6 ms·

> a tight-knit family is the foundation of all other social structures. But you're missing an important part there: the "tight-knit" part doesn't just mean "st

> a tight-knit family is the foundation of all other social structures. But you're missing an important part there: the "tight-knit" part doesn't just mean "stays together no matter what". It means "genuinely care about each other and work well together." Yes, a close, loving, supportive family is hugely important, for everyone in it. But a) the nuclear family you're almost certainly thinking about (a married couple and their children) has not been the norm for the vast majority of human history (and certainly wasn't when Confucius was writing), and b) whether you have a nuclear family or not, when one or more of the relationships at the core of your family is dysfunctional and causing significant stress, breaking that relationship apart can be a big improvement for the family as a whole. (In fact, when you don't have a nuclear family, it's much easier and safer to do that, because you're much less likely to be losing half the income in the household, or the only stable adult-to-adult relationship in the household.)

zozbot234 5y ago
> Yes, a close, loving, supportive family is hugely important, for everyone in it. Telling people that it doesn't matter if they divorce and that they should put their own short-term happiness first and foremost is tantamount to denying this. And when it's the liberal upper class doing this, they're pretty much pulling up the ladder to effective social cohesion behind themselves, even as they hypocritically enjoy its benefits while denouncing the horrific plight of those most socially marginalized. The fact that some people in terrible relationships are genuinely better off if they split apart doesn't mean that celebrating divorce as anything other than potentially a lesser evil is a sensible idea.
- bandyaboot 5y ago
  This seems to be rooted in the notion that the liberal upper class benefits by having cohesive families while at the same time saying that divorce doesn’t matter and, in fact, celebrating it. I can’t help but ask you to support that, because it seems like a bizarre claim to me. The only type of person that comes to mind for me when thinking of people that celebrate divorce are people that have been divorced.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    > I can’t help but ask you to support that, because it seems like a bizarre claim to me. There's little about this claim that's "bizarre", and the OP brings relevant evidence. Celebrating widespread, no-fault divorce and dismissing the importance of household-scale social cohesion is indeed a key part of the current Zeitgeist amongst intellectual, often left-leaning elites.
    - bandyaboot 5y ago
      It’s quite possible I missed the relevant evidence as I skimmed through a lot of it. There was certainly a relevant supporting anecdote, but I assume you’re referring to more than that? I won’t bother responding to the part that is essentially “support through repetition”.
- atq2119 5y ago
  > Telling people that it doesn't matter if they divorce and that they should put their own short-term happiness first and foremost That's a straw man, though. Nobody relevant is telling people that. You're either not listening to the primary sources and are getting a distorted representation by politically motivated secondary sources, or your own biases are clouding your understanding when you're reading the primary sources.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    The BLM movement explicitly supports "dismantling of the nuclear family structure" as one of their goals. How many progressives have voiced support for BLM? How many have bothered to denounce and disclaim support for these peculiar aims, that seem to have remarkably little to do with benefiting Black lives, and that quite a few Blacks would themselves oppose?
    - skinnymuch 5y ago
      Explicitly? Where?
      - FFRefresh 5y ago
        They removed references to it from their website (I believe after backlash), but here's an archived link to it: https://web.archive.org/web/20200715132542/https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200715132542/https://blacklive... The relevant bit: > We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
        hairofadog 5y ago
        The key word you’re missing in your interpretation of that quote is “requirement”. I may love hiking, but I am not in favor of requiring hiking for everyone. I imagine this is in response to various conservative proposals over the years to put forth (straight) marriage as a solution to various unrelated societal ills.
- 88913527 5y ago
  A lot of this discussion seems to be wrapped up in the idea that the lower classes look up to the upper classes. Is there any evidence for this point? It seems to imply poor people unable to think critically and independently. Yet, there exists households of modest means where each partner holds their other half accountable-- yet nobody is talking about those people. What's different about them, and what differentiates them from other lower-class households that can't keep it together?
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    Because when people think critically and independently, they get called "deplorables", "bigoted" or "conspiracy nuts" by the liberal elite who don't like what they have to say.
    - skinnymuch 5y ago
      I’m with you on the wildly wealthy and also elite people like Ted Cruz or that Shapiro fella. Or Josh Hawley. Cant be more of a coastal elite than that! Even I’ve visited the mid west because I wanted to, for non political reasons, more than he has and he’s from Missouri. Which he fled from to go from one coastal elite institutions after another. Or that Tucker fella who a few weeks ago sarcastically brought up Biden paying off his Yale student debt. Even though Biden at most would do $10K debt relief. And Tucker is an heir while going to Yale as a wealthy person is as elite as you can get — no relation to the common person. Same issues with out of touch elites like Biden and Mrs Harris throwing every other struggling person in prison if it benefits them while pretending it is being tough on crime and prevailing justice. Or Pelosi, or the Clinton’s, and oh so many more. Pelosi with her “let me trade investments with possible insider knowledge as possible” heh.
    - 88913527 5y ago
      Conservative echo chambers are just as strong as liberal ones. You best be towing the party line with your thoughts when participating in any political affiliation.

zozbot234 5y ago

> Yes, a close, loving, supportive family is hugely important, for everyone in it. Telling people that it doesn't matter if they divorce and that they should put their own short-term happiness first and foremost is tantamount to denying this. And when it's the liberal upper class doing this, they're pretty much pulling up the ladder to effective social cohesion behind themselves, even as they hypocritically enjoy its benefits while denouncing the horrific plight of those most socially marginalized. The fact that some people in terrible relationships are genuinely better off if they split apart doesn't mean that celebrating divorce as anything other than potentially a lesser evil is a sensible idea.

bandyaboot 5y ago
This seems to be rooted in the notion that the liberal upper class benefits by having cohesive families while at the same time saying that divorce doesn’t matter and, in fact, celebrating it. I can’t help but ask you to support that, because it seems like a bizarre claim to me. The only type of person that comes to mind for me when thinking of people that celebrate divorce are people that have been divorced.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  > I can’t help but ask you to support that, because it seems like a bizarre claim to me. There's little about this claim that's "bizarre", and the OP brings relevant evidence. Celebrating widespread, no-fault divorce and dismissing the importance of household-scale social cohesion is indeed a key part of the current Zeitgeist amongst intellectual, often left-leaning elites.
  - bandyaboot 5y ago
    It’s quite possible I missed the relevant evidence as I skimmed through a lot of it. There was certainly a relevant supporting anecdote, but I assume you’re referring to more than that? I won’t bother responding to the part that is essentially “support through repetition”.
atq2119 5y ago
> Telling people that it doesn't matter if they divorce and that they should put their own short-term happiness first and foremost That's a straw man, though. Nobody relevant is telling people that. You're either not listening to the primary sources and are getting a distorted representation by politically motivated secondary sources, or your own biases are clouding your understanding when you're reading the primary sources.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  The BLM movement explicitly supports "dismantling of the nuclear family structure" as one of their goals. How many progressives have voiced support for BLM? How many have bothered to denounce and disclaim support for these peculiar aims, that seem to have remarkably little to do with benefiting Black lives, and that quite a few Blacks would themselves oppose?
  - skinnymuch 5y ago
    Explicitly? Where?
    - FFRefresh 5y ago
      They removed references to it from their website (I believe after backlash), but here's an archived link to it: https://web.archive.org/web/20200715132542/https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200715132542/https://blacklive... The relevant bit: > We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
      - hairofadog 5y ago
        The key word you’re missing in your interpretation of that quote is “requirement”. I may love hiking, but I am not in favor of requiring hiking for everyone. I imagine this is in response to various conservative proposals over the years to put forth (straight) marriage as a solution to various unrelated societal ills.
88913527 5y ago
A lot of this discussion seems to be wrapped up in the idea that the lower classes look up to the upper classes. Is there any evidence for this point? It seems to imply poor people unable to think critically and independently. Yet, there exists households of modest means where each partner holds their other half accountable-- yet nobody is talking about those people. What's different about them, and what differentiates them from other lower-class households that can't keep it together?
- zozbot234 5y ago
  Because when people think critically and independently, they get called "deplorables", "bigoted" or "conspiracy nuts" by the liberal elite who don't like what they have to say.
  - skinnymuch 5y ago
    I’m with you on the wildly wealthy and also elite people like Ted Cruz or that Shapiro fella. Or Josh Hawley. Cant be more of a coastal elite than that! Even I’ve visited the mid west because I wanted to, for non political reasons, more than he has and he’s from Missouri. Which he fled from to go from one coastal elite institutions after another. Or that Tucker fella who a few weeks ago sarcastically brought up Biden paying off his Yale student debt. Even though Biden at most would do $10K debt relief. And Tucker is an heir while going to Yale as a wealthy person is as elite as you can get — no relation to the common person. Same issues with out of touch elites like Biden and Mrs Harris throwing every other struggling person in prison if it benefits them while pretending it is being tough on crime and prevailing justice. Or Pelosi, or the Clinton’s, and oh so many more. Pelosi with her “let me trade investments with possible insider knowledge as possible” heh.
  - 88913527 5y ago
    Conservative echo chambers are just as strong as liberal ones. You best be towing the party line with your thoughts when participating in any political affiliation.