching no doubt....

Or, could it be this is not about slavery or the confederacy at all, but two competing visions of what a human being is - an individual vs a traditional identity ?