Want to reduce violence? Promote the Family.

the family

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. [from the 45 Goals of Communism].

Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh interviewed Heather MacDonald, author of the new book The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe. MacDonald is an expert on crime and crime statistics. During the interview, Rush asked her, “What role, if any, does economics in the inner city play in all of this?”

Her answer was enlightening [transcript from RushLimbaugh.com]:

MAC DONALD: Very little.
 
RUSH: Really?
 
MAC DONALD: Criminologists were just chomping at the bit during the 2008 recession thinking that this would prove their favorite root causes theory of crime that is driven by economic need. Crime continued to drop nationally through the recession to record lows. And it was dropping through the first half of 2014 when it made a rapid reverse course and began rising after the Michael Brown hoax in Ferguson, Missouri. The ’60s, 1960s, which was really the nadir of violent crime, we had a very strong economy. There is no connection. There’s people in the inner city today, the good, the clean people who completely avoid any involvement with crime. They have no involvement with the police because, as they tell me, I’m a good person. The cops don’t stop me.
 
That [economics] is an excuse. The people that are engaged in these mindless drive-by shootings, the kids in Chicago right now who are responsible for this year’s 50 percent increase in shootings that are killing four-year-old children, they have smartphones. I mean, the teen involvement in smartphone media and social media is a godsend to the police because they can track down all these crews. But these kids are not exactly hand-to-mouth struggle for subsistence. And it’s not the drug war either.
 
This is a breakdown of the family that is leaving kids without any socialization and any decent role models. They don’t have fathers. So to say it’s an economic problem, I think, is completely false and you have lots of Asian immigrants who are at much lower income than many people on welfare and their children are virtually not involved in crime because they have two parents at home that are teaching them academic discipline and respect for authority.

The breakdown of the family.

This is something I have been talking about for quite some time. We have had a significant shift since the advent of the misnamed “War on Poverty” that began 54 years ago. Prior to this “War on Poverty,” 22% of black children were born to a single mother. Today it is seventy-two percent.

The police aren’t a threat to the black community; the erosion of the family is. Guns aren’t creating the culture of violence and crime in the black community; the destruction of the family is.

For all of his talk about “reducing gun violence,” the one thing that Barack Obama never talks about is this complete breakdown of the nuclear family. Despite the fact that the one thing that would actually reduce violent crime significantly would be promoting the importance of intact families.

And yet.

Back in June of 2013, Barack Obama celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

I know! Some of you are stunned to discover that there has been a law in place that requires men and women to be paid the same amount for holding the same job. No word yet on whether Hillary is aware of this.

Any old how, I write about this particular event in my book Liberals Gone WILD!!! The Not-So-Silent Conquering of America. Here’s the relevant passage:

Circled by his latest array of human props — this time, naturally, just women — Obama said the following:
 
“Women are now the primary source of income for nearly 40% of American families. Forty percent — almost half. That’s not something to panic about or be afraid about. That’s a sign of the progress and the strides that we’ve made…” [Emphasis mine]
 
You know why so many women are the breadwinners? In part because so many people have lost their jobs. But also because in the United States, let me repeat, 72% of all black children are born into homes without a father present. And this, according to Obama, is a “sign of the progress and strides we’ve made.”
 
In 1960, the number of black children born into single parent homes was 22%. So, over the same 50 years that we’ve had this Equal Pay Act, the number of black children living in a home without a father has more than tripled. And, according to Barack Hussein Obama, that is “not something to panic about or be afraid about.”
 
Why?
 
Because, that was the goal.
 
That was the intended victory sought when Liberals pushed on us the “The War on Poverty.”
 
The war was not to defeat poverty, but to secure in the American culture a permanent, government-dependent underclass. To ensure that a large swath of the American electorate looked to Government as parent, husband, provider.
 
And that is a “sign of the progress and strides we’ve made” according to Obama.
 
Believe it or not. Obama was actually speaking the truth. For Liberals that is progress. For Liberals undermining the family is making great strides in the conquest of our nation.
 
Liberalism needs to destroy its enemies. And a well-defined family unit is one of Liberalism’s enemies. Because the family is at the heart of the civil society.
 
This explains the War on Poverty. This explains the push to permit homosexuals to “marry” each other. This is explains the fight to make available over the counter an abortion pill to girls of any age — thereby removing parental consent. This explains the desire to see our children as “part of the collective” and getting away from the “notion that your children belong to you.”
 
The family is a target.
 
Nothing that Liberalism does is about helping others or solving a problem. To the contrary, Liberalism’s tactics tend to cause the very problems they claim they want to solve.
 
War on Poverty? Are there fewer poor people today than in 1964? No. Even taking into account population increases, the number of people in poverty today is the exact same percentage as in 1964. Fifteen percent. Taking into account population increases, that means the total number of people in poverty is higher today than 1964.
 
The sad fact is, prior to the passage of the “War on Poverty,” poverty in the US was on the decline. Then, after 1964, it began to climb and climb and climb.
 
Liberals didn’t seek to solve poverty.
 
The Liberals’ goal was weaken the family unit and deepen the dependence on Government.
 
Poverty was the goal.
 
And, therefore, the Liberals’ War on Poverty was won. They did it! They have succeeded in creating a permanent underclass unmoored from the family unit — thereby divorced from the civil society. And when a population is divorced from the civil society, the sovereign individual is destroyed.
 
And Liberals need to destroy the sovereignty of the individual.
 
Every action it takes is taken to undermine the “notion” of individual sovereignty. From private gun ownership to education. From the one-on-one relationship between doctor and patient, to the cohesion of the family. Liberalism targets institutions that promote individual liberty and sovereignty.
 
Dependence on Government is a means to destroying the sovereign individual.
 
Dependence on Government, forcing the people to become pliant sheep makes conquering them ever so much simpler.
 
This is one of the reasons it astounds me to hear Conservatives say, “We have to stop talking about the social issues.”
 
Really?
 
It is the crumbling of a good and moral civil society that has led to rampant government dependency, the destruction of the family and a horrifying indifference to human life — not just the value of the lives of the unborn, but also the complete lack of the value of life among young people who can kill a guy just because they’re bored.
 
Our very culture and society is being deliberately weakened by Liberalism in an effort to conquer this nation from within. How easy it is to overtake a nation when you slowly, systematically destroy its very foundations — its system of government, its moral underpinnings, its commitment to life and the family.
 
All the things that stem from a civil society.

If black lives really mattered to the Black Lives Matter crowd, they would be promoting the family.

If black lives really mattered to Barack Obama, he would forget about “common sense gun control” and focus his attention on the importance of the family.

But he won’t.

If the percentage of black children born into a solid nuclear family were to increase, the need for government dependence would drop.

And for the Left, this is simply not acceptable.

On February 3, 2014, Bill O’Reilly interviewed Barack Obama on Fox News where they had this exchange:

O’REILLY: All right. But 72 percent of babies in African-American community are born out of wedlock.
 
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah.
 
O’REILLY: Why isn’t there a campaign by you and the first lady to address that problem very explicitly?
 
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Actually, Bill, we address it explicitly all the time. I-I’ll send you at least 10 speeches I’ve made since I’ve been president talking about the importance of men taking responsibility for their children. Talking about the importance of, uh, young people, uh, delaying gratification. Talking about the importance of, uh, when it comes to child rearing, paying child support, spending time with your kids, reading with them. So, whether it’s getting publicity or not is a whole different question.
 
O’REILLY: But —
 
PRESIDENT OBAMA: This is something that we focus on all the time.

What nonsense.

Notice what Obama says here in response to the fact that 72% of blacks are born to single mothers. He has given speeches on the importance of paying child support.

To Obama, a monthly child support check is a satisfactory replacement to actually having a father in the home, raising the children alongside the mother. How telling is this?

The prevailing attitude seems to be that within the black community, absent fathers is simply a cultural thing.

But it isn’t a cultural thing. It is a complete breakdown of the culture — a breakdown of the civil society.

When you are not raised in a solid, stable nuclear family, you become unmoored from the civil society. It is the civil society that respects the rule of law, recognizes right and wrong, respects private property and the lives of others.

In 1997 Clinical Psychologist Wade Horn spoke at Hillsdale College and in his speech he said:

Fathers are also critical to the proper socialization of children because they teach by example how to keep negative impulses in check. It is through boys’ observation of the way their fathers deal with frustration, anger, and sadness that they learn how men should cope with such emotions. It is also through the observation of how fathers treat mothers that boys learn how men should treat women. If fathers treat mothers with dignity and respect, then it is likely that their sons will grow up to treat women with dignity and respect. If fathers treat mothers with contempt and cruelty, then it is likely that their sons will, too. Fathers are also critical for the healthy emotional development of girls. If girls experience the love, attention, and protection of fathers, then they are likely to resist the temptations of seeking such things elsewhere—often through casual sexual relations at a very young age. Finally, fathers are important in helping children make the difficult transition to the adult world. Boys require an affirmation that they are “man enough.” Girls require an affirmation that they are “worthy enough.”

Remove the father and the family falls apart. Remove the family and the civil society falls apart.

And this is what we are seeing today, is it not?

We are watching our civil society crumble. Respect for others, respect for property, respect for the rule of law, respect for life — all of it has eroded.

For the Left, Government is a suitable replacement for the father. It should be provider, protector, and educator. This is what they have done for over fifty years. And what has been the result? A society and culture in disarray and division. Whole generations of people living in government dependence. A complete disregard for others. An indifference to the value of life.

Unless and until we turn our focus back on the family, no amount of government oversight or intrusion into education, welfare or local policing is going to make a damn bit of difference.

If you like the work at Patriot Retort, please consider contributing

Hit the tip jar DONATE button in the side bar. Even a few bucks can make a world of difference!

Books by Dianny:

RANT 2.0: Even More Politics & Snark in the Age of Obama,
Liberals Gone WILD!!! The Not-So-Silent Conquering of America,
RANT: Politics & Snark in the Age of Obama,
and two novels: Sliding Home Feet First and Under the Cloud

You can find my e-books at all of these fine stores: smashwords.com, Amazon Kindle Store, Apple iTunes, and Barnes & Noble Nook Store.

Check out DiannyTees.com

— my Conservative & Christian T-shirt Store.

Share, share, share

2 thoughts on “Want to reduce violence? Promote the Family.

  • July 10, 2016 at 7:43 am
    Permalink

    An excellent post.LBJ knew exactly what he was doing when he signed the civil Rights Act of 1964.by replacing the man in the household with a government check he set those less educated,less motivated to take the easy road.As he famously said:”this will keep the ni**ers voting democrat for 200 years.”There are far too many who are content to live on government largesse and turn to various and sundry hustles,crime and fraud to supplement what they are given for nothing.They have become willing slaves on the democrat plantation and I don’t see that changing anytime soon,if ever.

  • July 10, 2016 at 2:45 pm
    Permalink

    Another EXCELLENT POST! Thanks Dianny!

Comments are closed.