Where do you draw the line if you officially support “normlessness” since everything and anything is just as “valuable”?
The concept of a “non-society” without identity due to “meme-flooding” is something that I briefly touched upon in an older entry of mine where I wrote about an article concerning the LGBTQ rainbow flag.
I translated an article from Norwegian to English where a man explained that the flag symbolises that “anything goes” and that there is no “template” for what constitutes a “normal” relationship; he argued that the activists behind this flag seek to profoundly deconstruct the “nuclear family” and a “functional society” by making traditional families seem “abnormal” and/or equal in status to all other relationship configurations.
Interesting viewpoints indeed; especially since I had no idea what the rainbow flag truly represented. I thought that the activism was/is about gay couples living together without being thrown into prison or killed. I thought that the idea was that couples would be allowed to live free from persecution; funny enough I have never read much or been properly exposed to the so-called “LGBTQ” or gay-lifestyle, so I voiced my support for something that I hadn’t really researched or knew anything about, all in the name of “being nice” and supporting “dignity of life,” “human rights,” and “respect for others.”
That is of course very interesting when looking at how the LGBTQ advocacy has played out. I never expected that we would get to a point where normal “make-believe” between children will (or can) make grown-ups wonder if the child is actually acting out “their real identity.” A child dressing up does not mean that the child is subconsciously “transgender,” I do believe that this is a very unusual and certainly abnormal configuration, yet “transgenderism” is now so “huge” that one would believe that everyone falls into this peculiar category.
The whole idea that bathrooms shouldn’t be divided either and that men can all of a sudden appear out of nowhere in a “Ladies room,” is bizarre and in my opinion an “infringement” upon women’s rights. Yet here we are.
I’ve read stories about children being taken away from their parents by the authorities, only to be placed in the care of gay-couples or Muslim couples, something that has obviously enraged the biological parents not interested in their children being exposed to an “alternative lifestyle” or the Muslim faith.
Yet in a society where anything goes, and everything is just as worthy; how can you argue that it is wrong?
Isn’t that your “subjective” opinion?
Because that is precisely the argument that will be used against you if you disagree or question any of this, and if you are lucky, the argument will be supported by cleverly (or foolishly) worded legislation.
Slippery slopes when it comes to “laws & rules” is another topic that I’ve also mentioned; since everything can go over-board in a spectacular fashion if no specifics are given! This “obscure” communication-method where abstraction is used to such an extent that the wording can be perceived in a myriad of ways is a ticking bomb that can be abused without measure.
This “fog-talk” and “normlessness” truly places a Nation in an awkward situation since:
- shared ancestry as a defining feature of your identity is fought against by flooding your territory with other population groups; eventually creating a situation of a “No-Nation” or basically a “Multi-Nation-Without-Any-Framework-Nation,” since multiple cultures will all be pulling in separate directions.
- religion as a unifying factor will be obliterated since any belief system is just as valuable as all others, setting the stage for never-ending competition and countless arguments, further dismantling internal unity and identity.
- relationships resulting in children is discouraged, meaning that there will be no future for your Nation and/or that your demographics will become so bad that your children will be forced into a situation where they’ll be surrounded by other tribes and will have to fight themselves out of this compromised situation to ensure their own survival.
- women and men are just the same; if women don’t “grow a pair” they are crap and if men aren’t “effeminate” they are crap too.
- you cannot have an operational and functional defence since you can never truly name your enemy; nor can you launch an efficient criminal investigation, since having an official suspect would be very offensive to anybody else who would belong to that specific group. How can you say that demographic such and such is a greater threat or pose a greater problem than population group this and that?
- the war on terror will be eternal, since the meaning of the word “terrorist” can constantly be altered. Your friend today is your enemy tomorrow and there is no end in sight when it comes to the fight.
- you cannot be honest in any field of research, which means that you’ll be bypassed by all of your competitors.
In other words: your Nation will be crushed.
Here is the video that inspired me to write these words: