A reader has drawn our attention to this brilliant piece by the Israeli/American blogger and journalist Daniel Greenfield, who (more eloquently than we) addresses a question that we have already discussed on one of the permanent pages of this website: why is the political left (both in the US and in Europe) so enthusiastically supportive of the “gay rights” agenda? Why are Socialists, Greens, and Communists spending their political capital on same-sex “marriage”, an absurd agenda that can be of practical benefit only to a small minority within a small minority (i.e. the roughly 10% of self-identified “LGBT persons” who actually want to “marry”), but which, as they must be aware, is more likely to cost them voter support rather than to win them new votes?
The answer is: gay “marriage” is neither about gays nor about equality. The real purpose is the deconstruction, and indeed the destruction, of marriage and family as basic social institutions. In other words, the aim is to destroy society as we know it.
The wet dream of the political left is, and always has been, REVOLUTION. And revolution means the DESTRUCTION of the existing order. If that destruction can be achieved by “peaceful” rather than violent means, all the better – but total destruction remains the goal.
The political left hates family and marriage, because the natural bond between parents and children or the bond between two spouses create a space of autonomy that is largely exempt from the interference of politicians. This is why socialists like Charles Fourier already in the 19th century called for the abolition of both, and why in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution one of the first reform attempts of the Bolsheviks went into a similar direction: there should only be the state and the individual, and nothing in between. It is perhaps no wonder then that today’s Socialists have similar agendas: for example, to make the attendance of nursery school compulsory, to shut out parents from decisions concerning the education of their children (in particular with regard to Sexual education, the “revolutionary potential” of which cannot be underestimated), the promotion of a radical understanding of “children’s rights” (which are in fact an instrument to empower the state at the expense of parents…), etc.
But the most important part of the agenda remains, without doubt, the deconstruction of the natural family. This is a matter of high priority for the political left – one for which it is prepared to make big sacrifices. The underlying expectation is that once the world is transformed into a tabula rasa, a field of ruins, no one will be left to defend it, because there will be nothing left to be defended. This will then allow the construction of a new world order in which all can be determined by the arbitrary will of politicians.
The only question worth asking about gay marriage is whether anyone on the left would care about this crusade if it didn’t come with the privilege of bulldozing another civilizational institution.
Gay marriage is not about men marrying men or women marrying women, it is about the deconstruction of marriage between men and women. That is a thing that many men and women of one generation understand but have trouble conveying to another generation for whom marriage has already largely been deconstructed.
The statistics about the falling marriage rate tell the tale well enough. Marriage is a fading institution. Family is a flickering light in the evening of the West.
The deconstruction is destruction. Entire countries are fading away, their populations being replaced by emigrants from more traditional lands whose understanding of the male-female relationship is positively reactionary. These emigrants may lack technology or the virtues of civilization, and their idea of marriage resembles slavery more than any modern ideal, but it fulfills the minimum purpose of any group, tribe or country– it produces its next generation.
The deconstruction of marriage is not a mere matter of front page photos of men kissing.