The Marxist Case for Family Values
OK, I have talked about writing this one for a while. I have even delivered the lecture a few times, so hopefully I have made my case solid. This all came about while I was rereading the Communist Manifesto on the road this summer. Let me state, I am not a Communist. If for no other reason, I have taken a decidedly anti-revolutionary stance in politics. Though change is needed and oftentimes quickly, historical wisdom suggests that the slower the change comes the more lasting it is. In essence, every society and culture is going to have serious embedded flaws and needs to work at resolving those flaws: reinventing society and culture will only lead to a new system with different flaws with no historical memory of how to solve them. In other words, all of us know ways of coping with and eventually changing our current problems.
In America, we have the highest divorce rate of any country. Sexual activity generally begins in the teens, which has led to a substantial increase in teen pregnancy. Many of the nuclear families that are together are highly dysfunctional with all parties feeling alienated from one another. This is something both American Political parties have hit up on, both offering their own solutions. The Republicans seem bent on ignoring the situation fiscally. As if by banning giving a condom to sexually active 15 year olds is going to stop them. Many feel that Democrat’s have gone off the deep end at times with Sex Ed, in that it might create the impression that because the subject is being taught to a perceived sexually active group, those not in on the subject matter are likely to succumb to the conformity pressure seeming to emanate from the teachers pulpit. I tend to take the Democratic stance, only because I believe the problem is embedded in our Capitalist culture.
“How so, pinko,” you might ask me. We live in a culture of commodification in which nothing is sacred. Everything is a commodity and often spoken with the language of economics. In the Manifesto, Marx laments the state of the lawyers and doctors that such honorable professions have been dragged down to the level of hourly wage slaves. That complaint sounds odd to us, since we live in a time where we are all hourly wage slaves (or at least wishing we could get an hourly rate instead of a salary). I think that perhaps Marx meant that these professions now must succumb to commodification – instead of working for the well being of all, they work for the well being of the few who can now afford to pay the wage. Doctors, lawyers, and statesmen all work for the highest bidder.
The situation repeats itself in most aspects of society as well. Consumer choice is now an embedded right. Though it is considered sacrilege to criticize freedoms (and trust me, I’d rather live in that sort of society!), we apply this right to every aspect of our lives in the sense of a permanent transience. We feel bound to nothing. Religion, leadership, courtship, families, and friendships are bound to supply and demand as well as consumer choice. We feel bound to something only insofar as we need it, and even then we have a right in deciding how best to fulfill those needs.
Consider the language used in courtship: One is on the market, available. Single men and women dress like walking advertisements of themselves. In fact, a new fad in clothes stamps short expressions or words in block lettering across the chess or butt: “Princess”, “Flirt”, “Pay Attention to Me.” Kind of sounds like “Coke is it,” and “Refreshing,” no? Sense consumerism pervades the dating process – a 30-day free trial (plus setup fees), ought it not pervade a relationship if established? Many of the youngest among us look at it all in purely materialist – “Look, I got one too!” Unfortunately, that perception never fades with age for some. Even for the older and more “committed”, one always feels able to escape and get a different product once the cost of repairs exceeds the perceived cost of the item itself. There is no obligation. Kids hatched are like miles on a car – it breaks the car in, but it wears it out too. It also decreases the resale value of the car. Marriage is a contract – and like all contracts in Capitalist societies, it can be broken if one will pay the penalty (protective tariff?) the court assigns.
Less and less in this world is sacred and priceless. The natural human desire for expansion is becoming the moral. Capitalism, to me, is only a concept of how best to make money. It would be foolish to shrug off capitalism. As with all realist theories, one plays with fire when they let expansionist and self-serving mentalities slip into every other aspect of their life.
Jane Jacobs hits on this in “Systems of Survival”, going so far as to identify two “moral syndromes” that every modern day man must carry to morally cope with his world. The first is a commercial syndrome; the second is the guardian (government/protector) syndrome. Though she doesn’t quite approach it at the same angle I have, I believe the ultimate truth she has found is that the modern individual needs to be flexible (not soft) on their moral values depending on their situations. Her thesis worked more to rebut the growing idea that government needs to operate more like a business, but we can apply the same idea here too: Wall Street ethics and mentality ought not be applied in the bedroom or at the family dinner table.
Like all great liberal pundits, I offer no better alternative other than raising awareness of the issue. Bare in mind that I am not entirely trashing the mentality; take this more as an observation than a judgment. We Americans take our freedoms very seriously (when we know they’re being violated), and perhaps then it makes sense then that we have moved these freedoms into every aspect of our lives. Maybe the driving point of the Enlightenment and birth of Liberalism was the belief that nothing is sacred and free from personal choice. As with all progress, it comes with a trade-off. The trade-off we have made for these freedoms is security (as in job security, not airline security) and dignity. By subjecting one another to market forces and competition, things are apt to abruptly change and people removed from contact for better or for worse.
Tags: Treyopia Spinnaker Current Events Gay Marriage Gay Marriage Marxist Family Values Family Values Conservative
