One of the obnoxious techniques used by "progressives" to rebuild society in their desired image is the redefinition of the English language.
And so it is with the word family. Indeed leftism identified the family as one of the obstacles that lay in the path of the implementation of its agenda many years ago. Those blessed with a good family life are more contented than those who are not. And therefore less inclined to rock the boat.
The Leftist agenda cannot proceed without a pool discontented and unhappy people, which is why the traditional institution of the family has been under assault for the past forty years.
An assault that has been all too successful it seems.
All this springs to mind with the latest brouhaha over Christine Rankin's appointment to the families commission, that political sop that Labour created to placate Peter Dunne.
And I cannot, for the life of me, see this commission doing anything to restore the traditional family to a place of preeminence in our culture. Which makes it totally pointless of course.
In Labour's tender hands it seemed to be intent on redefining the concept of family in new and novel ways, in addition to interfering in the manner in which normal families operate and co-operate.
Who knows how National will use it to further their aims? Everyone suspects that abolishing it is the answer, and given its sad history, I'd have to agree.
The sad thing is that many of those in their prime today who undervalue the family, and often mocking it will wake up one day, alone and quite possibly impoverished and wish they had had a family.
But by then it will be far too late and their only source of succor will be the state. Which will be far from emotionally nourishing assuming it can provide anything above barest nutrition at all. Perhaps not even that.
Surprised at your line of thought, Andrei. First, I think you should be talking about 'social liberal' redefinition of "family", not 'progressive' or 'leftist'. Support for civil unions, decriminalised prostitution, S59 changes, etc all came with cross-spectrum support from left- and right-wing liberals (Act to Alliance).
ReplyDeleteSecond, isn't it obvious that with the S59 referendum required to be held this year, the Nats (whose MP's and party officials seem to mostly be social liberals) want Rankin to shift the Families Commission into a pro-smacking advocate that they can then support (claiming to be following 'expert' and public opinion)? Allows Key to nicely duck the contradiction between most Nat party supporters pro-smacking views and Nat MP's voting for Bradford's law changes (albeit with the meaningless Key tweak).
Third:
"...wish they had had a family."Surely you are not suggesting the 'leftists' will get the state to supplant mothers a la Brave New World? hehe. I suspect it will be pretty hard for anyone to replace families, though the gay adoption crew are trying... ;)
erhaps you could ask Christine Ranking if she will get the Families Commission to finally define what a family is? I understand the reason they avoided this was to allow the 'family' redefinition to take place quietly under the radar.
The only thing I can think of that the Family Commission have done is save valuable dollars from the Women's Commission and the Women's Refuge by funding the white ribbon day appeal - the idea that men should wear a white ribbon to prove to women that they are against other men bashing women.
ReplyDeleteHardly a celebration of the family, but more an exercise in tax payer funded expenditure to state the bleeding obvious without actually changing anything, except perhaps sharing the blame out amongst men in general.