Many believe the family is base of society, the starting point for personal development in a wide variety of environments.
This point is doubly true, especially with regard to Italic family, so ethnically defined. It is undeniable that from first instruction to the future work is the family shaping the individual, in relation to his/her own ability, both mental and economic. And this happens in all Countries of the World.
What differentiates the Italian family, even only from corresponding European ones, is the reigning “amoral familism” which requires familiar nucleus, whose amplitude can also be very high, as purpose and not only as basis of the work of each of its component.
It is typically Italian phenomenon to which the person presenting himself as one with the preceding parental kit, and that we can only imagine the concept of emancipation as adjustment and adaptation of personal potentiality to needs of closed and hierarchical structure that is the family.
Just think for example at numerous family-owned businesses in the Country, which become gradually more and more closed and murky as one moves further South.
It is not difficult to imagine how such a cultural backwardness is the basis for an equally severe economic backwardness, with a closed society into subdivided compartments designed to self-interest rather than to a real collective welfare.
From this substrate, halfway between (Italian) comedy and tragedy, I believe it comes the horrible habit to put the surname before personal name in the signature.
This is the moral that massive Italian immigration of the past decades it has slowly imposed as normal to us.
But this is only part of the problem, the most historically significant one. Today, in fact , as a counter to this social composition we find a family vision of the “progressive” kind, where there are no more limits and closures, where the role of a parent is, so to speak , open to the public, and where a number identifies father, mother and intermediaries.
It doesn’t miss that the “progress” visible today is nothing more than recognition by the Institutions of paraphilia forms gradually more severe and degenerative. To get a glimpse of the future, just think of situation in Countries such as Denmark, considered as the most open (and available) in this ambit, where it is possible for a gay couple to get the missing gene pool simply by requesting it on loan to another homosexual couple of the opposite sex, in mutual exchange and happy harmony.
The World Health Organization defines homosexuality as a “natural variant of human behavior”, thus implicitly justifying any policy aimed to raise consensus with familicide laws.
We have perhaps lost in the name of political correctness even those few key principles that remained and that over the millennia have given the foundation of Civilization in its highest way, which should reflect the most skeptical – or liberal, depending on where we see the dogma – on possibility that maybe that was a working model.
The idea that men and women are able to procreate is certainly not a sexist and homophobic invention, but surely clearer intent of many European governments to pass it as that also leaves the viewer with an inkling suspicion about to whom is aimed the work of our representatives.
For the sake not only of Lombardy, but of the whole European civilization threatened by a decadence under an assumed name, it is necessary to recover the concept of Natural family, from which to develop a healthy society and free from woodworms and collective paranoia.
