Posted on 02/25/2008 1:13:10 PM PST by Caleb1411
Civilization depends on the health of the traditional family.
That sentiment has become a truism among social conservatives, who typically can't explain what they mean by it. Which is why it sounds like right-wing boilerplate to many contemporary ears.
The late Harvard sociologist Carle C. Zimmerman believed it was true, but he also knew why. In 1947, he wrote a massive book to explain why latter-day Western civilization was now living through the same family crisis that presaged the fall of classical Greece and Rome. His classic "Family and Civilization," which has just been republished in an edited version by ISI Press, is a chillingly prophetic volume that deserves a wide new audience.
In all civilizations, Zimmerman theorized, there are three basic family types. The "trustee" family is tribal and clannish, and predominates in agrarian societies. The "domestic" family model is a middle type centering on the nuclear family ensconced in fairly strong extended-family bonds; it's found in civilizations undergoing rapid development. The final model is the "atomistic" family, which features weak bonds between and within nuclear families; it's the type that emerges as normative in advanced civilizations.
When the Roman Empire fell in the fifth century, the strong trustee families of the barbarian tribes replaced the weak, atomistic Roman families as the foundation of society.
Churchmen believed a social structure that broke up the ever-feuding clans and gave the individual more freedom would be better for society's stability and spent centuries reforming the European family toward domesticity. The natalist worldview advocated by churchmen knit tightly religious faith, family loyalty and child bearing. From the 10th century on, the domestic family model ruled Europe through its greatest cultural efflorescence. But then came the Reformation and the Enlightenment, shifting culture away from tradition and toward the individual. Thus, since the 18th century, the atomistic family has been the Western cultural norm.
Here's the problem: Societies ruled by the atomistic family model, with its loosening of constraints on its individual members, quit having enough children to carry on. They become focused on the pleasures of the present. Eventually, these societies expire from lack of manpower, which itself is a manifestation of a lack of the will to live.
It happened to ancient Greece. It happened to ancient Rome. And it's happening to the modern West. The sociological parallels are startling.
Why should expanding individual freedoms lead to demographic disaster? Because cultures that don't organize their collective lives around the family create policies and structures that privilege autonomous individuals at the family's expense.
In years to come, the state will attempt economic incentives, or something more draconian, to spur childbirth. Europe, which is falling off a demographic cliff, is already offering economic incentives, with scant success. Materialist measures only seem to help at the margins.
Why? Zimmerman was not religious, but he contended the core problem was a loss of faith. Religions that lack a strong pro-fertility component don't survive over time, he observed; nor do cultures that don't have a powerfully natalist religion.
Why should we read Zimmerman today? For one thing, the future isn't fated. We might learn from history and make choices that avert the calamities that overtook Greece and Rome.
Given current trends, that appears unlikely. Therefore, the wise will recognize that the subcultures that survive the demographic collapse will be those that sacrificially embrace natalist values over materialist ones — which is to say, those whose religious convictions inspire them to have relatively large families, despite the social and financial cost.
That doesn't mean most American Christians, who have accepted modernity's anti-natalism. No, that means traditionalist Catholics, "full-quiver" Protestants, ultra-Orthodox Jews, pious Muslims and other believers who reject modernity's premises.
Like it or not, the future belongs to the fecund faithful.
This is an amazing family, Christians, and what a family should be. They’re so well organized, they homeschool, they built their own large home together, they really love each other. Great family.
Seeing the mistakes so many of our children make, I think mothers should arrange marriages for their children with people they know are people of integrity, etc. I can dream, can’t I?
I tried to do that too. All three wanted tube socks but I could always tell who belonged to the ones with holes all over the bottom!
We have large families in our church. One older pair had 12, several have between 6 and 7, we have babies born every year. One of our young women had a baby about 18 months ago and is expecting again. These are great parents with sweet children (for the most part).
I hate that. I have a grandson who my son adopted when he married his mother and he is just as much my grandson as my other 10 are. Another grandson is marrying a lovely young woman with a sweet little boy and he’ll be my great grandson. My grandmother played favorites with two of us (out of four children) and it ruined lives. I’ll never do that.
Good for them. Somebodys got to do it, but that’s not me. :)
I have three sons but I don’t have ‘happy holidays’ with them. One is a Bahai and doesn’t really celebrate Christmas, one always goes to mother-in-law’s house (never ours), and one does invite us over for dinner which is nice. It’s like pulling hen’s teeth to get the two who live near us together for a family christmas. Ends up near February!
I have three sons but I don’t have ‘happy holidays’ with them. One is a Bahai and doesn’t really celebrate Christmas, one always goes to mother-in-law’s house (never ours), and one does invite us over for dinner which is nice. It’s like pulling hen’s teeth to get the two who live near us together for a family christmas. Ends up near February!
Wouldn’t be me, either. They’re well suited for their big family. I wouldn’t have been.
We had a brief snow flurry here this morning. Bill told me volcanic ash was falling :-).
Very insightful comments.
The people I know regard marriage as a sacrament. Divorce is not unknown but it is not entered into lightly and is quite rare.
In these families there tends to be a strong Christian foundation that is taught to children literally from the cradle. Among the lessons are a strong work ethic and no tolerance for alcohol or drugs. That said there are certainly children who do not take these things to heart and rebel or disappoint. But in the main the children I know are good citizens who revere God, value work and seek education.
The key is faith and in parents who actually live that faith. These parents teach by example and children tend to take such teaching to heart.
You are right. Faith is the key. It is amazing how much difference a genuine faith in God and parents who really live their faith can make in the quality of a marriage and in the lives of children.
1. Easy divorce where the husband is automatically assumed to be at fault and is severely economically punished by the legal system at the whim of the woman.
and
2. Kids who turn out to be bums (too lazy to work around the house or get a job, too irresponsible to hold a job, drink alcohol, smoke dope, get pregnant out of wedlock to guys who can't support them, etc. etc.).
Yes, you have hit the nail on the head. The only way to overcome these problems is to live outside of mainstream US society. There is absolutely no way you can have your wife watching Oprah and your kids watching MTV and think that you will have a happy outcome from your efforts at building a family. There are those who criticize "isolation," but in today's society, it's the only possible answer.
Tax-chick; Mrs. Don-o; MinorityRepublican; scory; Maximilian
Thanks for your rersponses.
It does figure that to be sucessful at a long term marriage and raising kids you would have to pretty much be immune to being influenced by what passes for the “common wisdom” of mainstream society. And the less exposure to the mainstream media / entertainment these days the better.
Tax-chick; Mrs. Don-o; MinorityRepublican; scory; Maximilian
Thanks for your rersponses.
It does figure that to be sucessful at a long term marriage and raising kids you would have to pretty much be immune to being influenced by what passes for the “common wisdom” of mainstream society. And the less exposure to the mainstream media / entertainment these days the better.
Well, I think I just have got these double posts figured out.
You hit the Post button and nothing appears to happen. So you hit it again. Then something happens and it’s two posts...
Well, I think I just have got these double posts figured out.
You hit the Post button and nothing appears to happen. So you hit it again. Then something happens and it’s two posts...
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.