Wintery Knight

…integrating Christian faith and knowledge in the public square

How socialism undermines family, community and the dignity of labor

UPDATE: Welcome visitors from Free Canuckistan! Thanks for the link, Binks!

I saw this amazing post over on the Pugnacious Irishman, and I would highly recommend you take a look at it. Rich comments on an essay by Charles Murray on whether the United States should start implementing European-style social policies.

Here is Rich’s summary of the Murray article:

In the annual Irving Kristol Lecture given at the American Enterprise Institute Dinner, he argues that while such Europe-style policies might produce an economic benefit or two, they are ill conceived because they suck the meaning out of life.  They do this by enfeebling the institutions necessary for robust meaning in life: family, community, vocation, and faith.  Lastly, he argues that in the next few decades, science will provide ample evidence that such policies are ill conceived.

But how does European democratic socialism destroy human flourishing?

Murray writes:

To become a source of deep satisfaction, a human activity has to meet some stringent requirements. It has to have been important (we don’t get deep satisfaction from trivial things). You have to have put a lot of effort into it (hence the cliché “nothing worth having comes easily”). And you have to have been responsible for the consequences.

There aren’t many activities in life that can satisfy those three requirements…. Let me put it formally: If we ask what are the institutions through which human beings achieve deep satisfactions in life, the answer is that there are just four: family, community, vocation, and faith.

…It is not necessary for any individual to make use of all four institutions, nor do I array them in a hierarchy. I merely assert that these four are all there are. The stuff of life–the elemental events surrounding birth, death, raising children, fulfilling one’s personal potential, dealing with adversity, intimate relationships–coping with life as it exists around us in all its richness–occurs within those four institutions.

Seen in this light, the goal of social policy is to ensure that those institutions are robust and vital. And that’s what’s wrong with the European model. It doesn’t do that. It enfeebles every single one of them.

And then comes Murray’s central thesis. Big government socialism, by taking responsibility away from individuals in the areas of importance and meaning, actually causes more problems than it solves. Murray calls this government involvement in these areas “taking the trouble out” of life.

Murray continues:

The problem is this: Every time the government takes some of the trouble out of performing the functions of family, community, vocation, and faith, it also strips those institutions of some of their vitality–it drains some of the life from them.

It’s inevitable. Families are not vital because the day-to-day tasks of raising children and being a good spouse are so much fun, but because the family has responsibility for doing important things that won’t get done unless the family does them. Communities are not vital because it’s so much fun to respond to our neighbors’ needs, but because the community has the responsibility for doing important things that won’t get done unless the community does them. Once that imperative has been met–family and community really do have the action–then an elaborate web of social norms, expectations, rewards, and punishments evolves over time that supports families and communities in performing their functions.

When the government says it will take some of the trouble out of doing the things that families and communities evolved to do, it inevitably takes some of the action away from families and communities, and the web frays, and eventually disintegrates.

…We have seen growing legions of children raised in unimaginably awful circumstances, not because of material poverty but because of dysfunctional families, and the collapse of functioning neighborhoods into Hobbesian all-against-all free-fire zones.

This next point is something I first read about in George Gilder’s book “Men and Marriage”. When the government steps in and takes away the responsibilities of a man, especially husband and father responsibilities, it destroys the male will to be a responsible contributor to society. If the welfare state awards money to women to raise children without the father, what honor is there in being a good man?

Earlier, I said that the sources of deep satisfactions are the same for janitors as for CEOs, and I also said that people needed to do important things with their lives. When the government takes the trouble out of being a spouse and parent, it doesn’t affect the sources of deep satisfaction for the CEO. Rather, it makes life difficult for the janitor. A man who is holding down a menial job and thereby supporting a wife and children is doing something authentically important with his life. He should take deep satisfaction from that, and be praised by his community for doing so. Think of all the phrases we used to have for it: “He is a man who pulls his own weight.” “He’s a good provider.”

If that same man lives under a system that says that the children of the woman he sleeps with will be taken care of whether or not he contributes, then that status goes away. I am not describing some theoretical outcome.

I am describing American neighborhoods where, once, working at a menial job to provide for his family made a man proud and gave him status in his community, and where now it doesn’t. I could give a half dozen other examples. Taking the trouble out of the stuff of life strips people–already has stripped people–of major ways in which human beings look back on their lives and say, “I made a difference.”

Murray’s article and Rich’s commentary continue, but for me this was the important point. When government distributes wealth, it gets involved in the decision-making of the most important areas of life: marriage, education, parenting, taxes, etc. Speaking as a man, when you take away choice and responsibility from me, you cannot expect me to engage in work or family or community in the same way I would if I were in charge.

By the way, I explained why European socialism leads to the decline of religion in a previous post.

Filed under: Commentary, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

5 Responses

  1. ECM says:

    Speaking as a man, when you take away choice and responsibility from me, you cannot expect me to engage in work or family or community in the same way I would if I were in charge.

    The problem is, that’s what socialism demands and that, apparently, is what at least half of Americans also want.

  2. This is all very theoretical. What does the data say?

    I don’t know about Europe, but the parts of the US that more resembled the western European social democratic states–e.g. New England have lower divorce rates. One could also spin a theory that the rigors of the market and the expectations for longer working hours and higher income push families and communities apart.

    • In New England, people are too immature to get married! Marriage takes faith and maturity. New Englanders are not mature enough to grow up and take on additional responsibilities like marriage and children.

      (I say this as someone who is is not only unmarried, but chaste as well! But I admire married people, and I would certainly get married if I met, say, an unmarried clone of Michele Bachmann). But there is never going to be another Michele Bachmann – the public schools and the repressive university campuses bully women into a worldview that is hostile to men, God, marriage and children.

      Regarding the last point, the reason why marriage is dead in Europe is because of the welfare state and the high tax rates. That was the point of it. The influence of feminism required women to get out into the workplace, and to get the things that a husband provides for “free” from the state: protection, support, health care, etc.

      Feminists decided that life was too insecure without a government sugar-daddy to take care of them no matter what they did in their relationships. They wanted to be able to engage in relationships with the worst kind of unreliable men, and when those relationships failed, they turned to the state for support. They thought that the men would keep on marrying them and wanting children with tax rates of 60%. They were wrong.

      I think I will post some articles by John Lott (showing how feminism grew the size of government) and by Stanley Kurtz (showing how democratic socialism destroyed marriage by turning people into children instead of responsible adults). When government lowers the cost of failure, more people fail, just like in the “Great Society” programs. And since the money is taken from the good people, fewer people are good.

      It may also be worth noting that in some quarters there is a great deal of unjustified concern over overpopulation, despite the fact that doomsday predictions by leftists have proven wrong at every turn. But what do you expect? This is the atheist equivalent of Left Behind novels. Too bad their religion is now forming public policies that destroy marriage and child-raising.

  3. [...] HOW SOCIALISM undermines family, community and the dignity of labor …. [...]

  4. [...] metaartiklar: äktenskap är antisocialistisk & patriarkism When the government steps in and takes away the responsibilities of a man, especially husband and father responsibilities, it destroys the male will to be a responsible contributor to society. If the welfare state awards money to women to raise children without the father, what honor is there in being a good man [källa] [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Click to see recent visitors

  Visitors Online Now

Page views since 1/30/09

  • 4,532,330 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,173 other followers

Archives

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,173 other followers

%d bloggers like this: