The election of a gay PM to Ireland — one more childless leader
(and another disaster for Europe)
After the European news was awash with stories about France electing Macron, something like the ninth childless leader in Europe, Ireland’s new gay Indian Prime Minister has barely raised an eyebrow beyond some praiseworthy words from The Guardian and a few of the other left-wing rags.
The son of an Indian immigrant who came out as gay in 2015 will be the next Irish prime minister, after he was voted…www.theguardian.com
Was the lack of attention merely exhaustion or distraction?
I admit, with terror attacks on European soil almost every day, and endless attempts by the MSM and Deep State to impede and take down Trump, there’s a lot going on!
While Ireland isn’t as big a player as France or Great Britain, it was quite a coup for the globalists and New World Order types. Right now the biggest issue facing Europe besides mass migration is the demographic time bomb caused by Europeans not having large enough families. The two problems are related––and any sentient individual could probably think of several reasons Leo Varadkar might not be the right man to deal with them.
It is kind of hard to picture good old gay Leo saying something on par with the Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán at the Budapest World Congress of Families,
“The family is at the centre of the Hungarian government’s vision of the future.”
In Europe today we can still see people being branded as extremist for failing to fall into line with European dictates on the opinions — described as mainstream — which one should hold, for daring to point out the connection between immigration and terrorism, or the continuing cultural conflicts between immigrants and the continent’s indigenous inhabitants.
Yes, Orbán does go on sometimes, but he generally gets it right and has at least a few kids. Leo might be a nice guy, and maybe a better speaker than Orbán––but in the end he is just one more childless leader. And for the globalists, that might have been the best aspect of it all.
Leo will be in good company:
- Macron, the newly elected French president, has no children.
- German chancellor Angel Merkel has no children.
- British prime minister Theresa May has no children.
- Italian prime minister Paolo Gentiloni has no children.
- Holland’s Mark Rutte has no children.
- Sweden’s Stefan Löfven has no children.
- Luxembourg’s Xavier Bettel has no children.
- Scotland’s Nicola Sturgeon has no children.
- Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, has no children.
None of these folks have shown any leadership in addressing the problems of mass migration, or any real concern about raising the birth rate of Europeans. Really, it’s not a coincidence.
Even May, in spite of being now the Brexit PM, voted to remain, voted for globalism. She also has shown scant resolve on the question of mass migration. That she ended up being the Brexit PM makes one wonder what kind of globalist string-pulling may have gone on in the background.
It probably should have been Brexiteer Andrea Leadsom. Though she was at the centre of a spat over claims she said she would make a better Prime Minister than Theresa May because she is a mother, saying among other things, “I feel that being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.” The attacks were savage.
Only two days ago, many in the Conservative party were hopeful that they were about to close an ugly chapter in British…www.theguardian.com
But should they have been?
The short answer is, of course not. We still say: Get Used to Saying it Loud and Often — No Children, No Stake in Our Future, No Place in Political Leadership.
Forget the exceptions (the rare family man and woman who just happens not to have children, but is equally concerned about the demographic future of Europe), let’s talk about the rule. Wanting to have had children isn’t enough. People who don’t have children can’t picture what’s involved beyond the theoretical. How could they? They understand a little of the biology. They get that a lot of time is involved. (Definitely harder juggling that family/work balance!) They might even somehow vaguely have a sense that a society is a direct reflection of its people.
Though none of these things were really likely to be a priority for any of them.
Or they would probably have children.