For once, I don't think there's a language warning in this one! Still, it's important to know why the left hates nuclear families and especially fathers - it's competition!
18 comments:
A.B. Prosper
said...
A fine rant, Cap.
A caveat though, the nuclear family is not the be all end all. Its the minimum needed to sustain civilization.
And the States hatred of the family is nothing new, the manorial state of the middle ages tried to break up the stronger clan structures so the elite could control unruly populations.
The Romans did these among the lower classes as well.
More modern societies (industrial age here) attacked the extended family in subtle ways (mainly by promoting the nuclear family above all else) because extend families creates less economic activity for the State and are harder to control.
Ideally if a smaller State is the end game than we need to encourage bigger families and more kinship within a framework of cooperation so as to avoid the situation in the Middle East
How we do this against probably a millennium of effort is of course the challenge.
Yup. And it is getting harder and harder to be a nuclear family. My wife and I have been married for 21 years and have 2 kids. She stayed at home with the kids until the youngest was in grade 1. Since they are 7 years apart in age, this was many years. She now works part-time at a place with very flexible hours (but unfortunately low pay) so she can be there to get our youngest to school, be at home when school ends, be available to take them to various appointments, and also be at home all day when school is out for the summer. Anyhow, my point is this: For a long time money was very tight since we had only my salary to live on for many years. I in no way regret our decision. I am certain that it was by far what was best for our kids. However, part of my income was going towards taxes to ensure there was government daycare so other families could have two incomes. So not only did we have to live off one income, we had to pay taxes to ensure that others were able to have a second income. This is why I get so irritated when I hear politicians talking about the need to start new, paid by me, "affordable daycare" programs.
You've missed the boat Captain - by a country mile. Please - allow me to take exception:
Pride? Where is the pride in taking welfare? Do you think public educators take pride in their work, Captain? Do you think Gays and feminists are proud Captain? Do you think the black idiots of Ferguson are proud of themselves? I personally don't think so - underneath all that noise and militancy I think those people are deeply ashamed of themselves...and that is why they put so much effort into deluding themselves.
You give the leftist far too much intellectual credit. They are not lazy, they will go to incredible lengths expend huge effort to delude themselves.
They're STUPID. Look at the welfare slobs, the single moms, the pooch screwing union bums - none of them are smart enough to create anything that somebody else would want. They are morally and intellectually bankrupt.
The old saying applies - never ascribe to malice that which can be ascribed to stupidity!
The obvious exception to this would be their leaders. Those SOB's smart like a fox, and make their lives by manipulating stupid people. Obama, Sharpton and the race whores spring to mind.
There is only one way to deal with them too - be politically incorrect, call a spade a spade and tell them to shove it when they get stupid about it. As you yourself know - it means being rude, it means being impolite ... but there is no nice way to get along with idiots that are trying to take advantage of you.
Push will have to come to shove before these idiots will back down...and I am thinking it is high time to get this unpleasantness over with too...
The left hates nuclear families, they prefer chemical families. LOL !
Nuclear family is not a silver bullet. If your father and your mother are vicious, abusive and brutal tyrants then you as a child are not better off.
But if you live in a liberal society that provides child rights, child protection and punishes abusive parents then you have a survival chance.
If you have a liberal society that provides to children the education that parents neglect to provide then the child is better off.
I don't trust the nuclear family, I prefer the children to have access to society as a whole to make up for the abuses, violence and neglect from the part of the parents.
Just because you breed doesn't mean you have the skills nor the desire to raise your children properly.
If all you want to do is show your children who's boss then you have no business being a parent and it's a good thing for the child that liberal society is around.
Aaron, you should discuss one of the real attacks on the nuclear family; one that has far more impact than sociology ditzes.
It's the sheer cost of living. Here in Boston, for example, it costs a fortune to afford a decent place. The area around where I went to college had reasonable houses going for $600k or more, and that was with an average-ish school system. God forbid you want to live in Boston proper, cambridge, Lexington or Newton.
So if dad makes $90k a year as a software engineer, and you want to buy a house, guess what? You can't afford it on a software engineer salary. A second income is necessary.
Money was tight for my family growing up, and both parents worked. I could only imagine how much of a struggle it would've been if only one worked.
I'm 28 now, so I've hit the age where many people I know are starting families. And the ones with a stay at home mom are often struggling. Housing prices are still inflated over historical norms, in my opinion, and that doesn't even address other overly fat industries (education, social welfare, etc) that suck up paychecks and reduce purchasing power, which diminishes the ability of one parent being able to provide for 2 or more different people.
Side note: to play devil's advocate, I've dated girls in the past from these kinds of nuclear households. They've ranged from useless to beyond useless as people.
"I don't trust the nuclear family, I prefer the children to have access to society as a whole to make up for the abuses, violence and neglect from the part of the parents."
As Anonymous said, far too many parents fill their children's heads with garbage that takes a long time to clean out. Unless I'm mistaken, our treasured Cappy himself has said that his preacher father (with "good intentions" of course, as if that means anything) attempted to poison his mind with destructive religious ideas. And as a German leader one said at the dinner table, "Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child".
Who knows how many others suffered like me in my 20s when a Catholic childhood ran into an awareness of the religious shallowness of my ancestors, yet the ideal of Original Sin and the glory in suffering for the sins of the world still held sway? I was a SJW in my 20s but you'd better believe that the seeds were planted in me long before that.
The point is that the nuclear family is market-distorting in terms of transfer of resources and transfer of worldview. So anyone who isn't a fan of it isn't necessarily a leftist. But for my part, I will never have children, but my nephew will benefit from my silver and gold stacking as well as my lived example of an ex-SJW and happy MGHOW.
-Welfare takers; Proud? No. Ashamed? certainly not. It's a given therefore is no pride or shame involved. It's like putting a pride/shame appraisal on my ability to breathe.
Gays and Feminists; Proud? THEY HAVE ACTUAL MARCHES IN THE STREET BECAUSE THEY ARE SO GODDAMN PROUD. The whole culture is gay pride. Everyday, everywhere, all of us are bombarded with gay pride all the time. If you think they are ashamed then you're crazy.
Ferguson protesters; Proud? You say they are secretly ashamed. Now I know for a fact that you haven't lived in a community that has any similarity. There is no shame at all in lower class black communities. Shame has been written out of their culture entirely.
You are completely in the dark about what has happened to the US in the last 40 years.
I don't think Aaron is saying that nuclear families are the end all-be all of existence, or that every one is perfect. Certainly it would be great to have a system in place where children could be taken care of, if the parents prove inadequate.
That being said, it does seem the government is trying to replace nuclear families with another system--one that incentivises single motherhood (and absent, vagina-tingling, prison-bound, bad boy fathers.) Single mothers are, on the whole, less capable of raising a healthy child than a two-parent family (the occasional exception notwithstanding.) Government programs create more single mothers who themselves give birth to more single mothers. This is not unintentional.
"But if you live in a liberal society that provides child rights, child protection and punishes abusive parents then you have a survival chance."
Yes, that's true, except when the system fails horribly:
I sure as hell wouldn't want to grow up in the foster care system. And the things that make for shitty parents are less likely to happen in a nuclear family (and even less likely to happen in an extended family.)
Oh and one reason I think we don't have extended families anymore--the fact that we move around so much. Odds are good that no one these days will end up dying in the same town they grew up in. You have to go to wherever in the country the jobs are, especially if you joined a technical field. No longer do we live in a small town where everybody knows everybody and where the whole neighborhood can shame a person into behaving themselves...
Anyone else ever read 'The War Against the Family' By Gairdner? It's Canadian, dated, but eerily prophetic.
What you have to realize is that the left's end goal is not merely the disintegration of the family, it's the complete atomization of society. It's making it so that people can't relate in any meaningful sense anymore.
The mentality of the left is to allow the individual as much license to act (at least in word) while preventing strong group formations. This is accomplished by removing any barrier to entry to any organization. Hence feminism, affirmative action, etc. Then they rot every organization from the inside out.
I want to mention something to the commenters who were complaining about bad parents in nuclear families. Yes, there are bad parents out there. But guess what? The "new" families are way worse! orphanage-worse. single mom - worse. gay parents -fucking tragedy. (see my blog on that https://wisdomdistillery.wordpress.com/2014/07/14/16/)
On to my comment. I disagree that the motivation for them hating the family is so they can get a job to take the father's spot. I think this is a result. I think the drivers of this trend -we'll call them feminists and fags. Do this to justify their choices/ lifestyle. They want to say their way is just as good as the moral, traditional way. They attack the family to discredit while praising the "new" families. The real shame is they don't care what happens to the kids on their crusade.
I was referring to society as a whole granting rights to children, giving them the opportunity to take a lawyer and sue their abusive parents for damage and interest.
I was not talking about foster care, it's obvious those places are abusive hellholes, even worse than bad nuclear families.
I was complaining about the general libertarian and right wing vision of the nuclear family.
If they have it their way, society will not be able to intervene in cases of violence and abuse.
Parents must be held accountable and face the full force of the law. They must be made to pay damages when damages are due.
18 comments:
A fine rant, Cap.
A caveat though, the nuclear family is not the be all end all. Its the minimum needed to sustain civilization.
And the States hatred of the family is nothing new, the manorial state of the middle ages tried to break up the stronger clan structures so the elite could control unruly populations.
The Romans did these among the lower classes as well.
More modern societies (industrial age here) attacked the extended family in subtle ways (mainly by promoting the nuclear family above all else) because extend families creates less economic activity for the State and are harder to control.
Ideally if a smaller State is the end game than we need to encourage bigger families and more kinship within a framework of cooperation so as to avoid the situation in the Middle East
How we do this against probably a millennium of effort is of course the challenge.
OMG!
One truism after another, so much so I've got a sore neck from nodding my head throughout the video.
Seriously man, that rant so spot on.
Yup. And it is getting harder and harder to be a nuclear family. My wife and I have been married for 21 years and have 2 kids. She stayed at home with the kids until the youngest was in grade 1. Since they are 7 years apart in age, this was many years. She now works part-time at a place with very flexible hours (but unfortunately low pay) so she can be there to get our youngest to school, be at home when school ends, be available to take them to various appointments, and also be at home all day when school is out for the summer. Anyhow, my point is this: For a long time money was very tight since we had only my salary to live on for many years. I in no way regret our decision. I am certain that it was by far what was best for our kids. However, part of my income was going towards taxes to ensure there was government daycare so other families could have two incomes. So not only did we have to live off one income, we had to pay taxes to ensure that others were able to have a second income. This is why I get so irritated when I hear politicians talking about the need to start new, paid by me, "affordable daycare" programs.
Interesting topic, Cap... Good insights.
BTW, I think the word you were looking for at 9:30 was 'vociferously'... ;-)
AMEN!! The nuclear family is a wonderful thing.
Unless it's riddled with severe abuse of one kind or another, the extended family is even better.
I was one of the few GenX-ers privileged to be raised in an extended family.
My experience is frequently mocked as "backward," "clannish," and "outdated." Or else dismissed as "quaint."
Harumph. An extended family is a survival tool that prevents reliance on day care, welfare, and other forms of state interference.
No wonder they've been working to squelch it since the Industrial Revolution.
You've missed the boat Captain - by a country mile. Please - allow me to take exception:
Pride? Where is the pride in taking welfare? Do you think public educators take pride in their work, Captain? Do you think Gays and feminists are proud Captain? Do you think the black idiots of Ferguson are proud of themselves? I personally don't think so - underneath all that noise and militancy I think those people are deeply ashamed of themselves...and that is why they put so much effort into deluding themselves.
You give the leftist far too much intellectual credit. They are not lazy, they will go to incredible lengths expend huge effort to delude themselves.
They're STUPID. Look at the welfare slobs, the single moms, the pooch screwing union bums - none of them are smart enough to create anything that somebody else would want. They are morally and intellectually bankrupt.
The old saying applies - never ascribe to malice that which can be ascribed to stupidity!
The obvious exception to this would be their leaders. Those SOB's smart like a fox, and make their lives by manipulating stupid people. Obama, Sharpton and the race whores spring to mind.
There is only one way to deal with them too - be politically incorrect, call a spade a spade and tell them to shove it when they get stupid about it. As you yourself know - it means being rude, it means being impolite ... but there is no nice way to get along with idiots that are trying to take advantage of you.
Push will have to come to shove before these idiots will back down...and I am thinking it is high time to get this unpleasantness over with too...
The left hates nuclear families, they prefer chemical families. LOL !
Nuclear family is not a silver bullet. If your father and your mother are vicious, abusive and brutal tyrants then you as a child are not better off.
But if you live in a liberal society that provides child rights, child protection and punishes abusive parents then you have a survival chance.
If you have a liberal society that provides to children the education that parents neglect to provide then the child is better off.
I don't trust the nuclear family, I prefer the children to have access to society as a whole to make up for the abuses, violence and neglect from the part of the parents.
Just because you breed doesn't mean you have the skills nor the desire to raise your children properly.
If all you want to do is show your children who's boss then you have no business being a parent and it's a good thing for the child that liberal society is around.
Aaron, you should discuss one of the real attacks on the nuclear family; one that has far more impact than sociology ditzes.
It's the sheer cost of living. Here in Boston, for example, it costs a fortune to afford a decent place. The area around where I went to college had reasonable houses going for $600k or more, and that was with an average-ish school system. God forbid you want to live in Boston proper, cambridge, Lexington or Newton.
So if dad makes $90k a year as a software engineer, and you want to buy a house, guess what? You can't afford it on a software engineer salary. A second income is necessary.
Money was tight for my family growing up, and both parents worked. I could only imagine how much of a struggle it would've been if only one worked.
I'm 28 now, so I've hit the age where many people I know are starting families. And the ones with a stay at home mom are often struggling. Housing prices are still inflated over historical norms, in my opinion, and that doesn't even address other overly fat industries (education, social welfare, etc) that suck up paychecks and reduce purchasing power, which diminishes the ability of one parent being able to provide for 2 or more different people.
Side note: to play devil's advocate, I've dated girls in the past from these kinds of nuclear households. They've ranged from useless to beyond useless as people.
From my experience, it would seem that parents hate their own nuclear families even more than the state.
They don't need the state's help to ruin their child, their own hatred and violence towards their children is sufficient enough.
Nature should have evolved better than that and sterilized cold hearted men and women who are incapable of caring for their offspring.
"I don't trust the nuclear family, I prefer the children to have access to society as a whole to make up for the abuses, violence and neglect from the part of the parents."
As Anonymous said, far too many parents fill their children's heads with garbage that takes a long time to clean out. Unless I'm mistaken, our treasured Cappy himself has said that his preacher father (with "good intentions" of course, as if that means anything) attempted to poison his mind with destructive religious ideas. And as a German leader one said at the dinner table, "Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child".
Who knows how many others suffered like me in my 20s when a Catholic childhood ran into an awareness of the religious shallowness of my ancestors, yet the ideal of Original Sin and the glory in suffering for the sins of the world still held sway? I was a SJW in my 20s but you'd better believe that the seeds were planted in me long before that.
The point is that the nuclear family is market-distorting in terms of transfer of resources and transfer of worldview. So anyone who isn't a fan of it isn't necessarily a leftist. But for my part, I will never have children, but my nephew will benefit from my silver and gold stacking as well as my lived example of an ex-SJW and happy MGHOW.
Glen Filthie;
-Welfare takers; Proud? No. Ashamed? certainly not. It's a given therefore is no pride or shame involved. It's like putting a pride/shame appraisal on my ability to breathe.
Gays and Feminists; Proud? THEY HAVE ACTUAL MARCHES IN THE STREET BECAUSE THEY ARE SO GODDAMN PROUD. The whole culture is gay pride. Everyday, everywhere, all of us are bombarded with gay pride all the time. If you think they are ashamed then you're crazy.
Ferguson protesters; Proud? You say they are secretly ashamed. Now I know for a fact that you haven't lived in a community that has any similarity. There is no shame at all in lower class black communities. Shame has been written out of their culture entirely.
You are completely in the dark about what has happened to the US in the last 40 years.
I don't think Aaron is saying that nuclear families are the end all-be all of existence, or that every one is perfect. Certainly it would be great to have a system in place where children could be taken care of, if the parents prove inadequate.
That being said, it does seem the government is trying to replace nuclear families with another system--one that incentivises single motherhood (and absent, vagina-tingling, prison-bound, bad boy fathers.) Single mothers are, on the whole, less capable of raising a healthy child than a two-parent family (the occasional exception notwithstanding.) Government programs create more single mothers who themselves give birth to more single mothers. This is not unintentional.
"But if you live in a liberal society that provides child rights, child protection and punishes abusive parents then you have a survival chance."
Yes, that's true, except when the system fails horribly:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/fostercare/marr/
I sure as hell wouldn't want to grow up in the foster care system. And the things that make for shitty parents are less likely to happen in a nuclear family (and even less likely to happen in an extended family.)
Oh and one reason I think we don't have extended families anymore--the fact that we move around so much. Odds are good that no one these days will end up dying in the same town they grew up in. You have to go to wherever in the country the jobs are, especially if you joined a technical field. No longer do we live in a small town where everybody knows everybody and where the whole neighborhood can shame a person into behaving themselves...
Anyone else ever read 'The War Against the Family' By Gairdner? It's Canadian, dated, but eerily prophetic.
What you have to realize is that the left's end goal is not merely the disintegration of the family, it's the complete atomization of society. It's making it so that people can't relate in any meaningful sense anymore.
The mentality of the left is to allow the individual as much license to act (at least in word) while preventing strong group formations. This is accomplished by removing any barrier to entry to any organization. Hence feminism, affirmative action, etc. Then they rot every organization from the inside out.
Once again, Terrific Post!!!
I want to mention something to the commenters who were complaining about bad parents in nuclear families. Yes, there are bad parents out there. But guess what? The "new" families are way worse! orphanage-worse. single mom - worse. gay parents -fucking tragedy. (see my blog on that https://wisdomdistillery.wordpress.com/2014/07/14/16/)
On to my comment. I disagree that the motivation for them hating the family is so they can get a job to take the father's spot. I think this is a result. I think the drivers of this trend -we'll call them feminists and fags. Do this to justify their choices/ lifestyle. They want to say their way is just as good as the moral, traditional way. They attack the family to discredit while praising the "new" families. The real shame is they don't care what happens to the kids on their crusade.
Troper,
I was referring to society as a whole granting rights to children, giving them the opportunity to take a lawyer and sue their abusive parents for damage and interest.
I was not talking about foster care, it's obvious those places are abusive hellholes, even worse than bad nuclear families.
I was complaining about the general libertarian and right wing vision of the nuclear family.
If they have it their way, society will not be able to intervene in cases of violence and abuse.
Parents must be held accountable and face the full force of the law. They must be made to pay damages when damages are due.
"shame a person into behaving themselves"
The shamers are not always right, sometimes they use shame and guilt as yet another control, violence and abuse tactic.
Shame and guilt is the perfect tool of the tyrant.
Shame and guilt is used more often than not to establish dominance, not to right a wrong.
And if a whole neighborhood corners a strong individual with shame and guilt tactics, they can expect this to become ballistic.
No, I don't condone such tactics.
Shame and guilt doesn't work with me and those who use that on me risk having the whole ordeal getting physical.
I don't shame and guilt other people, I mind my own business and I expect others to do the same.
IF we had functional (Father Mother Children) families in this country..
There would be very little need for the current .gov largess we are now saddled with.
Things are as they now are because powerful people WANT them that way.
The popularity of single-motherhood is no accident.. it has been carefully orchestrated by the Powers That Be.
Who goes to Best Buy and wants empowerment? Me, when I'm looking for a power strip.
Post a Comment