A Culture Shattered: Part 2
Applied throughout many decades, starting with the 1960s, the psychological process of Hegelian dialectic virtually destroyed traditional marriage and, consequently, shattered traditional Western culture. Whereas many acknowledged repellant effects of ongoing cultural transformation, few understood how it happened. A previous article summarized the progression: By fomenting discontentment and rebellion, the dialectic was jumpstarted and the pump primed for establishing progressive ideals. Consensus-destined dialogue essentially tested the waters for social engineering and societal transformation.
In Latin “consensus” means “with the sensual.” Rather than agreement in principle, agreement is with the senses, called the affective domain, which by nature is subjective and difficult to measure. The late Chuck Colson lamented, “We’ve got American kids operating from an artificial set of rules unrelated to real life; they’re going to schools where adults don’t question those rules, watching media that validates those rules, and are being wooed by advertisers who tell them how insightful they really are. Worst of all, their parents are complicit in the creation of the parallel culture.”
That all worldviews must, first, be tolerated and eventually embraced as equally valid is problematic in that all ideas don’t affect the same consequences. If you don’t think so, just ask survivors of Auschwitz. Although noble sounding, the collective “parallel culture” exacts a dear price. Under rule of the godlike State, people give up their rights, labor, time, emotional energy, and even their children to advance some euphoric, utopian cause — but to little avail. From modern Latin, the term “utopia” literally means “nowhere.” In short, the elusive ideal is delusional.
Disingenuous Disinformation Campaign of Tolerance (1980s)
In 1981, Ellen Willis unveiled the objective of every feminist reform from legal abortion-on-demand to child-care programs — that being, to undermine traditional family values that once grounded Western culture. Now, monogamous, heterosexual marriage and traditional family are so marginalized that the United States Census Bureau announced, for the first time ever, it would no longer collect data on marriage, divorce, and related matters.
When the biblical status of dads and moms as agents of God was pooh-poohed, alternative lifestyle proponents rushed in to fill the void. However, Socrates may have described homosexuality as a “superior form of love,” but a study by the Family Research Institute revealed dramatically reduced life spans for gays. Furthermore, Gay Bowel Syndrome, parasitic colon disease, and fecal contamination are but a few health concerns faced by gay men, occasionally compelled to undergo reconstructive surgery.
That’s not to say heterosexuals are free of STDs. However, a 1982 study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control revealed that the typical gay male had in his lifetime over five hundred sexual partners, often strangers. It was generally believed that, in the 1980s, a homosexual flight attendant brought AIDS to America, where it emerged as the number one killer of people, ages 25-44. In response, change agents courted skeptics by championing tolerance, otherwise known as diversity, and launched an ingenious disinformation campaign. The so-called “safe-sex” panacea resulted in new cases doubling between 1986-1989. Notwithstanding, AIDS became the first politically protected disease ever; plus, it received the greatest number of tax dollars per death.
To be expected, the CDC and White House administration advanced the presumptive generalization that officials had it “all under control.” Surgeon General C. Everett Koop mass-distributed a misleading AIDS brochure, and AIDS educators in public schools championed “diversity” as tolerance and actually promoted homosexuality. The video It’s Elementary applied the dialectic to controversial social-sexual subject matter being presented in elementary grades. Children’s programmed, adult-like responses belied bias; and any semi-favorable mention of the “old way of thinking” was framed in sheepishly apologetic tones, apparently to avoid being denigrated as hateful.
Representing SEICUS and Planned Parenthood, Dr. Mary Calderone maintained that, even in the womb, children are sexual beings. Accordingly, Behavior Today expanded characterization of homosexuality as a sexual orientation (not deviation) to acts of pedophilia. Avid advocate of intergenerational sex, Dr. John Money appeared in Time magazine and, before long, the Gay Manifesto actually insisted on adult sex with children.
Decade of Reimaging Toward a New Mental Construct (1990s)
By the 1990s many Americans had abandoned traditional ideals, moral law, and sound principles gleaned from history. This, of course, created metacognition deficits, thereby enabling a massive, highly effective reimaging campaign. Verbal engineering necessarily precedes social engineering; hence, the reprehensible label “fag” was softened to “homosexual” which, in turn, morphed to “gay” and the very legitimate-sounding “alternative orientation and/or lifestyle.” Ultimately, “civil unions” and, then, “same-sex marriage” were legitimized.
Political correctness became the language of social engineering. Sacrificing common sense on the altar of political correctness spawned fuzzy thinking. Though nearly half of professional and/ or managerial positions were held by arguably the most affluent “minority class” — namely, homosexuals — the gay lobby argued “discrimination in the workplace.” John Hopkins University pioneered sex-change operations, previously viewed as unthinkable but, by 2015, “normalized” when Bruce Jenner transgendered and mainstream reality television walked us through the process.
Gone were the days when President Jimmy Carter famously declined being photographed in San Francisco with Harvey Milk. In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton and his administration were distinguished as the “most inclusive” to date for reaching out to the gay political community by appointing over 150 homosexuals to governmental posts, requiring sexually-oriented quotas in federal hiring and promotions, and issuing a presidential Executive Order granting protected-class status to gays in the federal workplace.
In PC lingo, heterosexuals were linked with “ideological systems that deny, denigrate, and stigmatize people.” For their independent views, traditionalists were called “hateful, narrow-minded bigots.” Nevertheless, most of them agreed in principle with the author of Canada’s hate-propaganda law (Svend Robinson) that vilifying gays (or anyone for that matter) is unacceptable.
The diversity crowd ignored the fact that Robinson freely besmirched Christian leaders as “ecclesiastical dictators.”
To evade negative stereotypes, many well-intentioned Americans, even Christians, joined the politically correct throng for fear of appearing homophobic, intolerant, even hateful. Otherwise minded conservative people of faith were expected to take it on the chin when labeled breeders, hate mongers, Nazis, cultural terrorists, religious whack-o’s, losers, and backward thinkers. A pejorative term to stigmatize traditionalists, “homophobia” implied a mental illness; however, recent research concluded that “homophobia,” in this clinical sense, does not exist.
More to follow in Part 3 of 5.