The bourgeois family–the family as it exists today–is creepy as fuck. Every parent I've known develops some bizarre predilection with their child's sexuality, which stems from a sense of ownership over the child. You don't "own" your child. You're mandated by state to raise them.
The fact so many people view children as a burden is exactly why we need to annihilate the bourgeois family. And folks with kids don't feel any different, and they treat their kids accordingly. Raise kids in state-run boarding schools. Let people who like kids raise them.
>>2289341retarded take and also the amount of resources taken to raise children professional would be astronomical.
Better to just have social programs to help parents
>>2289390If raising kids professionally is astronomical, why then do we have schools and pediatricians?
>>2289487And yet, people whine about work being the same as prison and there's no criticism of that
>>2289395I think labor camps would be better.
Or make schools mainly blue collar.
>>2289355The modern invention of the nuclear family is responsible for a lot of the loss of worldly skills in the average person.
>>2289479If working class people are allowed to exaggerate the brutality of mundane service work, then yes.
If schools aren't prisons why are kids not allowed to go outside nor speak their mind?
Some schools for id kids from walking or biking to and from school.
>>2289476>>2289484>>2289498>>2289509>>2289507There are still key differences in coercion, agency, and power structures. Teachers and doctors, unlike cops or prison wardens, have both individual and collective agency—they can resist and organize against oppressive policies rather than solely enforcing them.
You're flattening all this with philosophical gibberish.
>>2289396>>2289507>>2289511giving parents a voucher is not the same as literally hiring an army of 24/7 nannies, psychologists etc.
And school systems just prove the point, look how expensive school systems are they're usually a local municipality's greatest expense, you have property taxes being raised solely to pay for school, why tax the people 15-20% more just to raise kids professional instead of making the people who fucked to create the kid raise it for free with maybe a slight voucher to help pay for food etc.
>>2289562Who says that parents don't abuse their children? This is honestly just anarchist projection.
>>2289525Maybe because the bourgeoise schooling system isn't actually designed for the benefit of individuals but to educate people enough for them to be able to consume products and preform labor to be exploited by this owners of capital and actually impactful knowledge of how the world functions is gatekept in bourgeois libraries and institutions. This is why every "public" university of pretty much owned and controlled by massive conglomerates who get to control what the curriculum is like anti communist propaganda and other slop that passes for actual education.
>>2289341few are ready for this trvthnvke but the family form is a microfascist power structure (read Anti-Oedipus) and straight
sex is inherently fascistic (read Homosexual Desire). reproduction should be illegal unless done by a surrogate for a living wage, and children should be raised collectively by the state. death to all straight "people"
Is the nuclear family a modern invention?
No, the nuclear family—consisting of parents and their children living together as a single household unit—is not a modern invention. Its core structure has ancient roots, observable across many cultures and time periods, though its prominence and definition have varied.
Archaeological and historical evidence suggests nuclear family-like units existed in ancient societies. For example, in ancient Mesopotamia (c. 3000 BCE), cuneiform records describe households typically centered on a married couple and their children, managing property and labor. Similarly, ancient Roman families often revolved around the paterfamilias, with a nuclear core of parents and children, even if extended relatives sometimes lived nearby or were part of broader social networks. Anthropological studies of hunter-gatherer societies, like the !Kung San, also show nuclear family units as a basic social structure, often embedded within larger kinship groups.
The idea that the nuclear family is "modern" often stems from mid-20th-century sociological theories, like those of Talcott Parsons, who argued it became dominant in industrialized societies due to urbanization and economic demands favoring smaller, mobile households. This led to a perception that pre-modern families were mostly extended, with multiple generations under one roof. However, data from medieval Europe, such as English parish records from the 14th century, shows many households were nuclear, with an average size of 4-6 people, often just parents and children. Extended families were more common in specific contexts—like rural, agrarian societies—but not universal.
That said, the idealization of the nuclear family as a self-sufficient, emotionally intimate unit is more modern, peaking in the 19th and 20th centuries with industrialization and the rise of the middle class. Victorian-era cultural norms and post-World War II economic prosperity in the West, particularly in the U.S., cemented the nuclear family as a societal standard, often tied to specific gender roles (e.g., breadwinner father, homemaker mother). This model was less common globally and even in the West before industrialization, where economic survival often required broader kinship networks.
Cultural variations also challenge the "modern invention" claim. In many non-Western societies, like those in sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia, nuclear family units often exist within larger extended family systems, showing flexibility rather than a new invention. For instance, in India, joint families are culturally significant, but nuclear households have long coexisted, especially in urban areas.
In short, the nuclear family as a living arrangement is ancient, but its cultural elevation as the "ideal" social unit is more tied to modern economic and social shifts, particularly in the West. If you want me to dig deeper into specific historical data or cultural examples, let me know.
Grok says that the nuclear family is not a modern thing after all.
>>2289726Communal family raising, often called communal child-rearing or collective parenting, involves a group of people—beyond just biological parents—collectively taking responsibility for raising children. This can occur within extended families, tribes, villages, or intentional communities, where child-rearing duties like caregiving, education, and socialization are shared among multiple adults or even the wider community. Below, I’ll break down its key aspects, historical and cultural examples, benefits, challenges, and modern relevance, keeping it concise but thorough.
Historical and Cultural Context
Communal child-rearing has deep roots across human history and cultures, predating the nuclear family’s prominence in some societies. It’s grounded in the idea that “it takes a village to raise a child,” a proverb often attributed to African cultures but reflective of many traditional societies.
Hunter-Gatherer Societies: Anthropological studies, like those of the Hadza in Tanzania or the Inuit in Arctic regions, show children were raised by extended kin and community members. Parents hunted or gathered, while others—grandparents, aunts, or unrelated adults—watched, taught, or fed kids. This ensured survival in harsh environments.
Ancient Civilizations: In ancient Sparta (c. 800–300 BCE), boys were raised communally in state-run systems (agoge) from age seven, prioritizing collective discipline over parental bonds. In many Polynesian cultures, children were often cared for by extended family or adopted informally by other community members, strengthening social ties.
Pre-Industrial Europe: Medieval village life often involved communal oversight of children. Parish records from 15th-century England show neighbors and kin sharing childcare tasks, especially in rural areas where economic survival relied on collective labor.
Non-Western Traditions: In many African societies, like the Igbo of Nigeria, children are seen as belonging to the community. Elders, siblings, and neighbors play active roles in discipline and education. Similarly, in South Asian joint families, grandparents and aunts often co-parent alongside biological parents.
Key Features
Shared Responsibility: Multiple adults (kin or non-kin) contribute to childcare, from feeding and teaching to emotional support and discipline.
Socialization: Children learn cultural norms, skills, and values from a diverse group, fostering adaptability and community ties.
Flexible Roles: Caregivers aren’t limited to parents; older siblings, grandparents, or community members may take on significant roles.
Economic Support: Resources like food, shelter, or labor are often pooled, reducing the burden on individual parents.
Benefits
Resilience: Children gain diverse role models and support networks, which studies (e.g., by anthropologist Sarah Hrdy) suggest can improve emotional and social development. For example, children in communal settings often show greater adaptability to stress.
Parental Relief: Shared duties reduce parental burnout, especially in resource-scarce environments. A 2010 study on the Efe foragers of Congo found mothers could work more efficiently because others helped with childcare.
Community Cohesion: Collective raising strengthens social bonds, as seen in kibbutzim (Israeli communes), where communal child-rearing historically fostered group loyalty.
Skill Development: Exposure to multiple caregivers can teach children varied skills, from practical tasks to cultural knowledge.
Challenges
Conflict Over Authority: Differing parenting styles among caregivers can lead to disputes. For example, in some African communal systems, tensions arise when elders enforce traditional discipline against modern parental preferences.
Diluted Parental Bonds: Critics, like sociologist John Bowlby in the 1950s, argued that strong attachment to primary caregivers (parents) is crucial, and communal systems might weaken this. However, cross-cultural data shows secure attachments can form with multiple caregivers.
Resource Strain: In poor communities, sharing resources can stretch them thin, as seen in some urban communes where overcrowding strains childcare efforts.
Cultural Resistance: In modern, individualistic societies, communal raising can clash with nuclear family ideals, leading to social stigma or legal issues (e.g., custody disputes in intentional communities).
Modern Examples
Kibbutzim in Israel: Until the 1980s, many kibbutzim raised children in communal children’s houses, with parents visiting daily. While most have shifted to nuclear family models, some still share childcare tasks like education and meals.
Intentional Communities: Modern communes, like the Twin Oaks Community in Virginia, practice collective child-rearing, with members rotating childcare duties to balance work and parenting.
Co-Housing: In places like Denmark or the U.S., co-housing communities design shared spaces where neighbors collectively supervise kids, blending nuclear and communal models.
Indigenous Practices: Many Native American tribes, like the Navajo, maintain traditions where extended family and clan members share child-rearing roles, emphasizing cultural continuity.
Urban Collectives: In some cities, parents form “parenting pods” (e.g., during the COVID-19 pandemic), sharing homeschooling or childcare to manage work-life balance.
Relevance Today
Communal raising is less common in industrialized societies, where the nuclear family is often idealized, but it’s seeing a resurgence in response to modern pressures. Rising childcare costs (e.g., U.S. childcare averages $10,000-$15,000/year per child) and dual-income households push some toward collective solutions. Posts on X highlight growing interest in “village-style” parenting, with users praising shared childcare for reducing stress, though some note logistical challenges like coordinating schedules.
However, cultural shifts toward individualism and privacy in the West can make communal raising feel alien or intrusive. Legal systems also complicate things—courts often prioritize parental rights over community roles, as seen in custody cases involving non-biological caregivers in communes.
Data Point
A 2018 study in Child Development found that children in communal settings (e.g., extended family households) showed similar or better social outcomes than those in nuclear families, provided caregiver consistency was maintained. This challenges the notion that nuclear families are inherently superior.
Conclusion
Communal family raising is an ancient practice, rooted in human survival and social structures, and remains relevant in various forms today. It offers resilience and support but faces challenges in modern, individualistic contexts. If you want specifics—like examples from a particular culture, data on outcomes, or how to implement it today—let me know, and I can dive deeper or even check X for real-time perspectives.
>>2289735The concept of "white genocide" is a white nationalist conspiracy theory claiming that white populations are being systematically replaced or eradicated through immigration, interracial marriage, or other means, often blaming Jewish people or global elites. It’s rooted in fear-mongering and has been used to justify extremist ideologies and violence, as seen in manifestos like those of Anders Breivik or Brenton Tarrant.
Is it real? No evidence supports the claim of a coordinated effort to "destroy" white populations. Demographic changes in Western countries—like increasing diversity due to immigration or differing birth rates—are driven by complex social, economic, and political factors, not a deliberate plot. For example, in South Africa, often cited as a case study, a 2025 court ruling dismissed "white genocide" claims as "imagined" and "not real." Crime stats show white farmers are not disproportionately targeted; farm attacks (averaging 50 murders yearly) are part of broader violent crime patterns, with robbery as the primary motive. Whites, about 7% of the population, represent under 2% of murder victims.
Is it based? The term "based" implies something grounded in truth or unapologetically bold. Since the theory lacks factual grounding and is steeped in racist propaganda, calling it "based" doesn’t hold up. It’s a narrative that distorts reality, often to incite fear or division. For instance, claims of "white genocide" in South Africa have been debunked by experts like Gareth Newham, who note no evidence of ethnically targeted violence exists. Posts on X also reflect skepticism, with users like @dramadelinquent
and even my own past responses calling it a myth tied to broader crime issues, not racial targeting.
If you’re referring to specific claims (e.g., South African land laws or cultural shifts), I can dig deeper, but the broader "white genocide" narrative is unsupported by data and often weaponized for political ends. Want me to analyze a particular angle or region?
>>2289390>retarded take and also the amount of resources taken to raise children professional would be astronomical.What the fuck are you talking about Jesse.
There's plenty to critique about it, but professional child raising would be
far more efficient than the individualist system of atomized nuclear families. Think of just the resources alone, how much more efficient it is to prepare meals in bulk, produce or buy supplies in bulk, buy and apply medication to children with the same illnesses in bulk. Think of the time wasted to teach each parent all the details of them raising a kid, each having to learn from their mistakes individually, the negative impacts on both the child and the parent from this redundant process.
I don't like the idea of Matrix human farms, but if nothing else they'd be
saving resources.
>>2289789prison and work can be compared
but school cant…?
your cognitive dissonance is showing
in fact, school is worse since its also unpaid, involuntary and you can even get shot up these days.
>>2290763school is also a mode of slavery.
thats my point.
>>2289531
mein gott, schools under capitalism are going to be instutions where you get literate enough to participate in society (as a wage worker). it's the baseline expected of average labor power. society has advanced that much that there is a need to have higher baseline expectation of the general population so that they may (under someone else's directive, if under capitalism) operate society. but it this sense they are progressive because a mediaeval peasant wouldn't be able to operate in modern society, for example.
now of course if you aren't retarded this makes sense because modern schools are developemnts of the prussian school which needed to exactly that - get a large population educated quickly so that they may operate with the state machinery, and even get some professionals quickly.
schools are, this is all very true, and especially with the bologna reform in europe, fordist assembly lines of average labor power and professional labor power.
are schools going to look like this under communism? probably not. the soviet union and china followed the model that historically worked to get on par with imperialists. that's understandable. how are schools going to be organized? probably something like yugoslavia's model + less nonsense taught (marx writes somewhere that children's education should also enhalt actual factory work - i agree!). so a more developed form of prussian schools. but this is, also, understandable (if you are not an idiot) because you have to construct socialism out of real existing things. you can't just imagine a new system ex nihilo.
and that's my main gripe with anarchist talking points like this (yes, talking about the 'end' of proletarian dictatorship (i.e. communism) and how 'that' would look like is anarchist because it's utopian) is that they contribute nothing to the real movement but just make it harder to make communism a mass movement by demanding that all members of the movement have an opinion on every retarded take you can think of.
>What we can now conjecture about the way in which sexual relations will be ordered after the impending overthrow of capitalist production is mainly of a negative character, limited for the most part to what will disappear. But what will there be new? That will be answered when a new generation has grown up: a generation of men who never in their lives have known what it is to buy a woman’s surrender with money or any other social instrument of power; a generation of women who have never known what it is to give themselves to a man from any other considerations than real love, or to refuse to give themselves to their lover from fear of the economic consequences. When these people are in the world, they will care precious little what anybody today thinks they ought to do; they will make their own practice and their corresponding public opinion about the practice of each individual –and that will be the end of it.
>>2292035>schools elevate labour power (by not teaching anyone any skills)does this also imply that immigrants cannot perform the labour fitted for people with over a decade of public schooling?
>medieval peasants couldnt perform contemporary wage slavery (like standing behind a desk)>mass educationwould you say the general population is "educated"?
>anarchismi never mentioned anarchism, freud, foucault, postmodernism or abolishing the family - yet all these kneejerk terms were thrown out at me because i simply questioned the legitimacy of the contemporary school system (by even praising an aristocratic system of boarding schools). see the issue? everyone is so quick to defend the status quo yet are hesitant to criticise it. you are doing the same with this bullshit pragmatics.
>>2292063>does this also imply that immigrants cannot perform the labour fitted for people with over a decade of public schooling?what do you mean? there are immigrants and there are immigrants. those poorer, less educated emigrate (as labor power, towards where the actual wealth is) and then work in 'lower class' jobs (no education sans elementary) or turn to crime (as poor people tend to). those immigrants coming from a comprador bourgeois or petty bourgeois background are not going to be part of this part. see the issue with lumping people into categories which obsfucate class?
>would you say the general population is "educated"?putting in under quotations makes it possible for you to continuously argue about the meaning of 'educated'. yes, the general population is more educated than the previous generations. yes, there are also more and more examples of bourgeois intellectuals mystifiying reality and selling crackpot education, but this is due to the system being in crisis
>i never mentioned anarchismyou don't have to, since honest communists can smell ideas stemming from petty bourgeois vagabundism.
>because i simply questionedoh you poor you oh boo hoo you and your simple questions
get a grip
>everyone is so quick to defend the status quo yet are hesitant to criticise it. you are doing the same with this bullshit pragmatics.socialism is built with real persons and real things already existing not with utopian ideas dreamt up by delusional anarchists. you can't even argue about the merit of this 'alternative schooling system' without, and let me put this very clearly, WITHOUT TAKING STATE POWER and actually PUTTING YOUR IDEAS INTO PRACTICE TO TEST THEIR VALIDITY. the prussian system produces educated workers quickly and efficiently. this will clearly be necessary under a proletarian dictatorship, in a worker's state, since you'll have to retrain thousands of technicians tied to dying industries (like oil) and you'll have to educate millions to upkeep and build green energy etc. the efficacy of the prussian system together with proletarian dictatorship (like in the ussr and china) has been historically proven to work and there's literally no reason to discover warm water all over again. once we actually get to the civilization level of the ussr (or near it) can we actually talk about new and improved things.
>>2292063>>2292148>the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy>the proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest,all capital from the bourgeoisiecentralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State>the State i.e. the proletariat organised as the ruling class>to increase the total of productive forces* as rapidly as possible>in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property by means of measures which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which necessitate further (!!) inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production. >these measures will be different in different countries>in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable>…>10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &cplease read the the festo ;__;
*this does not mean heavy industry, read the the german ideology
>>2289386It’s school but competent
Ok
>>2290763It's a (literal) joke, don't take it seriously.
>>2290358🍔
You don't have schools in your country. You have no right to speak on the subject.
>>2290358A lot of people here are mentally stuck in highschool and can't cope with the idea that schools are designed to do that. You try to raise serious qualms with school, bourgoise family structure, or anything else logistically involving children and they revert back to their discontent for not having the movie highschool experience^tm and make posts like this
>>2289529 to extinguish the conversaion they aren't mentally prepped to process.
>>2293307>A lot of people here are mentally stuck in highschoolAs opposed to retards who think complaining about school is communism.
Unironically grow up. Communists are against giving anyone rights in the first place. But with children in particular it's because they lack the mental faculties (so do many adults but that's besides the point) to comprehend the consequences of their actions. They must be protected from themselves and others.
Before you reply with some shit about how this authoritarian and elitist, yes it is. Letting idiots (and children are idiots at least temporarily) exercise their own judgment results in such wonderful things as the antivax movement.
>>2293307>>2290358Also, calling school worse than
jail is peak retardation.
>>2293313>>2293337 (me)
Oh it just occured to me you were talking about
>>2290358 , don't know why you quoted me for that.
>>2293311>As opposed toVibes and thing noticing
>Unironically grow up.Criticizing load-bearing institutions required to keep society running is juvenile?
>Communists are against Communism is a mode of production after socialism, schools will work different under socialism than under capitalism, and will work different under communism than under socialism, ad infinitum.
>Before you reply with some shit about how this authoritarian and elitist,Ah, you're a recovering(?) anti-tankie redditor. Read Max Stirner and Marx.
>>2293297>please stop criticising school even though i cant make a list of its benefits>>2292148>what do you mean?your claim is that 13 years of school raises the labour power of a nation by presumably teaching them skills. my claim is that school doesnt teach you skills, since immigrants can do most jobs in the west to the same rate that the natives can. you are then found in an error, where in fact, baseline labour power is not increased by education at all.
>yes, the general population is more educated than the previous generationseducated in what?
>oh you poor you oh boo hoothats a very odd response to my claim of questioning power. clearly you believe in a whiggish system of "progress" where things just get better on their own. thats why you dont want to disturb the plan.
>the prussian system produces educated workers quickly and efficiently.if that were the case, it wouldnt take 13 years to create barely-literate citizens.
>ussrthe failed russian experiment?
>once more assuming im an anarchistcite me where i criticise the idea of a state. you are just reactive, grasping onto explanations of how anyone could criticise the failing system of western capitalist schooling.
>>2294286so we shouldnt improve anything?
>>2295043>not going to school just gets you in trouble with your parentsno, if you dont go to school, your parents go to jail and you are forced to go anyway. you have no choice.
>>2295252so the ussr succeeded?
also, i havent gotten a single example of what is good about school yet.
>>2299531 (me)
Additionally, instead of this time wasting bs where you have a bunch of students in a class for a specific time and an acceptable % of understanding to pass the class, everyone could take the course in parallel, proceeding at 100% understanding of the prior assignment. This way there'd be no filler material to stetch a class into a semester's worth of stress.
If someone only knows 80% of their math that's a huge issue actually.
>>2289678Do you mean the nuclear family or just kinship structures generally?
>straight sex is inherently fascisticYes, but homosex is just as fascistic and totalitarian. Sexuality is totalitarian since it preaches the correct functional use of the body in public for the service of state and capital. If we are going to execute all straights we should also execute all homosexuals too. Since homosexuality is just inverted heterosexualism. The two are siamese twins that spread misfortune everywhere they go.
>>2317725That last tweet
>I might as well make sure my son has a pretty dick for me to look atNo wonder a deadbeat got her pregnant. I don't know she sounds fucked
>>2318619Did you not ever think that they became addicted to drugs and etc precisely because the lot in life assigned to them was to be a lumpen?
I'm almost bored of saying it but, this is an 18+ board.
Unique IPs: 65