Watch Louder with Crowder every weekday at 11:00 AM Eastern, only on Rumble Premium!

Anyone who tries to convince children that they would be better off without their family likely has evil intentions. Unclear what the intent of Lorna Finlayson is, but she is arguing that children need liberation from their parents and I don’t think it's possible to start with an immoral premise and end with a moral conclusion.

Finlayson, a Marxist philosophy scholar, has penned a book titled “Child Liberation: The oppression of children and the case for change.”

According to The College Fix:

Finlayson questions the age limit on the right to vote, mandatory schooling for minors, and the overall power adults hold over children’s lives, according to the synopsis, published by The Bookseller. She challenges society to “break the consensus that children’s lives are not their own.”

What she is saying is so stupid it’s painful, and the only people who would be conceived are children.

Firstly, common sense should already explain why this is retarded, but obviously, sense is not common with her. Secondly, the majority of crime happens to people without fathers because bad things happen when kids are alienated from their parents. Studies show that people without fathers in the home are 20 times more likely to be incarcerated.

But let her tell us again why children need liberation from their parents….

My goodness they will literally let anyone with a pulse become a professor these days.

This “philosopher” thinks she knows better than God and even though biologically and morally she makes no sense, she still wrote a book that probably stems from the daddy issues that she may or may not have.

“… as young people increasingly take part in ‘school strikes’ over issues from climate change to school dress codes, the time is ripe to explore child liberationist ideas and rediscover radical philosophies of childhood,” the synopsis states. “With their help, we can glimpse other possible childhoods, and better worlds for all of us.”

The biggest sign that a movement is evil is if it relies on children to promote the cause. This is such a Marxist tactic it’s not even funny.

Finlayson’s scholarly interests include “Marxism and critical theory” as well as “non-Western philosophy (esp. Arabic philosophy and philosophy in the Islamic world),” according to her CV.

Recently, there has been a growing movement among those on the left that argues that children don’t need their parents, as if their well-being doesn’t depend on it. These people wouldn't do that if kids were not naive, as they can only stay in power if they have people with developing brains voting for them. And that’s not an insult to kids, it’s an insult to the “adults.”

Do they think they can convince the masses that the bureaucracy is more competent than the nuclear family?

The left is so evil that they believe kids are better off not being born. And the next best thing is turning the government into mommy and daddy. To call this deranged does not even come close to describing all of this.

Claim vs Truth: What Jon Stewart Gets Wrong on Violent Crime Rateswww.youtube.com