Posted on 07/15/2021 12:41:30 AM PDT by CharlesOConnell
It is being generally acknowledged that capitalism and communism are two phases of the same thing. The twentieth century Financial Capitalists of Wall St. sponsored the Russian and Chinese revolutions, without which sponsorship they would have died in the cradle, to bring the great mass of humanity out of isolation in central and east Asia into the world money system.
You can't un-know that, now that you do. What is the opposite, not under the Hegelian thesis-antithesis-synthesis, but preceding and separate from this mind-trap of centuries?
What conservative sociologist Carl Clarke Zimmerman called, the Trustee Family society. It's what socialism is the enemy of. Working backwards from the end-stage breakup of our society, an increasing number of people aren't in any family, they're radical individuals, a pattern most popularized by J.J. Rousseau. Going backward another step, there are the Dad, Mom and 2.1 kids, the Atomistic family society, with marriages that are disposable at the decision to divorce by either individual, for any reason or no reason at all. Just after the Trustee family starts disintegrating, is an intermediate form before the atomization of society, that Zimmerman calls the Domestic Family society; it may be what our grandparents had when having as many as 10 children was common and you had dozens of cousins, all of whom had to take care of one another. There was at least token respect for the sanctity of the marriage vow.
“‘The Trustee family is so named because it more or less considers itself as immortal, existing in perpetuity, and never being extinguished. As a result, the living members are not the family, but merely “trustees” of its blood, rights, property name, and position for their lifetime.’ It’s not the nuclear family, or even the extended family, but all the members of the family in the past and the future as well as in the present generation. A sacred bond unites members in the present generation with the ancestors who gave them life; the same bond unites them with their future descendants, who will perpetuate the family name, honor, and worship. The trustee family envisions the family primarily in religious terms.”
“The domestic family describes a household based on the marital bond: husband, wife and their children. In such an arrangement, family members emphasize individual rights along with family duties.”
“In atomistic families, however, individual rights are exalted far above family bonds, and the family itself exists for the sake of the individual’s pleasure.”
(The isolated, alienated individuals in our society, when they become radicalized by conventional, socialistic mis-education/indoctrination in colleges and universities, are the main constituents of Antifa and BLM.)
But preceding this all was the Trustee family, which holds property in trust for its long generations, and resolves its governance internally, using its own culture, customs and laws in the absence of artificial, external governmental controls.
(Stories about the adoption of Sharia law, new in the United States and of longer standing in Britain, are just a local development in time of a pattern that has held sway over all of history. So when the British ruled Ireland, they allowed there to be the local administration of Brehan law. If a homicide were committed, the British would have to allow the local authorities to assess a fine against the members of the perpetrator's clan, rather than personally punishing him--his own clan would take care of that. It drove the British nuts. The same thing prevailed in the Ottoman Empire, local religious communities allowed to conduct their own internal justice in what was called the Millet System, as long as the minority communities respected the broader authority of the Caliphate, in national and international affairs. When France becomes Islamic, there will have to be provision for the Christian minority to exercise its own internal justice, presuming that the secular-atheistic French will become Muslims.)
The Trustee family has been the norm in all civilizations and cultures, for the majority of human history. Occasionally a strong government would take over when the Trustee family had disintegrated. It happened at various times in the separate histories of Greece and Rome. Greece was under family dissolution when the historian Polybius described how people were becoming so selfish they were refusing to have children, an abomination that is predicated on the ability to have sex without children, called pharmakeia in Greek, literally "witchcraft" after the old crone's practice of giving abortifacients. Roman society after went through a parallel dissolution a few centuries after its founding. The Germanic barbarians who were overrunning the Roman Empire still maintained the virtues of the Trustee family while facing the culturally dissolving Romans.
At the time the Germans were under siege by the temporarily, militarily superior Romans, their families would be observed coming along with the berzerkers to battle to scream, cheer and exhort them on to feats of honor and bravery, until the time that the Romans were finally over-run by the Germans, with their higher birth-rate and their militarily superior heavy cavalry based on saddle stirrups that allowed for the use of heavy lances without being ejected off the horse. It was out of this mix that emerged the early Middle Ages of the Benedicting Monasteries reclaiming wild lands, teaching people how to work, the serfs with more rights than factory workers in the industrial revolution cohering around the warrior-rulers in the manor houses, the Squires.
“It is being generally acknowledged that….”
The “appeal to consensus” is one of the weakest forms of the “appeal to authority” fallacy.
Yep and it goes down hill from there
Just a bunch of BS to fulfill his word contract and earn a buck.
Author has to be a recent graduate, or just an idiot. No, they are not on any such path. One is in that direction, the other, t’other. Geesh. How long did your poor Mom have to take potty training you?
This is set forth brilliantly in The Ancient City: A Study of the Religion, Laws, and Institutions of Greece and Rome -- by Numa Denis Fustel de Coulanges. Having read that, I am comfortable skipping the efforts of a contemporary sociologist. That said, his premise is solid.
Thank you for posting. He is right.
From the jacket.....
“Family and Civilization is the magnum opus of Carle Zimmerman, a distinguished sociologist who taught for many years at Harvard University.
In this unjustly forgotten work Zimmerman demonstrates the close and causal connections between the rise and fall of different types of families and the rise and fall of civilizations, particularly ancient Greece and Rome, medieval and modern Europe, and the United States.
Zimmerman traces the evolution of family structure from tribes and clans to extended and large nuclear families to the small nuclear families and broken families of today.
And he shows the consequences of each structure for the bearing and rearing of children; for religion, law, and everyday life; and for the fate of civilization itself.”
Forgot....published in 1947.
bump for later
Chesterton and Belloc recommended Distributism. It appears to be doing well in the Basque community of Mondragon in Spain. Also, there are a number of Distributist organizations who conduct regular conferences.
The socialists call the distributists capitalists, while the capitalists call them socialists. So there might be something there.
There is always Capital, therefore there is always Capitalism, it’s all about who controls Capital, the individual, or the State.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.