#spyggate, Cultural Marxism, Deconstructionism, Father Anthony Cekada, Fox News, Francis Effect, Frankfurt School, FSSP, Genderism, George Soros, Germany, Giardia lamblia, Gonorrhea, Great Cardinal, Havana, Hemorrhoids, heretical pope, Herpes simplex virus, hippies, HIV, Holy Year of Mercy, Human immunodeficiency virus, Human papilloma virus, Humanism, Isospora belli, Jacque Derrida, James O'Keefe, Jesuits, Jesus Christ, Joseph Ratzinger, Jozef Pilsudski, Keynes, Keynesian Economics, Kirill I, Krakow, Law of Unintended Consequences, messeging, Mexico City, Microsporidia, Miracle on the Vistula, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Nassim Taleb, neo-modernism, Neo-Pagan, Net Neutrality, new springtime, New York Times, Nigel Farage, Pagan Christians, pathological, Poland, Polish Bolshevik War 1920, Pontifical High Mass, Pope Pius VI, President Andrzej Duda, President Donald J. Trump, Project Veritas, Raymond Burke, Republic of Poland, retained foreign bodies, risk event, Roman Curia, s "c"atholicZombie, s "theological structuring", s ABC News, s ABERRO AGENDA, s aberro-sex agenda, s AIDS, s Ambiguity, s Anal Cancer, s anorectal traum, s Archbishop of Warsaw- Praga, s Associated Press, s Austria, s Benedict XVI, s Bergoglio, s Big Gender, s Card. Muller, s Cardinal Burke, s Cardinal Kazimierz Nycz, s cardinal Walter Kasper, s Chapel of the Holy Trinity, s chastity belts, s Chlamydia trachomatis, s Pope Francis, Saul Alinsky, sBoris Johnson, sCatholic Church, sCavalcade of the Three Kings, sCryptosporidium, Sexually transmitted diseases, spirit of Vatican II, SSPX, St Thomas Aquinas, sustainability, Synod 2014, Synod of Filth, Syphilis25, Tags anal fissures, Tags Black Lives Matter, Tags Catholic Church in Poland, TagsBREXIT, Team Bergoglio, The Remnant, The Scholasticum, theological deconstructionism, Thomism, Tradition, TransRational, Truth, Unjust ruler, US Presidential Election 2016, Vatican II, Work of Human Hands, Zombie, ZombieBishop, ZombieChurch
Hope all my dear and loyal readers are having a pleasant and safe, … above all safe… summer.
This humble blogger has been busy with other matters this past few months so the posting has suffered. For this, your humble blogger apologizes.
However, today the Deus ex Machina blog has been fired up since it is a red letter day. A couple of TRENDS have appeared in the public domain, that align perfectly with what this blog has been indentifying… well… since its onset. Therefore, it is only fitting to bring these OCCURENCES to your attention.
We begin with the economic and financial market sub-set of the Visibilium Omnium, et Invisibilium. On the 23rd of July, this post HERE appeared on our favorite catholic Zero Hedge website. In this post, its author Seth Levine via the RealInvestmentAdvice.com, explains to his readers all about post-Modernism and how it affects this particular area of interest.
Those who follow this humble blog will recognize the hermeneutic followed by the author of the post.
And the second OCCURENCE of post-Modernism being brought and ‘splained to the unwashed masses, appeared just this morning on the Mises Institute blog. For those who are not familiar with this organization, it is the foremost proponent of what is known as the Austrian School of economics. The Austrian School in turn, is the major proponent of everything that is individualistic, free market and in accordance with the Natural Law. In fact, the Austrian School traces its lineage to St. Thomas Aquinas and the Scholastics. And what’s more interesting, this information about its linkage with St. Thomas can be found on its website.
And just for CONTEXT purposes, as the Modernist’s within the pre and post concilior church were suppressing those ‘abstract’, ‘rationalist’, ‘ahistorical’, ‘arid’, ‘frozen’, ‘immobile’, ‘obsessed’, ‘encouraging pure secularity’, ‘sclerotically hardened and furred theologically, spiritually and ecclesially’, ‘causing a rupture between theology and life’, a ‘wax mask’, a ‘straightjacket’ that ‘reduced theological speculation to sterility’ and all around “manualistic” Thomists from within their ranks (see HERE), Thomism proper was flourishing outside of this “theological cum ideological” sub-set of the et Invisibilium. In the case of this economic sub-set, through the Austrian School and its most famous “golden child” that it produced, the Monetarists of the Chicago School.
Leaving off here, what is most important to understand from this post is that modern man, who presently is having a hard time explaining the OBJECTIVE REALITY of what it is that he is OBSERVING, is turning to the time tested knowledge of what our ancestors have accumulated. This road to the Walhalla of wisdom that these modern men are seeking, appears to lead through gaining an understanding of 20th Century economic literary and philosophical movements, movements such as the Marxist post-Modernist movements.
But as far as the Truth is concerned, well as St. Augustine of Hippo OBSERVED...
PS And a timely reminder HERE…
Why Marxist Organizations Like BLM Seek To Dismantle The “Western Nuclear Family”
Authored by Bradley Thomas via The Mises Institute,
One of the most oft-cited and criticized goals of the Black Lives Matter organization is its stated desire to abolish the family as we know it. Specifically, BLM’s official website states:
We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
This idea isn’t unique to BLM, of course. “Disrupting” the “nuclear family” is a commonly stated goal among Maxist organizations. Given that BLM’s founders have specifically claimed to be “trained Marxists,” we should not be surprised that the organization’s leadership has embraced a Marxian view of the family.
But where does this hostility toward the family originate? Partly, it comes from the theories of Marx and Engels themselves, and their views that an earlier, matriarchal version of the family rejected private property as an organizing principle of society. It was only later that this older tribal model of the family gave way to the modern “patriarchal” family, which promotes and sustains private property.
Clearly, in the Marxian view, this “new” type of family must be opposed, since the destruction of this family model will make it easier to abolish private property as well.
Early Family Units in Tribal Life
Frederick Engels’s 1884 book The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State provides a historical perspective of the Marxian view of the development of the modern Western family unit and its relation to property rights. (Engels, of course, was the longtime benefactor of and collaborator with Marx.)
In reconstructing the origins of the family within a Marxian framework, Engels traces back to the “savage” primeval stage of humanity that, according to his research, revealed a condition in which “unrestricted sexual intercourse existed within a tribe, so that every woman belonged to every man, and vice versa.”
Under such conditions, Engels explained, “it is uncertain who is the father of the child, but certain, who is its mother.” Only female lineage could be acknowledged. “[B]eing the only well known parents of younger generations,” Engels explained, women as mothers “received a high tribute of respect and deference, amounting to a complete women’s rule [gynaicocracy].”
Furthermore, Engels wrote, tribes were subdivided into smaller groups called “gentes,” a primitive form of an extended family of sorts.
These gens were consanguineous (i.e., included people descended from the same ancestor) on the mother’s side, within which intermarrying was strictly forbidden. “The men of certain ‘gens,’ therefore, could choose their wives within the tribe, and did so as a rule, but had to choose them outside of their ‘gens,’” Engels explained. And “marriage” at this stage was a “communal” affair, meaning that multiple partnerships between men and women was closer to the rule than the exception.
Because mothers were the only parents who could be determined with certainty, and the smaller gentes were arranged around the mother’s relatives, early family units were very maternal in nature and maternal law regarding rights and duties for childrearing and inheritance were the custom.
Transition to the “Pairing Family”
This was the state of affairs for thousands of years, according to Engels. Over time, however, there emerged what Engels referred to as the “pairing family,” in which “A man had his principal wife…among many women, and he was to her the principal husband among others.” This was in no small part due to the “gentes” within tribes developing more and more classes of relatives not allowed to marry one another. Due to these increasing restrictions, group marriage became increasingly impossible and ever more replaced by the pairing family structure.
Under this structure, however, the role of mothers was still dominant. Quoting Arthur Wright, a missionary among the Seneca Iroquois tribe, Engels notes, “The female part generally ruled the house….The women were the dominating power in the clans [gentes] and everywhere else.”
The fact that women all belonged to the same gens, while husbands came from separate gentes “was the cause and foundation of the general and widespread supremacy of women in primeval times,” Engels wrote.
“In the ancient communistic household comprising many married couples and their children, the administration of the household entrusted to women was just as much a public function, a socially necessary industry, as the procuring of food by men,” he added.
As society evolved, as Engels described it, from “savagery” to “barbarism,” an important evolution was man’s development of weapons and knowledge that enabled them to better domesticate and breed animals.
Cattle and livestock became a source of wealth, a store of milk and meat. “But who was the owner of this new wealth?” asked Engels. “Doubtless it was originally the gens,” he answered, referring to a collective, or group ownership over the sources of wealth. “However, private ownership of flocks must have had an early beginning.”
“Procuring the means of existence had always been the man’s business. The tools of production were manufactured and owned by him. The herds were the new tools of production, and their taming and tending was his work. Hence he owned the cattle and the commodities and slaves obtained in exchange for them,” Engels explained. This transition marked an early passage from “collective” property to “private” ownership over property—particularly property in productive resources.
Such a transformation, Engels noted, “brought about a revolution in the family.”
Part of that revolution involved a shift in the power dynamics of the household.
“All the surplus now resulting from production fell to the share of the man. The woman shared in its fruition, but she could not claim its ownership,” wrote Engels.
The domestic status of the woman in the house, which had previously involved control and distribution of the means of sustenance, had been reversed.
“Man’s advent to practical supremacy in the household marked the removal to his universal supremacy,” and further ushered in “the gradual transition from the pairing family to the monogamic family” (what we would consider the nuclear family).
With the superior status acquired, Engels wrote, men were able to overthrow the maternal right to inheritance, a move he described as “the historic defeat of the female sex.”
The family unit’s transition to a male-centered patriarchy was complete, according to Engels. Much of the blame for this can be attributed to the emergence of private property and men’s claim over it.
How to Overcome the Patriarchy?
In the Marxian view, therefore, the modern nuclear family runs counter to the ancient “communistic” household Engels had earlier described. It is patriarchal and centered on private property.
“In the great majority of cases the man has to earn a living and to support his family, at least among the possessing classes. He thereby obtains a superior position that has no need of any legal special privilege. In the family, he is the bourgeois, the woman represents the proletariat.” The family unit, rather than the collective tribe, had become the “industrial unit of society.”
The overthrow of this patriarchic dominance can only come, according to Engels, by abolishing private property in the means of production—which he and those steeped in Marxist ideology blame for the patriarchy.
“The impending [communist] revolution will reduce this whole care of inheritance to a minimum by changing at least the overwhelming part of permanent and inheritable wealth – the means of production – into social property,” he concluded.
What would this new social arrangement look like, according to Engels?
The care and education of children becomes a public matter. Society cares equally well for all children, legal or illegal. This removes the care about the “consequences” which now forms the essential social factor – moral and economic – hindering a girl to surrender unconditionally to the beloved man.
In this we see early echoes of the modern left’s current refrain attacking “patriarchy” and the nuclear family as essentially capitalist and private property–based institutions.
In this, BLM is no different from other Marxist groups. The organization’s goals extend far beyond police abuse and police brutality. The ultimate goal is the abolition of a society based upon private property in the means of production.
Michael Dowd said:
Marxism doesn’t work as originally conceived. For practical purposes the Chinese model would be the practical solution for those behind BLM, BLM is a temporary tactic being used to disrupt society to make ready for the New World Chinese Communist Order—it seems to me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
S. Armaticus said:
The neo-Marxists will take any kind of Marxism that they can get right about now. If it’s the Maoist version, so be it…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Michael Dowd said:
Sam–Why do you think major corporations support BLM? Out of fear or some more nefarious reason?
S. Armaticus said:
This is Obama’s legacy. He is the one who forced neo-Marxists into the HR departments. This then allowed them to terrorize the mgt and boards into forking over funds for other leftist causes.
It’s the Jesse Jackson shake-down model…
LikeLiked by 1 person