It’s just ridiculous to say that the puritians that got homosexuality banned have roughly the same ideology as today’s diversity advocates.
Right- and even if you take the more reasonable view and claim that the Puritans have the same genes or personalities or social roles or so on as today’s diversity advocates, that means that we need to explain future social change in terms of those genes and personalities. If there will always be Mrs. Grundy, what will the future Mrs. Grundy oppress?
Why exactly Neoreactionary? Why don’t you talk about the chance of fundamental Muslims dominating?
Our social ideology changed a lot in the 300 years. The fact that it hasn’t is one of the more central misconceptions of Neoreactionary thought.
Even in 200 years we went from homosexuality being legal, to it being illegal because of puritans, then being legal again and now gay marriage.
It’s just ridiculous to say that the puritians that got homosexuality banned have roughly the same ideology as today’s diversity advocates.
Right- and even if you take the more reasonable view and claim that the Puritans have the same genes or personalities or social roles or so on as today’s diversity advocates, that means that we need to explain future social change in terms of those genes and personalities. If there will always be Mrs. Grundy, what will the future Mrs. Grundy oppress?
Citation please.