|
V. Illych L. posted:nah there's a real current in radical left thought that goes along the lines that the nuclear family is an inherently conservative institution which undermines solidarity etc. small family groups have a whole bunch of awful effects from inheriting wealth to patriarchal poo poo to ghettofication as those with means move according to school district so it's not surprising that people start thinking of alternatives. the kibbutzim did lots of experiments with communal child rearing, fascinating stuff - but the state socialist solution would likely be simply pushing the family out by providing subsidised creches, full-day schools etc The creche system doesn't abolish the family. It's daycare4all. Where do the kids sleep in this society? If don't they sleep near their parents, I'm not interested. If they don't wake up near their parents, I'm not interested. If they spend a large part of the day with other children and other adults who are not closely related, that's great. But that's just daycare. gently caress boarding schools. The British do that, it doesn't work.
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
bike tory posted:The only people who would actively want to live in a space like that if something bigger were available are deluded libertarians and maybe people with sensory processing difficulties like some people on the autism spectrum. And apparently a few posters itt. Option #3: The Demoralized. Shipon posted:It doesn't matter what economic system we live under, we can't have housing in the form of McMansions or even most "luxury apartments" for everyone because it's not environmentally sustainable You know, I'd like to see footprint modeling for the following scenario: 'Affluence is offloaded onto public spaces.' Model everyone living in skyscrapers full of coffinboxes but every building lobby looks like:  No one has kitchens but cafes and automats are at-cost baroque palaces. No one has gardens or lawns but parks are everywhere and look like Lord of Rings poo poo. You wake up in your walk-in closet then 20 minutes later step out into:  Except add 200 people to each photo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:The creche system doesn't abolish the family. It's daycare4all. Where do the kids sleep in this society? If don't they sleep near their parents, I'm not interested. If they don't wake up near their parents, I'm not interested. If they spend a large part of the day with other children and other adults who are not closely related, that's great. But that's just daycare. gently caress boarding schools. The British do that, it doesn't work. it's motivated by a drive to make the family less and less relevant. the logical conclusion is the gradual abolition of the family unit - but the intuitive policy is to implement whatever's easiest first, and everyone likes not having to deal with kids having to be home (literally every stakeholder except for some taxpayers love this) there's no particular reason why one or two biological parents should be the optimal way to rear children, and many radicals will tend to reject appeals to tradition etc, so a policy basically hostile to the family unit doing things and, in the final extent, existing at all is to be expected. one of the things kollontai tried to do in the soviet union was free universal daycare, specifically as a way of attacking the nuclear family this is not to say that you can't believe in the nuclear family and be a good communist, simply that opposition to the nuclear family is a real thing on the radical left for many reasons, some of which are actually very good
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:32
|
|
|
Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:The British do that, it doesn't work. Of course it works, it's successfully perpetuated the ruling class institution of pederasty for hundreds of years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
They aren't good, and the Soviet model just led to a whole bunch of hosed up kids.
steinrokkan has issued a correction as of 00:40 on Nov 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
The nuclear family has led to a bunch of hosed up kids too 
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
It takes a village to raise a village idiot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
Marenghi posted:I find it weird that American grocery stores employ bag boys. They double up as cart monkeys because god forbid some old gently caress take their loving cart back up and move their fat loving rear end a few more feet. Source: I was a cart monkey.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
abolish families, abolish compulsory gender, all caretakers are rigorously screened and volunteer to be a parent to a group of 4-8 children at once from birth (preferably test tube) to age 24 or so. Meals and such are shared in large refactories, and education is largely focused on community work that's safe for the age group and e-learning, built with the full resources of humanity. we must destroy every social institution that coexists with capitalism. Even whatever gotcha you want to own me with ps. we have at most one more generation to do it or die
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
so Brave New World without the alcohol
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
all HVAC systems are also connected to industrial scale weed vaporizers that constantly hotbox the building
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:02
|
|
|
I mean so far it sounds pretty drat good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
more *clap* kids *clap* with *clap* reactive *clap* attachment *clap* disorder anyway, it's actually very good that jobs like grocery baggers and cart returners exist, and we'll need a lot more things like that if we're going to have something like a national jobs program
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
Yeah nothing better than paying people minimum wage for hours of useless busywork, I'm sure that will cover all their living expenses and provide meaning to their lives.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:14
|
|
|
It could be worse! https://twitter.com/dannoyes/status/1190326077391917056
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
Colonel Cancer posted:Yeah nothing better than paying people minimum wage for hours of useless busywork, I'm sure that will cover all their living expenses and provide meaning to their lives. I agree with you that the minimum wage should cover people's living expenses, and not every job is a career or needs to be. However, having a place to go every day where you interact with other people, develop relationships with coworkers, and have a sense of being able to provide for oneself can be incredibly valuable. I guess you could argue it's a good thing that cashiers are getting replaced by robots, but gently caress that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:19
|
|
|
etalian posted:It could be worse! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl8eJTRKOIc
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:19
|
|
|
Colonel Cancer posted:Yeah nothing better than paying people minimum wage for hours of useless busywork, I'm sure that will cover all their living expenses and provide meaning to their lives. Cool anti-labor sentiment. Just because we do work helping people and are underpaid doesn't mean the work itself is inherently meaningless or bad. Little tired of folks work-shaming people because they conceptually can't handle and pathologically undervalue service work due to some purestrain loving capitalist "just do it yourself lazy loser" rhetoric. D.Ork Bimboolean has issued a correction as of 01:31 on Nov 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
etalian posted:It could be worse! Claw back all dividends and stock buybacks for the last ten years, then seize the utility and turn it public.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
Under the current system such work doesn't provide adequate pay, celebrating it is like clapping for low paying no benefit part time job growth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
Colonel Cancer posted:Yeah nothing better than paying people minimum wage for hours of useless busywork, I'm sure that will cover all their living expenses and provide meaning to their lives. This is different. "Useless busywork" are tasks that are being done far more often than necessary (like continuously cleaning or checking something) or tasks that don't need to be done at all, just to artificially keep a person working. But groceries do need to be bagged and carts to need to be returned. Someone, at some point, has to do these things. The variable here is who does the work, either the individual customers, or dedicated staff. These are actually great things to promote if you were trying to fill some kind of jobs program. In general, anything that can be described as "work that does actually need to be done, by somebody, or things don't work" are great jobs program ideas.Just the fact that it translates to something actually being accomplished puts it above so many bullshit jobs that people do right now, even if it's mundane or in-glamorous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:32
|
|
|
Colonel Cancer posted:Under the current system such work doesn't provide adequate pay, celebrating it is like clapping for low paying no benefit part time job growth. That is the fault of the system, not the work. Someone still has to clean toilets, pick up trash, wash windows, etc even if its part time. People are comparing actual useful, tangibly productive labor to bullshit non-work because of a lovely attitude/perception. D.Ork Bimboolean has issued a correction as of 01:35 on Nov 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:32
|
|
|
The odd thing about the USA having grocery baggers is that they have them at all. That poo poo will be done for free by the people buying groceries. Saving $20k a year on wages has to be worth at least $50k in bonuses to execs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:more *clap* kids *clap* with *clap* reactive *clap* attachment *clap* disorder We need to move past something like a national jobs program, and towards something along the lines of "people doing what they think is worthy of their time instead of some humiliating busy work as slaves to the corporations"
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
Buckminster Fuller said it better than anybody: "We should do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian Darwinian theory he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living." Until we can recognie this as the goal of our civilization, we are always going to engage in cruelty and violence and class based terrorism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:nah there's a real current in radical left thought that goes along the lines that the nuclear family is an inherently conservative institution which undermines solidarity etc. small family groups have a whole bunch of awful effects from inheriting wealth to patriarchal poo poo to ghettofication as those with means move according to school district so it's not surprising that people start thinking of alternatives. the kibbutzim did lots of experiments with communal child rearing, fascinating stuff - but the state socialist solution would likely be simply pushing the family out by providing subsidised creches, full-day schools etc this is not radical left thought. it is at best radical left of center thought. all of the above effects are exactly what marx meant when he was talking about abolishing the family and the place of women
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:this is not radical left thought. it is at best radical left of center thought. larry you loving dolt
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:49
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:this is not radical left thought. it is at best radical left of center thought. all of the above effects are exactly what marx meant when he was talking about abolishing the family and the place of women Is othodox Marxism considered moderate leftism these days?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
Inceltown posted:The odd thing about the USA having grocery baggers is that they have them at all. That poo poo will be done for free by the people buying groceries. Saving $20k a year on wages has to be worth at least $50k in bonuses to execs. It is a very high volume business, that interacts face to face with consumers buying in bulk, often for one to two weeks worth at time. The faster you can get all their stuff bagged and into their vehicle to let them drive off to open up a precious parking spot the better. This is doubly so for older/handicap folks who need more assistance than most and would otherwise find it almost possible to shop alone in any timely manner if at all. More people and more product per hour the higher your revenue. That 20k/y bagger/cart-getter/etc probably does 50k/y worth labor, not including all the minor/odd jobs they usually get tagged into.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:52
|
|
|
In short, people should be exterminated based on the social milieu in which they grew up, which is largely generational.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Is othodox Marxism considered moderate leftism these days? im not sure how the monster of inherited wealth is supposed to rear its head after we destroy inheriting stuff and also wealth
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:im not sure how the monster of inherited wealth is supposed to rear its head after we destroy inheriting stuff and also wealth Which is not a radical position?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 02:01
|
|
|
Slightly more numbers, numbers, numbers! Want Walton Family rich? Underpay labor on a fabulous scale! How much labor and how much are they underpaid? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 02:14
|
|
|
How am I supposed to shoplift $124,000 per day? This is bull
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
Woof Blitzer posted:How am I supposed to shoplift $124,000 per day? This is bull Join a shoplifting union.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 04:21
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:it's motivated by a drive to make the family less and less relevant. the logical conclusion is the gradual abolition of the family unit - but the intuitive policy is to implement whatever's easiest first, and everyone likes not having to deal with kids having to be home (literally every stakeholder except for some taxpayers love this) this hostility to the family unit ended up manifesting itself in some extremely destructive and harmful ways under governments influenced by left philosophy. I think steinrokkan was alluding to this when he said the Soviet model led to a lot of hosed up kids. One example of seeking a gradual abolition of the family unit was a sometime hostility to the adoption of orphans and a preference to keep them in institutions where their upbringing could be left up to the state. There was also more pressure to institutionalize special needs children than in the west. Of course These orphanages were typically severely underfunded and many children inside ended up getting much less social interaction and care than they needed, and the result was they ended up developing much more severe developmental problems than if they had been raised in families. Bulgaria in particular stood out for hurting a lot of kids like this. The state that would implement the most extreme anti-family policies however would be Democratic Kampuchea under the Khmer Rouge. Pol Pot sought to completely remake Cambodian society and did not spare the family. Men and women were made to live separately. Marriage was compulsory and existed only for the purpose of reproduction. Young adults were be married in mass to anonymous partners and consummation would be guaranteed at gunpoint. Children were separated from their parents as soon as they were fit to work and enrolled in the army or work battalions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MIMOySmCZA
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 04:36
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:i know your joking but i hate it so much when New Leftists interpret this as some kind of destruction of gender roles thing, which it is, but not in the modern sense. it's about abolishing the idea of a family where you have a head of household and a subordinate partner who's primary duty is producing and raising children. its about seizing the means of human reproduction from capitalist society. Capitalism neatly reproduced this. It’s financially unviable for one parent to stay at home. So both parents have to work and this requires the children to be placed in childcare, though this takes up the bulk of the second parents income and the little remaining covers the rent one worker cannot provide. I’ve spoken to so many working parents in my career who’ve uncritically talked about mothers taking up employment just to get out of the house, because the income just covers childcare.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 04:42
|
|
|
Shipon posted:It doesn't matter what economic system we live under, we can't have housing in the form of McMansions or even most "luxury apartments" for everyone because it's not environmentally sustainable From what I know, the most environmentally friendly thing is almost always to use what already exists and has been produced instead of pouring resources into new construction/production. So just use the apartments and houses that already exist, pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 05:09
|
|
|
The most environmentally friendly thing you can do is kill (and possibly eat) the rich.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Marenghi posted:Capitalism neatly reproduced this. This exact situation is probably why I'm so uh, anti-anti-family. Communism would have meant I had parents, instead of mostly-absent divorced drug addicts who had much bigger problems to deal with
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 05:24
|
|