House of Eratosthenes

There’s really no mystery to it, we know why, and we know how: They whip out their patented “I laugh at it and it becomes untrue” magic-beam of thought destruction.

From the comments:

sorry aaron, but isn’t your reasoning contradictory? if more nuclear families = more production = more GDP, the left should like nuclear families, because they produce more money that will be spent by the governments, which translates in more job positions and salaries for them.

Holy smokes, what a load of bull. When has the left ever been worried about a supply stepping up to meet a demand, except where it concerns the supply of more law, agencies, regulations? They certainly haven’t been overly concerned about the government having enough money to spend. They use the rhetoric to justify higher taxes, but anybody who’s paid attention for any length of time knows what’s really on their minds is the higher tax. After all the taxing and all the spending, is the government running a budget deficit? Did it run one last year? Will it run one next year? All they know about it is “The home office told me the deficit went down under Obama/Clinton.” That’s the extent of their knowledge about budget deficits.

Putting it another way: Say all the IRS trucks get caught in traffic and burn up in a massive fire, with all the cash (and the hard drives, but that’s another story), and government doesn’t receive a single nickel before it has to do all this spending. All the year’s spending is from debt. Or, the car fire doesn’t happen, everything comes out fine that year, all the spending is from cash. The point is, what does the leftist care either way? They don’t give a rip. They don’t even know how much spending there is. Their position is that it isn’t enough, whatever it is. They just want it to go up.

Another interesting aspect of leftism, with regard to this issue, is about men getting married in the first place. Lefties have no problem with that at all. Once the marriage is underway, they have a big problem with it continuing; every divorce that might possibly happen, they want to happen. But you’ll notice when centrists and right-wingers say “Don’t get married in the first place if you’re not sure it will work in the long run,” they say that alone, there are no leftists joining them. That’s because married men are not free. Bachelorhood, for whatever else you might say against it, is freedom. Liberals hate freedom. Bachelorhood is driving your motorcycle down an empty highway, with a bunch of horsepower between your knees and fifty dollars in your pocket. Being a husband and a father is more like flying in a passenger jet; full of being told where to go, what to do, how to sit. Or, piloting it, since there are real responsibilities involved, and a shift that is endless. Or more like, a mechanic maintaining the jet. Or a luggage handler loading and unloading it.

Or, being given a pink slip and sent to the unemployment line. Oh yeah, leftists especially love that part. That’s the fuel that makes their other-society go, men being told they’re no longer needed or wanted, and get out, take your infernal opinions with you, leave your wallet behind. Telling a man to go away is how business runs in their world, how households run in their world, how the law works in their world, how kids get “educated” in their world. They can’t get enough of that. Workplaces, homes, entertainment, media, they want it saturating all those walks of life, men being told their positions have been eliminated, and hit the road, Jack, and don’cha come back no more.

This illuminates the irrationality of their obsessive-compulsive disorder: If you’re so keen on men being ejected, wouldn’t it make sense to back up the “don’t get married if it isn’t forever” folks? But the lefties won’t join in. If that advice is followed, there are fewer victims. The left requires victims. They want more kids from broken homes. Hey, getting democrats elected is actually pretty tough. And, they’re punch-drunk on the fire-the-man ritual. You can’t forcibly eject what wasn’t affixed in the first place.

“This illuminates the irrationality of their obsessive-compulsive disorder:…”
Didja’ ever notice…..?
The more “disorders”, unexpectedly discovered after 4000 (or so) years of “civilization”, that are found that are cited to be SOOOOOOOOoo debilitating as to preclude
actual labor in exchange for a paycheck, or consequence in the face of behavior, the more diagnoses of
“Borderline”, voting, and management of their personal affairs, still allowed!”
seem to evolve, while requiring indeterminate ongoing “therapy”, and pharmacy, at “state” expense, of course.
I’ve been led to understand that the IQ, and “sanity”, of certain folks from the annals of history can be estimated simply from “stuff they’ve said” (or allegedly written).

Could the psychiatric/academic community be trusted to write an algorithm for an app for that?
MIGHT solve a whole lot of “Here’s why your opinion is unimportant!” questions.
(consider what the question actually asks.)
- CaptDMO | 01/25/2015 @ 16:56
Having responsibility for a job, family, and one’s own small corner of society is peerless motivation. Or more specifically, CARING about others, about your impact on them for good or ill, makes you discard whatever will get in the way. When other people’s lives depend on your conduct, a lot of people will unsurprisingly live and work as if other people’s lives depend on it, regardless of personal cost.

The Left wants an impossibility: a world in which all people work that way but no people actually have a reason to. They take away the family, then expect men to be stupid enough to work for no other reason; then call men stupid for refusing to do it. In the brilliant phrase of CS Lewis, they castrate and then bid the geldings to be fruitful.

Why then do they pursue this goal? Because to leave the family intact destroys their cause, as seen above – a person getting down to brass tacks is unlikely to waste his hard-earned time, moneys, efforts with such nonsense, in the same way that a person sitting to a sumptious feast of his favorites isn’t going to fill up on a pound of rice cakes while waiting for the first course.

A thing that has to admit its own refutation to try to prove its case, is a contradiction in terms.
- nightfly | 01/28/2015 @ 15:19

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

“Why the Left Hates Nuclear Families”Sunday, January 25th, 2015

“Why the Left Hates Nuclear Families”
Sunday, January 25th, 2015