Attacks on the household and celebrating childlessness as equally good, if not a better choice from having children, we know well from Poland. Despite dramatic demographic indicators, liberal and left-wing media regularly fill us with reports of the freedom afforded by the deficiency of children and how many mothers regret that they have been. The same is actual throughout the Western world. Even Pope Francis criticised “selfism” respective times for people choosing animals alternatively of children. In the United States, too, this is 1 of the loud themes of the ongoing electoral campaign.
Family is missing more than money
For the past fewer weeks, there has been no day for the Democratic organization and journalists and celebrities representing the interests of the demoliberous establishment to match the “sexist” and “hate” words of J.D. Vance – candidate Donald Trump as vice president. Vance in 2021 said in an interview with Tucker Carlson that “United States are governed by corporate oligarchs and a group of childless kittens moms. People who are unhappy due to their life choices, so they want the full country to be miserable too. This is simply a fundamental fact — look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigig (a homosexual minister), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (a very left-wing MP) — the full future of Democrats is controlled by childless people. What is the point of giving our country back to people who do not truly have a direct interest in its future?"
Vance became known by his 2016 book Elegia for bidets. It tells about his hard childhood marked by poorness and pathological household relations. Vance talks about the structural problems of the American white working class, from which he himself comes, specified as poverty, unemployment, alcoholism or drugs. He argues that they are the answer to them, neither the socialist nor libertarian program. It does not underestimate economical factors, but the main problem is neither the deficiency of public services nor besides low or besides advanced taxes, nor besides low or besides advanced social benefits. The confused Americans lack, above all, community, unchangeable household relationships, sense of sense and ethos of work for themselves and others. They deficiency God and family. A fewer years after Vance was written, he became Catholic. In 2022 he was elected Senator (in the US it is higher than an MP). Sam and his wife have 3 children.
Since Trump pointed out him as a vice-president, left-wing media have furiously attacked Vance and drawn his next “shocking” statements from the past. For example, they inform that Vance's falling childhood called it a “civilization crisis” or that he offered to give parents additional votes for the children they have. The Harris run in sensational speech released a recording as Vance says that people with children should pay lower taxes due to the fact that “we should impose taxes on things that are bad and support things that are good”. specified obvious, common sense claims are presented as evidence that the vice president of the United States can become a fascist and theocrat who wants to “tell women what they can do with their body”. The Demolibers want to demolish Vance as much as possible, hoping that this will lead to Trump's defeat. It is besides worth noting that Vance did not only criticize women – as “a unusual cat mom” he besides described the leading establishment economist Paul Krugman, a 2008 Nobel laureate who claimed there was no economical argument for having children (and who did not own them).
Celebrate front against children
The run for condemning Vance was attended by the serviced celebrity salon. After the debate, Harris and Trump, a well-known vocalist Taylor Swift announced that she supported Harris by signing her message as “a childless cat mom”. The mainstream media were excited to announce a large turn in the run and convince millions of Americans to vote for Democratic candidate due to the support of the pop star. In fact, as James Dudek aptly wrote, Swift's support for Harris “is as shocking as Krystyna Janda's support for the PO or Jan Pietrzak for the Law”. The hedonist 34-year-old supported Biden in erstwhile elections, of course she is besides committed to killing unborn children. besides during the fresh Emmy Awards awarded for tv productions by actor Selena Gomez and Candice Bergen attacked Vance and his words about “cat moms”, which immediately delighted the media.
By the way, the mechanisms for promoting left-wing anti-cultural content are well visible. The largest media and financial centres make specified characters as worthy of this celebration of celebrities, who will supply a mass of amusement filling our lives. Then they present in sensational speech their opinions on how to live, expressed from the position of authority. In fact, it's precisely the opposite. People like Taylor Swift are promoted precisely due to the fact that they will later preach concrete ideological content, affirming the dominance of circumstantial interest groups in the Western world. They will frequently be empty media products for propaganda, not “artists”.
That's why a multi-month performance was organized in America, full of headlines “who will be supported by Taylor Swift?” and convinced that “it is she who will decide the result of the election.” If there was even a chance that he would declare voting for Trump, there would be no specified articles. Of course, it is not only about politics, but besides about promoting a circumstantial lifestyle. Young women are told that “they will be like Taylor” erstwhile taking the example from her will choose a carefree and promiscuous life without husband and children. In practice, the vocalist has millions of dollars and thousands of men willing to enjoy it. Long-term luck won't give her, but her fans won't even have it.
Anti-family women as a replacement proletariat
Liberal-left media besides make communicative that Vance's “shocking” words will importantly harm Trump's run among childless women. Here again we see the reversal of the effects and causes. The individual choices of Americans greatly affect their political sympathy. This shows us, for example, an exit poll survey conducted at the occasion of the erstwhile U.S. national elections in November 2022 at a large example of 18.5 1000 respondents by CNN – so it would be hard to propose that the nonsubjective was to prove conservative too. Meanwhile, the poll showed that Republicans won 59% to 39% among husbands, 56% to 42% among wives, and 52% to 45% among single men or surviving in free relationships. The only group of 4 in which the left was victorious, were single women or in free relationships – but its advantage was gigantic, 68% to 31%. This allowed the Democrats only a minimal defeat of 48% to 50%.
This data shows well that erstwhile an anti-family left claims to represent women, in practice they mean those women who do not want a husband or children. Despite deep cultural divisions in the United States, matrimony and motherhood make no little difference than origin. While the Democrats won 60% to 39% among all Hispanics, the Latins with a spouse and children were 64% to 36%. The right even won among Latin women who are wives (and so sex and ethnicity should work in the benefit of the left) – 50% to 49%. By comparison, among Latinos single or surviving in free relationships, the left has won crushingly as much as 71% to 28%. We have a chasm for white Americans, too. Among white wives, Republicans have a 63% to 36% advantage, but among white single women or in free unions Democrats won 58% to 41%.
“Cats we have” simply pays off the left
These data do not surprise – they are consistent with a common sense intuition. A man with a household usually lives, functions regular and thinks differently than a single atom. However, it is worth to be aware that the left-wing production of “cats I have” simply pays off politically, as is bringing immigrants. An individual voter as part of a group is much more comfortable than 1 who needs to be convinced by a circumstantial programme. At the same time, however, it tries again to reverse the origin and effect, claiming that single women or immigrants and their descendants vote more frequently to the left, due to the fact that the right is “little inclusive”, “sexist”, “racist” etc. This is to convince the right hand to abandon its own values. From this point of view, too, we should look at anti-family propaganda conducted in Poland by many media.
Of course – many people do not have children of their own accord. Many couples have fertility problems, women frequently experience miscarriages. We should not attack circumstantial people whose individual situation we do not know. It is besides clear, however, that many people could have children, but they do not want or postpone it for an eternity later – frequently due to the media-saturated fears. The affirmation of the household is not harmful to anyone – on the contrary. Prof. Patrick Deneen, a friend of Vance's, wrote in his last book on “the society of barley” (insects surviving only a fewer days), without the past and without the future, surviving only for the present time and the consumption of products substituted for them, not curious in their ancestors' wealth, not leaving behind either material or cultural achievements, “or even another generation”. Neither Trump nor Vance are, of course, heroes without fault. On November 5, however, we will see whether elections can be won in modern America by going at least a small in contrast to the dominant permissive paradigm.
Casper Kita
