Attempts to legitimize the destruction of the nuclear family continue apace. This time the monstrosity of the argument is presented in virtual Technicolor glory by New York Magazine. In a featured opinion piece titled “Children Are Not Property” by Sarah Jones, a senior writer for the magazine’s politics coverage treats readers to an argument that is so predictably absurd some have wondered if it is actual satire or even written by artificial intelligence.
But sadly no, we must presume that Jones actually sat down and wrote the screed declaring parents threaten the well-being of children and somehow a bunch of strangers unrelated to children are a better alternative to raise and influence the most vulnerable among us. After the public school/teacher’s union debacle with our children and the continuing obsession with teaching them to be racist and transgender, you will be forgiven if you laughed out loud spurting that milk you were drinking through your nose. You’re not alone.
Jones writes: “Like any piece of property, a child has value to conservative activists. They are key to a future the conservative wants to win. Parental rights are merely one path to the total capture of state power and the imposition of an authoritarian hierarchy on us all. So it’s no surprise that children have long been a fixation to the right wing.” Moreover, as the New York Post reported, she bleats “’right-wing Christians’ have embraced the parental rights movement in a bid to mold their children how they choose, ‘much like any domesticated animal.’”
I didn’t know the environment in which Jones was raised, but in her screed against parents she confesses, “There is no way to control a child forever. My parents learned that much. I hid books from them and discovered different ways of thinking through literature and furtive online searching. In relatively short order, I became an atheist and a socialist…” Surprise! Said no one ever.
Newsflash for Jones, parental rights are a fixation for…parents. Not everything is political. It’s actually called “instinct” and “responsibility” transcending partisanship and yes, even faith. No matter the bizarre insistence by the left, loving and protecting your children is human instinct and a virtue informed for millennia. It is one of the instant, and most important, instincts for all living creatures.
The arguments by the left that children don’t belong to their parents but to the “community” is an old, tired, and dumb idea. Not so long ago, Hillary Clinton tried to normalize it with her “It Takes a Village” book and soft argument that children belong to everyone. What has to wonder if Clinton’s friend Jeffrey Epstein used that argument on occasion.
Of course the irony of this argument is missed by the writer. While Jones condemns the idea that parents have a special and unique bond with and have a right and an interest in instilling their values in their children, the argument here is not that little kids should be thrown unattended into the woods to fend for themselves. No, she and the left argue that adult influence should be transferred from parents to uninterested state agents.
Like everything else spewed by the left, this is not just idiotic, it’s dangerous and destructive. It’s also very revealing of the left’s lack of confidence and illustration of their own parasitic nature that they are reduced to attempting to take and control the children of society. This is only necessary when you represent something that repulses every civilization you attempt to consume.
The overall attempt by the American left to convince people that children are better off with strangers should be viewed as an attempt to legitimize the psychological and eventual physical kidnapping of children by the state.
Totalitarian societies throughout history have resorted to state-based kidnapping in order to maintain power. From Stalin, to Hitler, to Cambodia’s Pol Pot, Romania’s insane Ceausescu, and even most recently with the Russian kidnapping of Ukrainian children for transfer into Russia, the left always needs brainwashed foot soldiers and the only way you get that is when you start with children.
We know this anti-parent and anti-family obsession is nothing new, but we must take note that this renewed effort is public and blatant. The fact that this putrid piece of garbage showed up in a magazine that, while liberal, still has some respect in American culture, should raise a giant red flag that this craven mission has now metastasized even further into the national conversation. Several people at a major American magazine saw this article and thought it would be fine to publish and that it would be fine to be associated with it.
The good news is the vast majority of Americans reject this madness and understand the dangerousness of it. It is a very few people strategically placed in certain public cultural elements, like magazines, newspapers, legacy media, and education, that move along these little improvised cultural explosives in an attempt to make it appear as though this is a natural, accepted argument.
Nothing of course could be further from the truth but it is important to recognize that all it takes is a few people in strategic positions to destroy a country. The Germans learned this, the Russians learned and perhaps are learning it again, as have the North Koreans, the Cambodians, the Cubans and so many others who were taken to the cleaners and then to the wood-chipper by a few well-placed disturbed leftists whose mission is to destroy everything that is good.