I reckon it’s part of a plan to break society’s norms and structures (national identity, family, gender identity, the individual’s autonomy) in order to replace these structures with a manufactured structure that can be controlled and monetised. We can see an example in farming: there are hardly any family farms in America. Instead farms are owned by big corporations, and casual labourers work them. There is no local “farmer”. Similarly small businesses are replaced by chain stores and even chain pubs. Thus is not a mere conspiracy theory; it’s already openly promoted as a Good Thing. The business start-up bros talk about “disrupting” the old norms. There is much talk in business, politics, advertising and society of getting rid of the “stale” (especially the “pale, male snd stale”). But it’s not a 21st-century idea. Political regimes, religious cults, the Army and similar organisations – indeed any group that seeks power and control over people – have used the disruption-of-society tool to create new societies and replace old traditions with new ones beneficial to their leaders. Pol Pot took the children away from their families, trained them to be loyal to the Khmer Rouge – and created his own society. Hitler and Stalin did it. Schools do it and they too try to crush dissenters. I remember my early days at school and being most unimpressed at the way we were expected to chant maths table and Irish phrases – I used to find myself daydreaming, scribbling and on many occasions was caught reading under the desk and punished for it. I didn’t want to disrupt the class; I just wanted to be left alone, in peace. School had disrupted my own routine which involved lots of reading and art. Ironically we all need to push back against disrupters – disrupt the disrupters. By all means choose to obey certain rules of society (when they are reasonable) and obey the immutable rules of nature (e.g., there are only two genders). We are creatures of God and our duty is to respect our Creator and His Commandments. But man-made rules are to be scrutinised, questioned – and opposed if they go against ethics and morals.

LikeLike