The Destruction of the Family Unit
Is the Government your New Daddy?
By Joni Douglas
Never has the role of ‘dad’ been as ambiguous as it has become lately, here in America. Think about it, the meaning behind the words dad and father, have changed dramatically in the last 50 years. And men have noticed. Some of them have taken the steps to be more active participants in their children’s lives and that is a good thing. But the role that men, throughout the centuries, have assigned to themselves has always been one of provider. Centuries ago, being the provider meant they were the hunter or the warrior, providing the essentials necessary for the survival of their family. Today, although we still need warriors, we do not need to hunt for our food. So, where does that leave the average man? We still assign the title of provider to men, especially young men with families. But the means of providing for the family have now changed. Very often, men define themselves by or are defined by their employment, by the job that they do everyday. Perhaps, this isn’t the best way to define or categorize men, but nevertheless, it is more often than not, true.
The current economic system has taken its toll on American men, in more ways than we realize. The weight of this recession has hit men most heavily. American men have lost roughly ¾ of the 8 million jobs, which have just disappeared, since the beginning of 2008. Construction, finance and manufacturing have been particularly hard hit and tend to be male dominated industries. Industries that normally employ women, such as education and health care are holding up relatively well in this recession. Particularly noteworthy and somewhat troubling, is that it looks possible, within the next few months if things don’t change, for the first time in US history the majority of this country’s jobs will be held by women. This is staggering!
The government wants to help. They talk about shovel-ready jobs. They passed the Stimulus Bill telling us that jobs will be created. Yet very little of the stimulus money has actually filtered through into male-dominated industries. Only a very small fraction of that money went into the shovel-ready projects. So where did all the money go? Most of it was distributed to state and local governments, education and healthcare. Since the majority of start-up jobs, in America, are created by small businesses, one has to wonder why none of the funds intended to stimulate the economy, have not been used to stimulate small businesses. So, no matter what Congress and the White House intended, the stimulus bill has not created nor saved any jobs for men in the private sector.
Now what does this do to our family? The man’s role in the family is deep-seated, with the necessity for preservation of the family. Although he is biologically and psychologically connected to the family, he is yet separate. The bond to his family becomes his reason for staying with the family, so he stays with his family to complete his role as provider. If dad isn’t working for the government, in the education system or in the health care field, he may be out of work. So who then, does the family depend on to be the provider? Poised to step in and take over the role of provider, is the government. Does this really benefit the family unit?
Oddly enough, this was predicted by none other than Karl Marx. The top priority of Marxism was the abolition of the family. Marx laid down his strategy to eliminate private property and eliminate the family. Stating very clearly in his Communist Manifesto that the family will disappear as property disappears with the destruction of capitalism. Marx is saying that the family, business, and private property are entwined and when one fails and ceases to be part of the equation, the other two will pay the price.
Now isn’t that what is happening in America today? Whether or not it’s being done intentionally, the steps that the government has taken have certainly undermined the family. Studies have been done on how the economic crisis of the great depression, showing clearly how unemployment affected men and their roles in the family. The traditional view of masculinity instills in man the need to protect and provide for his family. Take that need a way and there goes the instinctive incentive to stay with his wife and family.
Nothing has been done by this administration to stimulate the portion of the economy that would provide jobs for men and especially young men; jobs that would protect and strengthen the family unit. Is this the dirty little secret of the progressive movement? Is the government your daddy? Are we, as Americans, willing to risk this potential catastrophe? Do we really want to head down this path, this extremely dangerous road that leads to the eradication of the family?