logicp_writings/new/Grooming_Pedagogy.md

Groomers

Based off of a Twitter thread on the 9th July, 2020 by James Lindsay.

Something he has been thinking about, but hadn't realized the full depth even by the time of that thread. It's about what's going on in Schools, in Social Media and in Mass Media: the sexualization of children through Critical Theories of Identity (tip of the iceburg) - Racialization, Post-Colonialism, Gender, sex, sexuality, Critical Theory of society dipping into capitalism etc..

Important aspect of woke culture that many perceive. Woke culture wants to dismantle the innocence of children.

They see the innocence as a fundamental problem that has to be overcome in order to achieve liberation. Sexual liberation to achieve gender and racial liberation.

Marxist queer theory (Neo-Marxist) - racialization of children in schools. It all exists to obliterate the innocence of children which the woke see as a hegemonic narrative which maintains the existing order and relations in society, which must be dismantled in order to achieve revolution. Who better to destabilize than children?

The easiest way to get into it is MAP - Minor-Attracted Person (pedophiles - Men Acting as Pedophiles?). Push for this, in conjunction with sexual books that are supposed to be revealing and reaching into school libraries with very explicit/sexually explicit graphic novels depicting oral sex, teaching about anal sex and rimming, etc. Even as young as 3rd and 4th grade.

Oblierate childood innocence. Obliterate childhood innocence, but Queer-Theory takes it further (grooming ideology - understand it as this. Queer is an "identity without an essence").

Queering is Grooming

The definitions needs to be understood as "Identity Without an Essence".

Marxist grooming ideology. The purpose is not just to break down childhood innocence, which is a hegemonic narrative to them that maintains existing social relations which must be disrupted and dismantled.

Destabilize individuals as children and to make them susceptible to politically actionable points of view. They can't understand themselves or get based by knowing who they are an ddifficult to move from their knowledge who they are. This leaves them politically manipulable. They will be depressed, anxious and groomable because they need to lean into an identity without an essence. Identify with not knowing who they are. This destabilization is intentional. If you are shocked about pornography in schools (books and comics depicting early sexual experiences with graphic detail including oral sex and strapons usage in a queer context), you should direct your shock to those schools. This stuff didn't make it into there accidentally. It' spossible it was let in without sufficient vetting (which is negligence).

The people who pushed these books into the schools did so on purpose. Under the guise or lie that while there rae sexual minorities who don't understand themselves (who need to feel pitied and need to be amended by providing them with material so they can understand themselves). Look back 20-50 years and look at how sexual deviants were mistreated. Gay children in socially conservative households, etc... Kernel of truth allowing them to validate and maniuplate to get this material in government schools. Provide this in government schools so that these children have some point of contact to understand themselves as they actually are. But queer theory means an identity without an essence - everything identity-based is considered a spectrum or fluid, Changeablea and malleable. as pretend and malleable and changeable as a profile picture or avatar on social media, or in the metaverse when you can be a furry for real!

This is actually happening in our schools, and it is a long running project rooted in MArxist theory which is used specifically to destabilize the relationship between parents and children, childhood and adulthood intentionally so that you can make both sexually and politically groomable children. Whispering nasty magic into the king's ear and keeping him weak so that sauroman can usurp the power through the confusion and control which is provided.

Wormtongue promises everything to the king but wants, as repayment, access to the most prize women - able to choose for himself. Hey pedos, do our bidding. Destabilize the schools and the kids and you can have your pick of them.

Destabilziing children so they can be groomable. Sexually groomable, so pedohiles benefit. Destigmatize pedophiles.

Marxists get to destabilize identity and psychology. Politically groomable people who are disaffected and mentally ill. Manipulate them into being revolutionaries for the cause. This is the point of Marxism. These are your children that they're doing it to, so they can get what they want - they imagine there's a magic liberation on the other side of this. Disgusting and catastrophic aims. Both in th emeans and in the ends.

In the meantime, your chilren becoming massively psychologically nad sexually abused. Through our schools. Schools that should be accountable by the parents, because they work for us.

Our schools have been captured in a way that allows a Marxist agenda that achieves itself through psychological and sexual abuse.

We need a broad-based parents coalition that no longer cares about right left centre democrat republican etc. Male female, latin black, vaccinated or unvaccinated.

All of this division of parents prevents them from being able to protect their kids from creating this stabilized population in the chilren who rae mentally ill and who are, in fact, going to rebel against, mock and hate their parents' sexual morality and grand parents' sexual morality. Reject and refuse it. And possibly rise up in violence gainst the older generations (like what happened in China). Deliberate plan. Not an attempt to help teh proportion of students suffering from anything. Those are props from this Marxist, political agenda that the sexual groomers get to capitalize upon, under the brandname of "comprehensive sex education" tucked within the program of "social/emotional learning" which has been coopted entirely by these political groomers and literal sexual groomers that have tkaen control of our education system.

We will look at George Lukach, Hungarian Marxist, Herbert Marcuse, the Critical Marxist of the 60s, and a little bit about Paulo Ferirari (sp?) Antonio Gramsci?

Gramsci

What repels communism in the west is the cullture. Cultural hegemony - the forcefiel that keeps the culture stable and prevents people fr omwanting to be revolutionaries and organizing properly. The neomarxists later cmplained about this, saying Marx was wrong, capitalism was stabilizing society and providing them with a good life,so we need to go at it from a different means. Gramsci said entire the cultural instututions and destabilize them from within. Establish an internal counter hegemony and then let that rot blossom and fester and work its way outward until the culture is destabilized, and then the revolution can proceed.

Gramsci identified 5 key pillars of culture:

• Religion
• Family
• Education
• Media
• Law

BLM nuclear family - the most powerful way, 100 years ago realized, was to destabilize children by sexualizing them. Racializing them can be added to this now.

Tangent: Gramsci was translated into English in 1970/71 by Joseph Buttigieg at Notre Dame University (Pete's father) - Democratic connection. Grooming in their politics?

Goal

Destroy the hegemonic / cultural forcefield - the family is the key institution that perpetuates and maintains this.

Childhood Innocence

One of the narratives, as they frame it, that maintains cultural hegemony through the instution of the family is in fact childhood innocence. They believe that childhood innocence is something that people make up and work to maintain specifically so that they can (into the existing social relations) by keepin them in a state of innocence until they are old enough to start to transition into adult knowledge and themes.

The idea that children should have a period of innocence in their lives is psychologically/developmentally appropriate - robust developmental psychology - having inappropriate relations between adults and children can lead to disorders like schizoid personality disorder. Massively damaging to a young child to be seuxalized or dragged into adult romantic/sexual themes.

Childhood innocence becomes a target. The most obvious way in which wokeness goes after children is through the queer variant of trans activism - trans strippers performing for children in schools. The belief is that the innocence we encourage in children is part of the systems of power that organize society. These are specifically, in queer theory, generated through performativity. Chilhood innocence is aperformance imposed on children by adults so they'll be unaware of the potentials of sexual liberation, etc.. THey can be groomed, literally, into the idea that Work is Good! This is the basis of the sexual liberation movement of hte 60s. Break free of redirecting our sexual energy into productive work so we can achieve things. Become hedonistically and sexually indulgeant so we can liberate the libido and liberate eros (Marcuse, eros in civilization) so people can live a better liberated life, rather than the one they've become chained to the idea of work, which sustains capitalism which they think si what provides a "good" life, but not a perfect life.

Brainwashing children to believe that innocence is a good thing and important and valuable and sexual things are adult themes and romantic themes are for adults. And it's something we keep away from children so they become moldable into the existing system where they're taught to be productive in terms of work, brainwashed into the capitalist system. Paula Fereiri had the "banking model" of education where children are bank accounts where the teachers are just placing knowledge into their heads, rather than seeing it as an interactive process - this whole idea that we must deconstruct the power relation between teacher and student, and reconceive it where the teachers and students are dialectically synthesized into teacher students and student teachers who are basically on par with one another, or even that students, because of their oppressed status o the part of the teacher, become slightly more empowered than the teacher. Student-led education program and stiudent-led revolution, the student movement that Marcuse is tapping into.

Marcuse said "The students are the radicalizable base that you can actually inculcate theory into and get them to bring it into the disaffected groups, like the unemployed, the societal dissidents (including pedophiles?), the racial minorities, the sexual minorities, the feminists, they he wanted to coopt into a new working class because thte working class had been stabilized by the mroe mature capitalism that we were experiencing through the 20th century.

The belief is that the innocence we encourage in children is part of the systems of power specifically generated through eprformativity (pretending) that enforce heteronormativity and cisnormativity and lead to disphoria and oppression of gay and trans kids. The idea is that you have to rescue those kids. This logic isn't terribly complicated, there may be gay or trans kids in the classroom who would be more comfortable in their sexual/gender identity (doesn't make sense for a child), if they saw disruptions tot he usual binaries and ststandards being celebrated. This disruption is simple: exhibition of sexuality, especially queer sexuality and trans people demonstrating queer sexualities . The cultural prohibition on this behaviour is chalked up to childhood innocence which is now viewed as a dominant discourse that enforces these normativities and enables children to go along enough until they're also going to think that childhood innocence was a valuable part of their growing up and needs to be maintained and oppressed into the next generation so the right morals can be bbrought in (like sexuality being an adult theme). Adolescents are likely, and in some regards should be, experimented with in limited cases, but it's also certainly got to be framed in terms of its developmental context as children who for whom these themes rae completely inappropriate mature through a rocky adolescents and emerging adulthood into full adults for whom it's completely appropritae and largely significant if not central to the way in which we interact and organize things, when we're not focused on other projects (which generate prosperity and wealth).

Sitting at your house and masturbating doesn't generate prosperity. Doesn't build a better society. You actually need to do something productive.

Race

This is the liberation that they want to achieve, not just with adults, but starting with children so they don't reproduce the dominant discourse about childhood innocence. Sexualizing children's spaces becomes a logical consequence of both queering spaces and queering childhood in order to liberate the potentialities of children's identities. This requires a disruption of childhood innocence, seen as righteous queer activism. It's the same with race - applies in Critical Race Theory specifically too - white people have white innocence and children are raised to be innocent of racial themes and racial issues, and that is an aspect of white privilege that needs to be dismantled. Racial innocence also has to be overcome so that they can have their antiracist utopia. So what you see in both cases is an attempt to groom children politically by destroying the idea that children can just be children, and we don't have to racialize or sexualize children.

In Critical Race Theory the racial innocence of children is seen to be a social breeding ground for a culture of white supremacy. Children are allegedly socialized into the Charles Mills' racial contract which maintains white supremacy. He wrote a book int he late 90s called the Racial Contract where he re-invents Russo's idea of the social contract to say that all white people, as the dominant group in society, organize a racial social contract called the "Racial Contract", even though nobody is told about it or knows it, but it's a tacit agreement that all white people by virtue of being white agree to to keep racial minorities down. Huge conspiracy theory where no one knwos they are a conspirator. Heart and soul idea in CRT. The grievers who say James is wrong abotu this like to say "Charles Mills is not a Critical Race Theory, he was a Critical Philosopher of Race". Morons.

In CRT it asserts that anything that maintains white racial comfort is suspect, racial innocence of childhood (treating people as individuals having non-racial environments) is considered to be seriously problematic and makes room for white supremacy culture to flourish and grow the white racial contract to establish itself in the next generation, and for them The CRTheorists it must be intervened upon through projects like Antiracist baby, teaching CRT in schools, bringing it in through social-emotional learning as a social awareness component, teaching children not tbe racially innocent, which is, for them, a white privilege only available to white kids, because minority children and other race children (except asians) are having their race imposed upon them.

The societal structure of white supremacy exists and it impsoes race on all the races but white, who get to ignore their race (doesn't actually even align with anything that's been happening in teh last 30 years). People making fun of white people and calling things white and white culture, which is also racist and preposterous, has been a mainstay of pop culture for 30 years.

The goal is to immediately remove the racial innocence of children because the innocence of children is a target which must be destroyed.

Real-life examples

CRT is more insiduous where queery theory is flagrantly inappropriate. Transstripper story hour seems inappropriate compared to being concerned about racism.

Now we are having some very frightening sexual grooming behaviour going on, through social-emotional-learning (SEL) - example from North Carolina where a 7th grade classroom - young girls of 12 - are being asked to describe the changes (in writing for their teacher, sometimes to be read in class, sometimes with identities attached) to describe the changes happening to their body, how it feels to be growing breasts, how it feels to be looked at, how are people paying attention, do you feel the looks of the other people. This is the destruction at a very complicated an ddifficult time where kids are trying to figure out a transitional phase, and should be relying upon responsible mentors who are not state actors who happen to be caught up in a deeply criticized poltiical ideology. They should be relying on parents to guide them through this. If this was a church youth group engaging in these kinds of behaviours, hellfire would come down on them as an obvious grooming ring, and everyone wants to burn the creepy youth pastor, for grooming kids who have often been sexually abused in those contexts, which is a tremendous tragedy, because it's ana bility to exploit a very trusted religious institution in order to harm children. Atleast the youth pastor is just a creeper - sounds like a sick thing to say - but he's not alos a mArxist, unless he is and has infiltrated. he's probably just a creeper taking advantage of the situation.

In the schools we have an actual Marxist ideology driving this project. And not doin it so a creeper can pick a handful of people that he's going to abuse, or she's going to abuse (as often happens) but rather so you can destabilize the identities of the children and remove them from a culture of childhood innocence. So it's very flagrant, in this regard, against CRT. Insisting that racial innocence is part of the operation of whiteness, and is only available for white kids, or white people, or white-passing people. So this is an aspect of white privilege, others obviously covet this and are going to act white or subscribe to white adjacency. Suck up to whiteness so they can be allowed by white people to be considered white and treated as white - that's the disgusting way in which critical race theory deals with it, but the sexual side is just so much worse.

I keep going backt o CRT because I knew it better than Queery theory, but as a last point, teh innocence of children does the opposite of that in adults - setup its own power dynamic that a critical theory of education sees as illegitimtae and in need of disruption - Paula Feirerey - everyone is on common footing, an inappropriate mentor relationship has to develop now, and when you start adding in a sexual dimension just imagine, you have a bunch of young children who are being brough tto an "oh we're all equals here" by some creepy groomer - in classrooms - because children in Critical Theory of Education (Critical Pedagogy) - within Critical Pedagogy - children cannot be allowed to remain innocent, because they have to be seen as co-equal with adults and instructors. They're sort of a noble savage in a sense, if you will - uncorrupted or less corrupted by the dominant discourses and power dynamics structuring society, and the goal becomes to catch them and groom them earlier - this is actually happening at scale in our government scales, but also in private schools - but primarily in gov schools - within the umbrella of broader brands like Social Emotional Learning, Transformative Social learning, and the CASEL model (), because you have to disrupt childhood innocence in order to disrupt the institution of the faily and the role / clear difference of role between adult and child, where aults rae mentors and boundary-setters and guides and responsible and children are exploring and learning and growing and they need boundaries, they need mentorship, they need guidance, they need structure, they need to actually - this is all developmental psychology I'm talking about here, not , as they would have it, a hegemonic narrative - they would claim that I have been brainwashed by this and think it's right and natural, and developmental psychology is a scientific narrative that I invoke in order to defend my hegemonic belief that it's right and natural, but it's just actually true. The post-modern belief is that anything that is claimed to be true is to be understood as an application of power and a re-assertion of power, and therefore it may or may not be true, and it's not interesting if it's true because truth is just a social construction.

They want to destroy the childhood innocence because it infiltrates the institution of family one generation to the next developing a stable basis upon which the culture can maintain (and goodness against the evil of Marxism). Children cannot be left innocent if they are to be coequal with teachers and instructors and, more to the point, they have to be seen in terms of an oppressed status. Children are oppressed by adults - an ageism argument - so they need to be elevated to the same level as adults, but defiant against the adults whom they've been taught are oppressing them. This is the creation of a Red Guard like in Maoist China. The programs that are happening in our schools are following the same playbook that Mao put into schools in China in the 1960s before th eRed Guard started to kill teachers, kill professors, kill parents and grandparents, destroy the existing Society, tear down art and artifacts that are not part of the Communist regime. Childhood innocence becomes one of the targets that must be disrupted to do this.

This is child abuse (the right name for this). This is grooming both sexual and political. It is absolutely abhorrent, but it's also part of a broader Marxist program - and again, the people bringing this in to some degree are either totally caught up in this way of thinking, and maybe don't realize it, but are completely programmed in this Marxist way of thinking, or they're aware of what they're doing - and this is where we can turn backwards and look 100 years ago at this fellow George Lukach.

George Lukach

A Hungarian Marxist.

Lenin was known as a "vanguardist" or a Bolshevik who uses the Vanguard model. An elite who are going to usher society through the revolution that it doesn't necessarily want for its own good.

He was more "Bolshevist" than Lenin (the leader of the Bolshevists). He was very invested in this program, and was instrumental in the 1919 attempt to turn HUngary Communist (failed after 5 months).

He worked in the Belakun regime - the regime of Communism taking over Hungary with this revolution. He was made second in command (Deputy Commissar for Culture and Education), which failed (he stated in History and Class Consciousness - he was openly hostile to want to tear down Christianity and Christian morality - seeing those as the big obstacles throughout Europe that were preventing any possibility of bringing in Marxism. In a sense, therefore, Lukach (not o much Gramsci) becomes the father of cultural Marxism.)

He wanted to destroy the existing cultural morality, cultural stock, of the European countries, because he believed it was the best way to bring Marxism in - to remove the greatest impediment to it. A society with a mature and operating theology will be extraordinarily resistant to Marxist theology.

Marxism might be referred to as a cancerous or gangrenous theology that takes advantage of a society which becomes weak and sick. A cultural basis which has become weak or sick - the cancer or gangrene can flourish in that context.

Lukach (origin of sex education?) believed that educating children and dragging them away from childhood innocence, especially with regard to sex, would actually destabilize sexual morality and therefore Christian morality in society more effectively than anything else.

He instituted in his role as Deputy Commissar of Culture and Education in Hungary compulsary sex education in schools, that was not just like "oh this is what sex is, this is the birds and the beers, this is where babies come from, etc". Not many people object to the idea of teaching those ideas in one context or another -t hey might object to the schools teaching it, but they don't object to it being taught whatsoever. What are the feeling sand things that will get wrapped up in it (that's a parent's duty). How do we detach to procreation, how is it responsibly recreational to have sex.

Lukach did things in Hungary in 1919 - 1920 that are very reminiscient of what we're hearing today under teh brand name of Comprehensive Sex Education - part of the broader program including Social Emotional Learning. Introduced a very radical proram that included graphic literature to the children. He promoted sexual promiscuity in children in schools. He pushed the narrative that monogamy is bad and not natural, and in fact should be made fun of - it should be mocked. And, of course, parents who were trying to teach you this conservative, moral sexual ethic are backwards and deserve to be mocked.

In each of these topics there are always kernels of truth.

For example: mocking Monogamy

Monogamy is a challenging feature - if you look at statistics, they on't support that humans are good at monogamy, but that doesn't mean it's not something that can be aspired to. The numebr of people who cheat in relationships turns out to be rather staggering - what the people working in these spaces call "non-ethical non-monogamy" (cheating) - some robust arguments that humans struggle with this for deeply ceded reasons, and it does require an ethic to maintain fidelity, and I"m even content to admit that there's room for debate and flexibility in terms of what fidelity entails to deal with the reality of human sexuality. But this is different - this is the open mockery of free love, poly amory, etc.. in 1919 Hungary, but the Hungarians were appalled by this and pushed the regime out - probably because they went too far with the sexual crap. In 4-6 months the whole regime fell apart, but did Lukach's program fail?

No, because he didn't go away, he actually went on to inform the Frankfurt school as it came into existence. He met with and liaised with Antonio Gramsci, Max Horkheimer, went to the Marxist study week in Frankfurd and delivered these ideas on sex education and its role to this convention around the early 1920s and in the audience was Felix Veil.

Felix Veil

Financier of the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt - the Frankfurt school. The creation of Neo-Marxism was bankrolled by this guy who wanted to see this stuff come in, and he was captured by Lukach's ideas of comprehensive sexual education - sexual ethics taught through a narrative of childhood innocence - and also just Christian and more broadly traditional sexual morality - must be destabilized if we're going to get Culture Changes to make the way through Christendom for Marxism.

Many of Lukach's ideas (he should be more than Gramsci considered the father of Cultural Marxism) made its way in there.

The Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt is Neo-Marxism. They had lots of things to try and tear down the existing culture and its morals. Among them, we have to get rid of every traditional attitude (Old ways, Old Habits, Old Customs, Old Ideas) - traditional sexual morality (men are men, women are women, masculinity won't always fit but it should be encouraged, feminity doesn't always fit, but it should be encouraged and not judged) Rather than promoting androgyny, gender fluidity, non-binary, trans, etc, and trying to bring in a new sexual morality. We don't have a responsible sex education that comes from a tradition that's been captured by these creepers/groomers. Marxists in a marriage of convenience with the sexual groomers - a project to destroy traditional Christian ethics, but also - let's say the Christian ethic does go too far, and there's some wiggle room around this - there is actually a human nature-based sexual ethic that the Christian approach approximates - fairly well but not perfectly. The goal is to destroy that. Why?

Gramsci

The goal of Gramsci is to destroy the family as an institution - transmitting values from one generation to the next to keep a stable generation. They brand the destruction of this "freedom". The highest freedom.

Freedom which leads to the people who are groomed into this way of thinking that the previous older culture is actually oppressing them and holding them down and holding them back. This is exactly how it works within the context of what's happening in our schools today.

Frankfurt School

Boleshevik 1917 hungarian revolution1919 Officially formed in 1923

Birth of Cultural Marxism - biggest players Antonion Gramsci (prison in 1926) and George Lukach - who had an idea that might be considered Queery Theory or an origin/precursor. Pressed into schools to subvert traditional/Christian sexual morality and the family in concert with that to achieve Marxism.

By the 1950s - 1955 - Herbert Marcuse trying to achieve one of the broad aims of the Frankfurt School (he is director or about to become at this point - Horkheimer had set it aside so he could do more theoretical work with Adourno). Goal was to fuse Freudian thought (concern with sexuality and how this creates psychopathologies in people - Freud was obsessed with sex - joke: Sigmeund with his hand on his chin "A-HA! It's not that I want to have sex with his mother, but that everyone wants to have sex with their mothers! Oeidpus complex. Childhood innocence to suppress sexuality sublimate it into productive work, but the Oedipus complex causes psychopathology because the desire to have sex with your mother as a child is not being reckoned with appropriately (crackpot nonsense?). Frankfurt school took up this project of fusing Marx and Freud) => Eros in Civilization in 1955 (Marcuse) was his attempt to do this - a difficult book to read, unless you know about Freud and Neo-Marxism - but you can get some sense of this destruction of childhood innocence:

The notion of the conservative instincts under the rule of the pleasure and Nirvana principles strictly precludes such assumptions that there is an original instinct of workmanship and wanting to work.```

So Freud, and Marcuse, are rejecting the idea that humans want to be productive. A conservative nature of the instincts vs the pleasure principle - freeing of the Libido. And the Nirvana principle is the desire to return to the womb (when there were no problems).

```When Freud incidentally mentions the natural human aversion to work, he only draws the inference from his basic theoreticl conception - the instinctual syndrome on happiness and work recurs throughout Freud's writings, and his interpretation of the prometheus myth is centered on the connection between curbing of sexual passion and civilized work.```

People don't want to work (the want to eat and have sex - lay around and enjoy themselves libidonnally). Not only does this cause the Freudian psychopathologies but it maintains capitalism through a condition of servitude - an attack on Protestan work ethic - sexually repressive as well. You must take your sexual urge and repress it and turn it into the drive to do productive work in the world.

John Harvey Kellog - 7th day adventist inventing Corn Flakes to suppress masturbation - believe it if you ate very plain foods, you would have fewer sexual desires and a lower sexual drive. Grain-based diet  - a crackpot religious attempt to suppress sexuality so people would work.

Marcuse talking about Freud talking about repressing sexuality in order to be more productive workers for a captalistm system that traps them into this cycle, and this is all a giant metanarrative that needs to be smashed. People don't actually like to work, it's not good for them, and it maintain san oppressive system where everyone goes along with an oppressed state, even though it makes societies which work for people, and the repression of sexuality and the overemphasis of work cause all these psychological problems and unhappiness. We could be so much mroe happy if we were liberated.

The basic work in civilization is non libidinal (labour). Labour is unpleasantness. Unpleasantness has to be enforced. Administered state.

For what motive would induce man to put his sexual energy to other uses if by any disposal of it he could obtain fully satisfying pleasure. He would never let go of this pleasure, and make no further progress.

If there is no original work instinct, if people don't want to work, then the energy reuired for unpleasurable work must be withdrawn from the primary instincts - from the sexual and the destructive instincts (libido and libido-dominandi). The will to dominate and destroy. Eros and thanatos.

Since civilization is mainly the work of Eros (the myth - the demigod? representing sexual energy and creative instinct) and thanatos (creation and destruction - intention - these myths speak deep to the psyche the creative eleent and the destructive element. Civilization is mainly the work of the creative element - eros.

Culture obtains a great part of the mental energy it needs by subtracting it from sexuality. But not only the work impulses are thus fed by aim inhibited sexuality, the specifically social instincts such as th affectionate relations between parents and children, feelings of friendship, and the emotional ties of marriage, contain such impulses that are held back by internal resistance from obtaining their aims.

Only by virtue of such renunciation do they become sociable. (the affectionate relations and feelings only become sociable by virtue of renouncing the sexual element underlying them (Freudian?)) Each individual contributes his renunciations first under the impact of external compulsion and then internally (learning to self regulate) and from these sources , the common stock of the material wealth of civilization has been accumulated. (Freud remarks that these social instincts need not be described as sublimated, becaus they've not abandonned their sexual aims, but rest content with certain approximations of satisfaction - closely related to sublimation). Thus the main sphere of civilization appears as a sphere of sublimination, but sublimination inolves desexualization.

"Administered society. People don't want to work, it's unpleasant. You don't always want to work. Not nearly as much as you do in Marxism - you don' want to work for someone else so your surplus value can be exploited to make someone else rich. There must be an enforcement mechanism and power dynamic pushing you to work."

NeoMarxist approach - break down the affectionate relations between children and parents. Under attack in Marcuse (we live in Marcuse's world), but it's not just that - this is a project Marcuse was heavily informed by the thoughts of Lukach, who was involved in the sexual liberation movement.

Directly attacking the idea of innocence in the usual Marxian inverted way - if you flip it upside down, you get real innocence by becoming not innocent. That's a philosophy - he says:

"Within this antagonistic system, the mental conflict between ego and super ego, between ego and ID, is at one and the same time a conflict between the idnividual and a society. The latter embodies rationality of the whole (ego vs ID) in the individual struggle against the repressive forces as a struggle against objective reason. (Marcuse loves this line of attack). Therefore the emergence of a non-repressive reality principle, involving instinctual liberation, would regress behind the obtained level of civlized rationality. This regression would be physical, as well as social. it would reactive early stages of the libido that were surpassed in the development of the reality ego, and it would dissolve the institutions of society in which the reality ego exists. (If we sexually liberate, we're in business - liberation/communism). In terms of these institutions, liberation is relapse into barbarism, however occuring at th height of civilization as the consequence of not of defeat but of victory in the struggle for existence, an supported by a free society, such a liberation might have very different results (it's going to work this time, muh communism). It would still be a reversel of the process of civilization, a subversion of culture, but after the culture had done its work and created the mankind in the world, that could be free!"

So we push through the idea of civlization into communism, and we do so by rejecting innocence. Where better to do that than in Children, who must have their effective ties of parents and child freed from the repressive state, which removes the sexual element. It would still be regression, bt in light of the mature consciousness (Marxist) and guided by a new rationality (the Neommaxist critical theory scientific socialism for marx) under these conditions, the possibility of a non-repressive civilization is predicated upon not the arrest, but upon the liberation of progress, so that man would order his life in accordance of his fully developed knowledge, so that he wuold ask again what is good and what is evil?

So we push everything morality-based into question. if the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom, than the original sin mjust be committed again. We must eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence.

The notion of a non-repressive instinctual order must first be tested on the most disorderly of all instincts - sexuality. Non-repressive order is only possible if the sex instincts can, by virtue of their own dynamic, and under change of existential and societal conditions generate lasting erotic relations among mature individuals (mature? but if you obliterate the concept of childhood innocence as a social fiction sued to maintain the existing social conditions and relations, if you obliterate that, everyone who is sexually awakened, even at 6 years old, is a mature individual. Everyone with the consciousness embedded into them si a mature individual).

We have to ask whether the sex instincts after the elimination of all surplus repression can develop a libidinal rationality that's not only compatible with but promotes progress towards higher forms of civilized freedom. (this is to be done how? by asking: what is good and evil by eating from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state if innocence.)

This is the project. The project of Neo-Marxism with regards to sex and sexuality and, in fact, with regard to Lukach's vision of comprehensive sex education - the basis for what's going on in our groomer-based government schools. So if you want to understand what's going on in our schools, you really have to understand - you can jibber about Fouceault trying to blitter morality so he can be a pedophile, post modernism and post structuralism is embedded with these ideas - age of consent? petition that all postmodernists signed in the 70s to remove the age of consent in France completely (from 15? not young enough?) Just a socil construction/fiction -

Post structuralist feminists who garbled Fouceault and signed that petition. Judith Butler, Gayle Reuben - openly defending pedophilia in her 1984 Thinking Sex - foundational government for Queer Theory.

Conclusion

I wanted to give you a picture that what's happening in our schools with regard to these groomer books isn't some weird accident that just cropped up. It's not just stupid weirdos who got into schools, or just pedophiles. It's pedophiles, groomers and sexual weirdos being driven by a Marxist ideology that knows that destabilizing sexual morality by deconstructing childhood innocence - framing it as a false narrative and socially constructed in position in power from one generation to the next - that they can create conditions by which there'll be great societal unrest, the children will be not just sexually groomable and abusable and thus perpetuating a cycle of abuse from which all of this springs - the abused become abusers (This whole movement is predicated on people being abusers) - not only can they do all of that, but they can also politically groom people into becoming what Mao referred to as a Red Guard that wants to overthrow

"Here's this thing, you're very interested in sex and adolescent, it becomes very powerful, but you have a destabilized identity without an essence - you don't know who you are, and you're being groomed at school into thinking of yourself in terms of a sexual identity and a gender identity and even weird romantic identities - there's hundreds of them, and they're fluid, and they move around, and ou can't really know who you are , and the reason that you're going through this crazy process of self discovery is actually because the older generation lied to you the entire time and why? so they could maintain power structures that are evil - Cisheteronormativity - Homophobia, Transphobia, racism - they wanted to maintain the social order that benefitted them so that it keeps benefitting them into old age - they are oppressing you and doing violences - a violence of categorization on YOU the child the student the adolescent who can't even figure out who you really are (your true sexual and gender and romantic identity in essence)"

The whole point is to destabilize children to make them politically groomable into hating the existing order of society, so they can overthrow it. All of the psychological and physical and sexual abuse that will come part and parcel with this - Hey it's just part of the process. It's an externality. It's kind of net beneficial, but they distance themselves from it to look like good people. If Lukach would have had his revolution, HUngary would have had a dark day through the 1920s in terms of absolute destruction of sexual morality.

You can get a pretty good sense of what's going on when you kind of take this longer view - and again we can talk about Paulo Freire and his view that we have to basically find ways to bring adults and children in educational governments to the same level. That there is no structure, there are no values being brought to you. The values that society is trying to impose on you young radicalizable confused angry persons whose hormones are out of whack and whose brain isn't fully developed yet - it's being imposed on you just to keep repressed from who you really are - you should have it, you should hate the society that did it to you, you're miserable because these stupid older adults have the wrong culture that we could all be liberated from - that's the political grooming htat's connected to the sexual and psychological grooming that's rooted in queery theory that's being mainlined into our schools through Gender Ideology and Queer Theory under the brands of Social Emotional Learning (for example) and Comprehensive Sex Education - this is very intentional, not just people doing things, or people trying to help "gay children" and "gender dysophoric children'. This is a grooming project by people with an incredible radical politcal agenda that want to destabilize all of western civilization, and if they have to destroy your children to do it, they're not just more than willing, they're eager because that's part of what it is - the cycle of abuse marches on - one page after another, one generation after another. They are trying to not close down that cycle of abuse to minimize that abuse - they're trying to invert it and say that the cycle of abuse is actually a liberating concept - if we can liberate the esxuality of children, we obliterate the innocence of children, then we can have a non-repressive societal order FINALLY.

It begins by, according to Marcuse, freeing sexuality between what he termed as Mature Individuals. I would argue, fo rthem, will be people who have been programmed or groomed to think in terms of a Critical Theory - that's hwo they always mean terms like that - people who think like we do are mature, everyone else is willfully ignorant and is in White Innocence - White Innocence tells you - what has White Innocence hasn't had an awakened racial consciousness - what is innocence? Not having an awakened Critical Consciousness - a form of privilege to not have one, because the people who are oppressed are forced to have one by the power dynamics. That's the logic.

Schools are trying to awaken that in children, whatever physical, psychological and sexual abuse comes as a result - so that they can generate their Red Guard.

This has to be pushed out of our schools with extraordinary prejudice. This has no place anywhere near children - it is beyond child abuse - it is James' opinion that people who are doing this knowingly belong in prison - maybe for the rest of their lives. People who are being pressed into the service of doing this - teachers, who aren't totally on board, but know it's a condition of their job - those people are being vigorously exploited and they are morally culpable for not standing up. The people who are doing it knowingly, however, the administrators bringing in Trans STory Hour Pushing the gender ideology through SEL - those people belong in Prison.

Critical Pedagogy needs to be tackled in the more general theoretical abstract to get this all to fit properly, but this still provides a good overview in the meantime. You need to know what's going on in schools, you nee to know how important it is to resist it, it's nto some accident, it's not the result of just some infiltration of abusers into our school it's not just the result of negligence - it is actually part of the broader over 100 year cultural Marxist program that has evolved through time to become what it has become today - brand names of "Comprehensive Sexual Education" and "Social Emotional Learning". Show up and read the book on a video at a school meeting. Show what's going on at the schools. This is at myt kid's school!