Pedophilia IS “progress,” part 1

“Why couldn’t she just be a lesbian?” is a refrain I’ve heard regarding my gender-confused teenage niece, whom I wrote about in Life with a Rainbow Mafioso. It’s a shocking statement, really, illustrating the nihilistic depths to which we’ve sunk.

Drowning in unremitting depravity, we’re gasping for breath, desperately trying to get our heads above water in the flood of Societal sodomizing. But it’s virtually inescapable precisely because it serves society’s most powerful and influential. Just ask Jeffrey Epstein. Oh, never mind.

So, dabbling in some fashionable girl-on-girl action seems almost, dare I say, normal in comparison to the train wreck that is transsexuality, with all of its totalitarian edicts, intersectional idiocy, endocrine voodoo, surgical mutilation, fantastical libertinism, and Soviet-style compliance tactics.

“If God does not exist, then everything is permitted.”
— Fyodor Dostoevsky

Maybe there’s something larger going on here, and each part of LGBT is simply a dystopian ingredient in the poisonous pie. I mean, in a war with No just peace, would it really be so unlikely that each “movement” serves one master?

Let’s poke our noses under the tent of the early “gay rights” scene to see if we can’t figure this thing out. And as with all things LGBT, parental discretion is advised. Interestingly, even that phrase is something at which LGBT activists would recoil, both then and now.

So, what was in this radical document? The activists demanded for U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam, disbanding the military, and ending American imperialism. However, this wasn’t some principled assertion of peace, originalism, and non-interventionism.

Really, these gay men sided with the Vietcong because leftists always support the growth of communism. Even though radically individual in their high-time-preference sexual compulsions, LGBT are even more fiercely loyal to the greater cause.

They demanded “self-government and self-determination … irrespective of national, sexual, party, race, age, or other artificially imposed categories.” Notice how they described “age” as fake? This is important since they also called for “an end to any discrimination based on sexual preference” and said that “Everyone should be free to pursue sexual gratification” without fear of legal retribution.

Everyone? Would this include babies, toddlers, adolescents, the mentally handicapped, and the pervs who want to have intercourse with them?

“All faggots and lesbians now imprisoned for any ‘sex crime’ (except rape) should be released immediately,” they wrote. Well, I guess that answers my previous question. As long as little Bobby is seemingly sanctioning the act, right?!

This is why “age of consent” laws have been targeted by the LGBT activists from the very beginning of this rainbow crusade. Consider The Gay Manifesto, which was published in 1969, a month before the lionized Stonewall riots. In this foundational LGBT document, American bisexual Carl Wittman stated regarding the “exploitation of children: kids can take care of themselves, and are sexual beings way earlier than we’d like to admit.”

And being that the libertines asserted that “child molesting … is caused by the frustrations resulting form anti-sex puritanism,” one can surmise that Wittman would not place an arbitrary boundary like a number on his “flow of love.” It’s all your fault, you cis thugs.

Consider the 1977 French petition against age of consent laws, which was signed and promoted by intellectual agitators, like social theorist Michel Foucault, philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, and feminist Simone de Beauvoir, as well as high-society gay activists, poets, pediatricians, surrealists, and psychoanalysts. It was published in defense of three Frenchmen on trial for having sex with 13- and 14-year-old girls and boys.

The signatories aimed to decriminalize “consensual” sex between adults and children below the age of 15 since “no one makes a contract before making love.” Can statutory rape or pedophilia be love? I guess that depends on what is your definition of “consent.” But hey, since young girls can get the pill, why not have at it, argued these pro-pederast elites.

In 1979, a similar petition was published, supporting an adult accused of having sex with girls between the ages of 6 and 12. These sexual “liberators” said, “Desire and sexual games have their place in the relationship between children and adults” and that the children’s “fulfillment proved to everyone, including their parents, the happiness they found with him.” See, sexual grooming’s good for your child.

Rewind to when the progressive power couple (above) met with the Castro regime, even though its comrades considered homosexuality “inherently counterrevolutionary” and “a bourgeois decadence,” and persecuted gays. But they all understood that alliances must be made in order to chip away at the moral order of tradition and faith – the two most durable and effective competing institutions to countering central planning and all of its varied brands of leftism.

In the case of the atheist, bisexual, and sexually liberated de Beauvoir, it was undoing sexual mores, the sex-gender distinction, gender roles, and the patriarchy. She was also greatly influenced by Hegel and his master-slave dialectic, as was Marx.

To de Beauvoir and the feminists, it’s man vs. woman. To Marxists, it’s the wealthy capitalist class vs. the industrial working class. To “people of color,” it’s black and brown vs. white. To the pedophiles, it’s the patriarchal repression of parents vs. the liberated autonomy of children. It’s what today we would call critical theory, or the Victim Pyramid.

But what did/do these assorted radicals really want? A smashing of the old order and civilizing institutions, and the abolition of God by any means necessary. And the triune bludgeon of race-class-gender is their most effective weapon.

All these supposedly varied ideologies all spawn from the same nihilistic beast. Though they might have diverse progressive names and are seemingly comprised of different movers and shakers, they all cling on to the same godless master’s cloven hooves, blackened wings, and caduceus staff.

Consider that members of a British “civil rights” group which lobbied for lowering the age of consent were working at the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL), a supposed “human rights” organization. This opened the door for granting the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) “formal affiliate status with the NCCL [and] arguing that PIE also had human rights.”

It was during this time that “the NCCL lobbied for what was dubbed a ‘Lolita charter,’ where the age of consent would be lowered to 10, if the child ‘understood the nature of the act.'” It was also under PIE’s influence that the organization also advocated for the decriminalization of incest.

The big con is that it’s about political rights. The rights of minors. The rights of women. The rights of the poor. The rights of LGBT. The rights of abusers, degenerates, and criminals. Natural rights be damned.

“Gay Liberation repudiated child paternalism, the idea that children need the protection of adults and, in exchange, are eligible for fewer basic rights,” Bronski asserted, equating the demolition of the nuclear family with increasing liberty for boys and girls. The professor likens parents to enslavers and gays to emancipators who are selflessly “destroying the legal framework that allowed parents to ‘own’ children.”

This is the thinking of the statists who purposefully undercut familial authority by allowing children as young as 12 to receive cross-sex hormones and other “transgender treatments” without parental consent. They’re backed by the god-complex pediatricians’ claim that the desires of a child who thinks he must physically morph into his “authentic, true self” (even one as young as 8) trump his parents beliefs and decisions.

If you steal childhood innocence and demean the biologic protector instinct of mothers and fathers, you not only mock the very heart of Christian virtue, you also strike at the hierarchical dominion of our Creator. This very much pleases the central-authoritarian thought controllers and “new man” reformers.

This is why the Boston gay-activists’ 10 points included demands that “Rearing children should be the common responsibility of the whole community … [and] Free 24-hour child care centers should be established where faggots and lesbians can share the responsibility of child rearing.” As if this weren’t diabolical enough, they also insisted that “Any legal rights parents have over ‘their’ children should be dissolved and each child should be free to choose its own destiny.”

Emancipate children, satiate the pathology that is pedophilia, create the “faggots and lesbians” of tomorrow, and undercut the family (where the seeds of faith are most effectively planted and nurtured). By further separating people from God, you’re well on your way to reconstructing society in your sick progressive image and elevating each individual as his own deity.

The left realized long ago they had to build bridges. Nobody really cares that much about economics in a bipolar welfare state of materialist plenty, so academics and their blue-blood foot soldiers had to marry other “oppressions” into the fold, despite their opposition to the more plebian ones. Marx wrote about the abolition of the family in 1848 and used class warfare and irrational economics to further his true goal of annihilating God and erasing human nature. And while cultural Marxists may use different means, they certainly have the same exact ends.

“I don’t remember anyone ever coming out in favor of gay marriage,” explained historian Paul Gottfried of his time at Columbia in the ’60s hanging out with collegiate communists and Marxist professors. “They simply considered homosexuals to be deviant.”

These ideological purists eventually came to give their blessing to LGBT activism, just as they did the earlier with the Civil Rights Movement: they saw the actors within each cause as easily pliable puppets whose strings could be manipulated. Anything to push the juggernaut of change.

So they subsequently married the “gay rights” movement into to the larger fold, even though “we know that in communist countries, homosexuals are put in concentration camps. It was done by Barack Obama’s friend Fidel Castro,” Gottfried explained. It’s all part of what he calls “the amnesia of the intersectional left.”

Today, these varied progressive causes form “a unified block” pushing the narrative that “the left was always good,” Gottfried continued. The earliest activists of upheaval simply saw the potential of solidarity. Just as the economic Marxists of yesteryear lowered their “standards” by embracing “faggots and lesbians,” the cultural revolutionaries of present will soon embrace pedophilia all in the name of moving forward.

If everything is a right, then absolutely nothing – no matter how grotesque, shocking, sinful, immoral, unethical, nonsensical, or deadly – is off limits. Why? It’s not because “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket,” as social philosopher Eric Hoffer remarked.

It’s because the whole damn thing was a racket from the get-go. If government is god, then the universal self is the path to enlightenment. This “future religion,” as H.G. Wells called it, and the scientific dictatorship that it produces will “raise man as a phoenix from the ashes.” Anything and everything are possible if only tradition and natural order are done away with – for the sake of liberty, of course.

We can be whatever we want to be. And anyone who has a “biblical understanding of sexuality” or thinks that “God made humans male or female” is a hater who holds views that are “incompatible with human dignity,” decree the legal experts.

In order to empower man-centered technocracy, family, faith, and other old pedestrian ideas like manners and biology must first be cast into the dustbin of “herstory.” Open the door for homosexuality, and you bust open the gate for gender-less-ness, trans-humanism, trans-speciesism, bio-engineering, pedophilia, and all other “movements” which fall on the spectrum of the nihilist disorder known as “progress.”

Be sure to check out part 2.