An Analysis of the Welfare State and the Destruction of the Nuclear Family: A Deconstruction of Socialist Conservatism
An Analysis of the Welfare State and the Destruction of the Nuclear Family
The societal consequences of welfare programs and intervention of the state into the family unit in modern America have worked as a system of pure destruction to the nuclear family. Under the presidency of Lyndon Baines Johnson we see that the expansionary welfare programs, first envisioned under the social democratic/Keynesian nightmare that was attempted by Franklin Roosevelt, were continued. What we saw from this was welfare program after welfare program, and a shift towards the now generally accepted, but wonderfully idiotic egalitarian “nature” that is propagated by governments, the elite, academia, and all those on the payroll of the state, a state which is not working for Americans or conservatives, and is unwilling to put America first.
The systems of Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, payments to single mothers, and other pushes towards egalitarianism were propagated as a result of a new socialist agenda by the intellectuals and the elites. The problem with such programs vis-à-visthat being the family unit is that such programs collectivize individual responsibilities. The family unit is substantially weakened when we consider that one is not likely/willing to have children if he can instead focus on the short-term pleasure. He may attain this from drug use or promiscuity and decide not to focus on the long term gain he acquires from having a wife and children to support him in his elder age- as anyone who does not have adequate economic plans for the future would have to do in order for him to live a comfortable elderly life. Furthermore, one is much more unlikely to even be in the economic situation where he finds it an intelligent choice to have children and get married if he knows that his future expenses are covered for him, as these expenses are viewed as a “public good” which he is entitled to because of some fictional social contract. Finally, one is
less likely to take care of their health and avoid damaging vices such as drugs, alcohol, drunk driving, or promiscuity if they know that this will be covered by government healthcare in their future (or if we put in place a socialized medical care system promoted by the current American far left). Even if we understood that it would be a useful and good system - which it certainly wouldn’t be - we would run into the problem that one is much less likely to avoid these unintelligent and high time preference behaviors if these individual responsibilities were covered by the collective.
We also run into further trouble with things such as food stamps and payments to single mothers. In this, we actually see the state subsidizing people who are participating in undesirable and short-sighted behavior. If you are a promiscuous woman who decides not to settle down and instead have intercourse, you get subsidized, and you acquire further subsidization with an increase in children. These programs require an egalitarian outlook on society. When they are implemented, we would see that those who are the useful members of society, those who fund the lifestyles of deviants, will be taxed, and therefore not be incentivized to lead a virtuous lifestyle and incentivized to lead a deviant lifestyle when their wealth is not only removed from them but given to those who are parasites, the bums, the dullards, the dumb and the lazy, those who are leeches on the useful members of society. These lifestyles can not continue unless funded by the state. The state funds deviancy by removing the deserved excess capital from the useful members of society, and giving it to the parasites via the means of compulsory taxation and funding welfare programs. Of course, the easiest way to rid ourselves of this attack on our family is to slash the welfare programs and slash taxation. A natural and private law society is the only one that can ever propagate a successful family unit.
A society in which the state takes the place of the natural patriarch, who gets that authority through his homesteading or renting of private property, will not last. The state is undermining the patriarch, the family's authoritarian leader, by intervening. Why is it that you cannot decide whether or not your family walks free during these tyrannical lockdowns, or stays locked in a house? Why is it that you are now confined to a set of schools, violent and ugly often enough, and school choice programs are being destroyed, and are being more and more restricted by the American far left? This is of course because one is no longer the true patriarch and property owner. When you are limited to the choices a state makes for you on a personal family matter like whether you and your family can go to a restaurant, or your child's school, or even if your child can go to school, you are no longer the true patriarch. When you are no longer able to voluntarily engage with whomever you want, and disengage with whomever you want, because of “discriminatory practices”, you are no longer a property owner. The state is the patriarch and the property owner. You are simply now a follower in “your” property which can be removed at any moment by the state. These powers must be returned to those who should have never lost them, the men who own property and who lead families.
With regards to alternative lifestyles, any forceful funding of such programs to propagate egalitarianism should be slashed, and those on the payroll of the state, the elite, and academia should lose that paycheck, and be ashamed to the point that they find real jobs, or out of society entirely. Society as a whole must not accept this push towards socialism and reject it as a push away from the family unit, a propagation of egalitarianism, a revolt against human nature.