When the last time he started spinning the diagram of the household tree of the offspring and partners of Elon Musk (supported by sometimes the second, analogous, for Donald Trump), classically ironic libelft voices rose—that hehe, these are the conventional values that the right wants to promote.
This surface reaction is understandable. After all, we are bombarded with images of the candy household at the Christmas table, with slogans specified as “normal household – boyfriend and girl”, with the talk of priests about inseparability of ties, frightened gay, trans and lesbian, who cling, seek, and yet the another man are about to pluck out of the heteromarried embrace or “sex” our offspring. The household is simply a überfesh in a planet where there are fewer permanent things left that give safety and tranquillity.
Trump and Musk come out moderately credible as prophets of the revival of conventional values and of the thought of household holiness. 1 was playing with a porn star, was accused of rape, was convicted of sexual abuse, was divorced 3 times, and had dozens of romances. The another with many partners came together and divorced, changed models and singers, utilized surrogates, had an affair with tradwives, and the children were called X, Exa Dark Sideræl and Techno Mechanicus. However, focusing on their sexual and romanticist lives draws us from the axis of the phenomenon in question.
"Family Values" as opium for the masses?
Criticism, which stops at the crossings of bourgeois morality made by Musk and Trump, can either fall into harmless irony to anyone, or asymptotically approach the registers of Catholic Intelligence Clubs. Yes, hypocrisy is simply a beautiful nasty trait, but is it lacking for homosexual priests, socialists-landlords or liberals-nepotems? The feature is what can be sad, rather common. Nobody in their right head requires politicians to be sacred and to be the perfect embodiment of their values, due to the fact that with specified a modus operandi you have 1.2 percent in polls and you are Mark Jurek.
What if Musk and Trump's behaviour is just a conventional household model, and the net laughs are incorrect about it? Why should we identify a conventional household model with an atomic household characteristic of industrial society? Just due to the fact that it's duplicated in mass fantasy? In the same pop culture stories, mediocre Cinderella finds her prince of fairy tales, love overcomes all adversities, and a capable boy of mediocre household becomes a millionaire thanks to large ideas, outstanding intelligence and rising at 5 a.m. After all, it is clear that 99 percent are just fantasies. Why should household stories be different?
What if "family values" are just opium for the masses, followed by the explanation of grasping and free competition, which is meant to make a man, disproved by the instability of life in a deregulated market, sails towards the delirious image of the Archadic idyll? Promoted, funnyly, by the same environments that worship the Laffer curve and low premiums.
From Buhai Ilon to King of Saudi Arabia
So what is the essence of this situation? What you see with your bare eye.
An older, very wealthy polygamy man, with a swarm of offspring around him, who is just waiting for a period dedicated to him. Succession. The consequence is simply a futuristic version of feudal dynastic story.
What does this communicative structure remind you of? Game of Thrones? The Crown? Dragon’s House? Me, most likely due to the coincidence of names, came to head the bull Ilon and his monument in the village of Osowa Sień in the municipality of Wschowa. Buhai was a breeder of the Holstein-Frysian breed and the pride of the Breeding of Farmed Ossowa Sień. His image came from the States and replaced Otto von Bismarck on the collegiate. A small like Elon Musk with her imagination of household and state slow replaces the bourgeois industrial era model, with her atomic family, savings, work ethos, and mass consumption of repeated objects and patterns.
With the financial stratification that has reached unprecedented records, another wave goes. The richest is no longer adequate to free the consumption of services and things, for there are limits. But why shouldn't a female become a commodity or a "domain" – as described by the "integrated traditionalist" Ronald Lasecki at the Patriarchate Foundation conference? After all, we besides have a "prophecy" of this trend in Poland, which in the spirit of Trump and Muska was laughing, tumulting, scaring, romance, molesting, spawning more sons and daughters, and from any even grabbing a scythe under the ribs. Janusz Korwin-Mikke is the player of the same competition as the Patriarchs, but he plays in the local league. Its parties have besides for many years crushed manifes and “homosi” in the name of family, conservative values. And the president himself was bringing women to something between a kid and a rubber sex doll, which would inactive permeate with the views of the man he's sleeping with, so why would she have any voting rights?
If you have the impression that this is simply a collection of random acts, too, which are due only to the random trajectory of the brain work of older men, this is, in my opinion, a misconception. The full financial and political dominance gives emergence to another temptation – to occupy the same position as in work and parliament in union relations. Saudi Arabia may be a paradigmic pattern. A country in which the full tens of thousands of people of the ruling dynasty comes from 1 man, and another kings ruling since the 1930s. The 20th century is the ibn of Sauda, the sons of whom were forty-five. The wife twenty-two, and the concubine and lover couldn't number himself. And in Saudi Arabia, as he wished for an integral traditionalism, there is simply a alleged sacred order. 1 in which the state and religion combine into an inextricable one, and at the same time one, which is entirely by chance the sacred order of rich, polygamous men.
There will be rebellion of sons
So possibly the conventional model of the household to which Korwin, Musk and Trump mention is not an atomic family, but a kind of “primary horde” in which pater familias can have these “familias” as much as he wants, provided he is rich adequate or politically powerful enough. After all, Korwin spoke straight and talked about taking women's voting rights. If we add to this any effectively enforceable abortion ban, which will increase the economical dependence of a single parent on the offer of the labour marketplace or the father of a descendant and take her power over her own body, this imagination with Hand Tales It's not real anymore.
There may be another problem for our neo-Patriarchs. The more highly placed men will bet on any kind of polygamy, whether in quantity, whether in attractiveness, openly or in hiding, the more the number of possible partners available to mediocre men, little attractive, unknown, outside large centres will be reduced. This trend is already seen today, which is mostly the consequence of a disparity in migration from the state to the metropolis. kind programmes The farmer is looking for a wife did not come out of nowhere – it is simply a pop culture expression of this phenomenon. Incele They're another.
Let us presume that the processes described will proceed. present The number of men surviving alone increases significantly. How will this affect these young frustrated boys? To any degree they are able to endure life in economical exclusion, clinging to the fantasy of being part of a “great nation”, “imperium”, faith, or hating “communas”, “fades” or “feminazis”. But how long can they last on porn alone? The gents from the tops of the hierarchy who dream of the figure of the father of the horde must remember that the end of this communicative is the rebellion of sons who execution and devour parents, reinstalling restrictions on this market, including marriages and sublimation of urges.
Unless the war harvester reaps the unnecessary richest frustrated, destitute male family.
