The Family Manifesto - political platform of the Family Party

The Family Manifesto

---

I. The History of Human Relationships

The history of humanity is the history of relationships. At every stage of civilization, the bonds between people have defined the order of life—tribes, kingdoms, empires, nations. Yet above them all stands the first and eternal society: the family.

In the family, parents labor not for profit, but for love. They create wealth not to hoard, but to provide. Their sacrifice is given without calculation, their care without expectation of repayment.

But outside the family, other systems arose. The marketplace counted every coin, the banker demanded interest, the landlord rent. Capitalism transformed human life into commodities. Then socialism and communism rose in rebellion, promising equality. Yet instead of freedom, they forged new chains, replacing the parent with the Party, replacing love with law, replacing inheritance with confiscation.

Thus, humanity has stumbled, forgetting the divine pattern already written in the home.

---

II. The Family Order

The family is the first economy, the first society, the first school of love.

Its principles are eternal:

• Parents provide without counting.

• Children receive without owing.

• Life is sustained without debt.

When a child reaches maturity, no invoice is delivered, no contract signed, no interest charged. The wealth of parents is not a loan, but a legacy; not an investment, but an inheritance.

Here, in the home, we see the image of God’s creation. God, the Eternal Parent, made the universe and gave it freely. The air, the sun, the water, the earth—all are gifts without price. Humanity is heir, not debtor. Steward, not slave.

The family therefore is not only natural; it is divine. It is the prototype of a just and loving world.

---

III. The Failure of Old Systems

Yet the world has wandered from this truth.

• Capitalism exalted profit above people. It reduced men and women to producers and consumers, measuring worth in wealth, demanding repayment even for the necessities of life.

• Socialism and communism, in their zeal to oppose exploitation, replaced one master with another. The State became the false parent, demanding the obedience of children while withholding their inheritance. What the family gives unconditionally, these systems distributed conditionally—by decree, by ration, by fear.

The result was abuse, not nurture; dependency, not dignity. Where the family builds trust, these systems enforced compliance. Where parents give for life, regimes took for the sake of power.

But humanity longs for something higher. The failures of these systems are not the end of history—they are the sign that only love can endure, that only the family can show us the way.

---

IV. The Call of the Family

We proclaim the family as the foundation of a new world.

The economy of love is not only moral; it is measurable. In the United States, the services of a stay-at-home parent have been valued at $115,000 per year. In Ireland, the figure is €54,000 per year. Yet these immense contributions are invisible in GDP calculations. They do not appear on national balance sheets, and governments offer no direct compensation to those who raise the future citizens and taxpayers.

Thus, those who give the most to society—parents who nurture, educate, and sustain the next generation—are often the least recognized. Meanwhile, the very children they raise will grow to finance pensions and public services for many who chose not to bear the burden of parenting.

This is a profound injustice. The family economy sustains civilization itself, yet remains unacknowledged by the systems it upholds.

We call for a transformation:

• In place of profit, we lift up provision.
• In place of interest, we proclaim inheritance.
• In place of contracts, we call for covenant.
• In place of coercion, we declare freedom in love.
• In place of neglect, we demand recognition of the family’s true economic value.

Let governments learn from households, that leadership is service. Let nations imitate parents, that strength is given to protect the weak. Let economies model themselves on the family, that wealth is shared to uplift, not to enslave.

The family is not a relic of the past; it is the blueprint of the future. It is the seed of God’s kingdom on earth, the image of creation itself.

Parents and children of all nations, unite!

You have nothing to lose but your debts, your fears, your chains of exploitation.

You have a world to inherit—together.

By

Tinko Tinev

Maslow's hierarchy of needs, fundamentally wrong.

A fundamental flaw is discovered in Malow's pyramids of needs when analysing the initial stages of human life.

A humanist physiological needs need to be satisfied for a human to develop from a baby to an adult, but a baby is incapable of providing nutrients for itself.

A baby has no money to pay for.food.

A baby has no accurate value it can exchange for nutrition.

How are a baby's physiological needs met, if it has no food, no money and no belongings it can exchange for food?

It must be loved...

Someone, even an animal, must find it in themselve to give time, care, food, shelter in short unconditional love to the baby.

If that is the case, then Maslow was terribly wrong in assuming our satisfaction of physiological needs is most fundamental.

It turns out that our need to be loved with unconditional love is most foundational and defining for our lives.

If so, we are born to be an ampty journal of love, where the first line writes "I love you!" so a life of love can unfold as we write in each other's journals words of love.

The theory that humans are just animals falls short of proposing a holistic meaning to life.

Why Marxism does not create Utopia?

Marxists have tried... and tried... and tried again, to convince the world that they offer a way to a peaceful world.

Why have they, instead, left a trail of dead bodies, bankrupted nations, morally disillusioned youth and brocken societies infested with corruption that penetrated to the bone marrow of Utopian justice warriors?

The simple answer would be that Marxism and Communism are a cult and not an ideology.

Under the pretense concern for the problems of society lies a deep, cold and dark hate.

Marxists hate God and all He created, including people. They don't have scientific empirical and tangible evidence of a God's none existence. They don't have a proof that chaos gave birth to the Universe. Instead they believe these statements are true. And they believe this so much and with such passion, that are willing to oppress, persecute and kill all who oppose their belief.

The above disqualifies them as rational, and enrolls them into the long list of fanatic cults they hate and despise for being delusional.

While morally and financially bankrupting Russia and the Soviet republics, Marxists worked over time to "reform" the US and EU educational systems with the only hope in mind, kick God and other faiths out of the faith marketplace and become a monopoly. 

The fascination Marxists have for drugs, perverse sex, rock and roll, and baby sacrifice (abortion) equates only to those of pagan cults that worship human sacrifice and total obedience to a shaman. Giving birth to an army of "useful idiots"...

The same Marxists now despise the "deological" babies they conceived and planted into the minds of EU and US youth, claiming China provides a better alternative for the future.

What has Marxism achieved in China, except deny the Chinese people access to their culture, identity and heritage in efforts to have 1.4billion people worship the German Jewish prophet of hate Karl Marx?

How does this benefit the Chinese people and the Asian continent?

No answer is provided...

Only a mantra that Marxism is the only way toward a Utopian society that never existed and Marxism provides no proof, it ever will.

After all, after 100 year of global ideological dominance not a single "Moral Citizen" has emerged.

Delusional and an unscientific cult?

Deeper meaning to sex and live

Sex is sold and bought but today is there a deeper meaning to it?

Is sex and sexuality just a commodity?

Do we really want to be looked upon only as sexual objects and selected as partners only according to sexual compatibility?

Looking for the most simple definition of sex today, we may conclude that it is simply... friction. 

Based on such primitive assumption rubbing anything for pleasure could qualify as sex because in this world view it sex has no other purpose than to give pleasure to the one causing the friction. This seems to be the prevailing view on sexuality that the media and the entertainment industry share. As we know this leads people to marry objects or even spirits.

Despite this a slightly more educated perspective would include the obvious results of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, and other species surrounding us, that is the creation of another life. Some, today, argue that the pleasure given to the one rubbing surpasses in value the creation of life. Yet since this is only an opinion we need to explore deeper the life that is created to see if there is a deeper meaning or not. 

According to DNA research the moment the sperm enters the egg a new DNA sequence is created that carries a full description of the ancestry that created this life. If seen from a legal perspective we can say that, on molecular level a binding agreement has been signed between the mother and the father. This new life is a new opportunity not only for the man and the woman but for everyone that cares and loves the. 

What is most important then is the moment of time and the circumstances in which this binding agreement is signed. 

Were the two parties consciously anticipating the life they have committed to create or has one deceived the other for just a moment of pleasure? 

Was it an act of hate or violence? 

Was it a moment when one was deprived of cognitive capacity and either drugged or drunk was used for sexual self satisfaction?

We have to agree that the conditions and the state of mind of those entering into the binding agreement of life plays a crucial role in defining the value, direction and customer satisfaction of the next user of life as we know it. 

Will this life be wanted or unwanted?

Will this life be loved or hated?

Will this life be cared for or abandoned?

Coming back to our original search for the deeper meaning of life we have to conclude that sex being friction for self pleasure is a very limited and primitive view that barely scratches the surface of sex, sexuality the love who's attributes they are. 

The deeper meaning of True Parental Love the force defining our life and the universe

Deeper meaning:

True love...

A mighty force that is able to touch and transform the life of anyone.

At its best true unconditional love is the love and care of parents towards their children.

Many might argue that this is not true because they were abandoned or not loved to a satisfactory level, but looking back in history it is easy to see that has not been much love, respect and care to be shared among people in the societies before us and still today.

Despite that universal lack of love in the human world in all ages people have found peace and inspiration in nature. What captivates us in nature is that it's offered for our experience for free. Water falls from the sky. The so needed oxygen flows everywhere and trees and grass grow freely without need of birth certificate, passport, license, permission or human laws to govern them.

Why are they free?

Pondering upon this question I looked for a good comparison of the describe this observable freedom and found one in the love of parents towards their children.

Parents in the animal and human world work and care liberally for their offspring without a condition or demand of repayment.

Parents do not accumulate interest for care given but even look forward to giving all they could accumulate throughout their lives to the children as inheritance as they are cared for into adulthood.

Parental Love seems to be in contrast to all other forms of human relationships.

Therefore we easily look for a cause for the love that surrounds us and even embraces us through our lives by naming the source God /a father figure/ or and equivalent word for religious people and Mother Nature for believers in atheism.

Jesus of Nazareth was the first to note of this intimate relationship we share with the creator of our universe.

Could it be that this world was created for us, human beings, out of love by a parental figure that we could call a Heavenly Parent?

Searching for a deeper meaning to life and sharing the findings.

Join for regular updates!

A deeper meaning to misunderstanding

Searching for a deeper meaning to the purpose of life we notice that people seem to differ in characters from one another.

Often an educated assumption is made that somehow we grow not to be alike.

What about children? Are they not all the same?

A scientific researcher may assume all children are the same based on certain observable factors but every parent ever born knows that each child is unique.

Some people are more intellectual "by nature" than others, scientists might say, defining an inherent or pre-existing state responsible for this quality. Many atheists strongly believe a certain contribution by a "Mother Nature" a mystique, divine, creative and peace infusing being is responsible for the, otherwise, "random mutation" most monotheistic religions attribute to a being they call God, or other, who they see as a creator.

It seems that all faiths and even educated doubts agree that our deep qualities that define our being are pre-existing and not decided by ourselves.

Could it be then that the reason why we find it difficult to get along with some people is because... let's say it in a different way...

If we suppose that one person had the character and function of a muscle cell and met two others who carried characteristics of a brain cell and a bone cell, respectively, and they decided to discuss the purpose of life as seen by each one of them as they each see it.

Would they get along well with each other?

Searching for a deeper meaning to life and sharing the findings.

Join for regular updates!

Men vs women?

Quantum vs analogue

Men and women struggle to understand each other and very often fail.

My observations and search for deeper meaning to the purpose of life and deep interest in technology research, has lead me to the conclusion that man has an analogue and woman a quantum functionality.

The reason man and woman complement each other is because life as we know it is constructed of both quantum and analogue systems.

A woman is often right but would not be able to reason as to why. We usually call this woman's intuition. Men also possess intuition but due to a more logical approach to problem solving, often disregards feelings used by intuition to guide them to quantum solutions.

As traditional life required labor and pragmatic day to day survival decisions for man to provide food for his beloved, a woman's intuition was viewed as disruptive, illogical and often considered a sign of craziness or, when she turned out to be right, witchcraft.

The pragmatic male dominating society, even today, creates logical laws that disregard love and beauty, which are the quantum networking components of life that give life its ultimate purpose.

Therefore, research done on elderly people nearing their death shows that their only regret was not having loved their family and friends more.

It seems that when faced with the end of our life, we are able to see that its real value lies in the experience of giving and receiving love.

We can conclude that our hope lies in paying more attention to love and women who seem to have been built to understand it best.

How deep can our purpose of life take us?

A partnership of love between a man and a woman seems to be the only way to finding that out.

There alone the two aspects of our universe meet with the underlying hope of giving life a new chance through having children.