An essay on why the current marriage model should be abandoned altogether
First of all, what is marriage? Let’s go to the dictionary: (1): State of bond with a person of the opposite sex as a husband or wife who has a legal agreement and contractual relationship (2): State of bond with a person of the same sex Traditional marriage In a relationship like <same-sex marriage> (from Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary).
The word agreement should, of course, be suspected and should be suspected.
There is intense debate about how many choices and decisions are actually agreed upon in a person’s life. Yes, we seem to allow a lot, but in reality, since we were born to thank you for choosing what else you have and choosing a particular one, our hearts have been Is it manipulated and adjusted?
Therefore, in the above definition, the consensus is too open and the interpretation cannot be accepted as part of the definition. Therefore, we understand that marriage is just a contractual relationship permitted by law.
Second, it is acknowledged that there has always been a marriage among people. However, marriage, state governments, and now emerging world governments, which existed before industrialization, had very different contexts and, as a result, completely different purposes, meanings, and implications. In fact, the central focus of industrialization (which, of course, evolved into today’s large-scale capitalism), state domination, and world government was, through direct domination, the exponential generation of prosperity for a small number of people. Insist. And indirect and human management.
And one of the most important schemes governments use to manage and manage people is the current marriage model. It is a marriage model without the consideration or context of a tribe or tribe, or a wider family. Visit:- https://www.s-mariage.com/
In fact, when couples submit to the current model, they are allowed to become a core completely separated from other tribes and tribes, or to become a wider family connection or consideration to which they belonged. It seems to be accepted. Before Marriage ..
Perhaps this is why it is called a nuclear marriage (nuclear family or elementary school family is a term used to define a family group formed by an adult couple and their children [Wikipedia]). The authors admit that “nuclear families” have been common in Europe and the United Kingdom for some time, but after industrialization they have changed in nature and are two completely inward-looking private, exclusive units. became. If you want to investigate it, the most accurate term for this is an isolated family of closed nuclear families or a private nuclear family. Whatever the pre-industrial family, there is no doubt that the rise of capitalism as the dominant ideology underlying social organizations, and now globalization, has become apparent.
However, in this essay, not only in Britain and Europe, but also in complex family units, which are common in tribes and tribes, and wherever globalism and capitalism have humiliated families around the world. Mentions the model. Declared illegal.
The most important claim of this essay is basically how “marriage” is done and how it is practiced, deriving all its meaning and power from the tribal / tribal context, and broader of the tribe / tribe. If there is no context, it is irrelevant.
Efficiency, or duration. The idea of being able to marry a tribe or a person without a tribe is as ridiculous as the idea of national citizenship. When couples marry according to a private nuclear marriage, they simply experience ghost ritual movements that unfold inside and outside a context that no longer exists. It can be argued that the modern mass consumer capitalist nation-state is not a culture. It’s more business. When people get married in this context, they connect exclusively with one person, not with others. That person’s background, in fact, both people have no culture. There is no “form,” “tradition,” “role,” or family layer that can define the meaning and importance of the union of these two. Only two abstract individuals have undergone rituals that require a cultural context to define it, but they are not. When married, they only form their own set of goals and concerns, and the only context in which they can define the meaning of their little marriage is completely impersonal, isolated, faceless, and anonymous.
A major shopping center of global capitalism.
Marriage is embedded in the social context. It can never be separated, evaluated or commented outside the social, cultural and political context in which it is inserted. In order to see the marriage clearly, we must also consider the corresponding opposition to the unfaithfulness. Singles are currently divorced. It turns out that the current marriage ideals that are currently accepted are closely related to unmarried people. The authors suggest that unmarried people are as strange and bizarre as the current marriage model was for tribes and generations of people who lived in tribes for thousands of years. doing. In the tribal model, there is no “loneliness” before marriage and no withdrawal or separation from the tribe after marriage. This is because the tribal model forces people to include people, rather than grouping them into one or two groups. ,
Regardless of the stage of life or the state of the relationship. .. In fact, many languages around the world don’t even have the English word for a parent-child household known as a family. For example, Zinacantán in southern Mexico identifies the basic social unit as a “house.” This includes 1 to 20 people.