Våre regler
Hvis du leser innlegg på VGD du mener er i strid med våre regler (les reglene her) kan du trykke på dette symbolet over det aktuelle innlegget. VG Nett vil vurdere om innlegget skal fjernes.

Kjernefamilie vs storfamilie

NYTT TEMA
Glurkelure
GlurkelureInnlegg: 1113
08.08.08 22:21
Innlegget under er egentlig skrevet for et annet forum, men det kunne være inntressant å høre hva folk her mener om saken også. Slik jeg tolker venstresiden har dere alltid vært tilhengere av den sosialdemokratiske kjernefamilien - men det kan hende jeg tar feil.

---------------------------------

What is better, the nucleus-family, or the grand family?

Fascism is a bit vague on its family-policy. Its support for wellfare-state solutions leads to the creation of small nucleus-families consisting of the parents and their children. A complete absence of social security on the other hand will probably lead to the re-establishment of the grand-family where a lot of people (20- 30 maybe) who all share the same last name live in big houses where old people and kids are taken care of by the unemployed people, and some of the woman in the house.

I like the idea of grand-families actually (seems nice and social, and if your parents are assholes there are uncles and aunts and siblings and grandparants there as well that one can relate to when being at home), but I think that in order to return to such a more oldfashioned family-structure one needs a liberalist policy that removes social security, and by doing it makes familymembers more dependent on each other. To remove social security will also be non--fascist as it will be non-totalitarian (See the discussion below this one)

What do people here think? Grand families or nucleus-families? Is the return to the more social and less state-dependent grand-families possible without removing the wellfare state? Sometimes I think that a liberalist dictatorship such as that of Pinochet will be the best partly because the lack of anny wellfare policy can create the grand-family structure, and partly because the destruction of these things are so painful for a state-dependent population that it can only be done by a dictatorship that does not depend on popular support - such as that of Pinochet.

Traditional fascism is closer to social democracy in its social policy. A book i read about fascism here the other day claimed that socialism does not have to be totalitarian, but that totalitarian must be socialist - if the author of the book (dont remember his name) is correct then the creation of the authoritarian and totalitarian state could not happen without at the same time creating the welfare-state.

Anyway, it seems that fascism will create a economic situation where nucleus-families becomes the norm (as it quickly became under social democracy). The family as a whole lives all over the country, and each pair of parents raise their kids alone, leaving a lot of responsibility for the kids to the state, because they are both out working. The alternative grand-family where they all team up under one roof will probably only be possible if social security is removed.

---------------------------------------------

Den engelske debatten om temaet kan følges her:
http://internationalfascistforum.yourbb2.com/nucleus-family-or-grand-family-t502
Goblin_9
Goblin_9Innlegg: 22066
08.11.08 12:48
Utviklingen fra storfamilie til "kjernefamilie" foregår i dag omtrent på likt i nesten alle slags samfunn, unntatt i stillestående agrarsamfunn og hos noen få stammer i urskogen. Årsaken er heller industrialisering enn en aktivt pådrivende ideologi.

Likevel vil jeg se kollektivismen i både den tyske nasjonalsosialismen, og i den kinesiske og den tidlige sovjetkommunismen, som et forsøk på å erstatte menneskers tilhørighet til slekt, familie etc med tilhørighet til kollektivet, uttrykt som en del av staten.
Klikk for å gå tilbake til toppen

Siste innlegg