Permanently Deleted
Just change material relations and let people work out a family structure that suits the new relations. It took generations for the nuclear family to emerge under capitalism, and it will take generations for whatever replaces it to emerge. It's a bad idea to consciously try to change or abolish current family relations, because the experiments that have been done in that area have been very poor.
you say you don't want people to have power over the family structure, yet you want the power to change it? Interesting.
Also you need to think materially as the person above says. The economic base will influence the family structure, not the other way around.
Why allow strictly only female biological parenthood? If the goal is communilized upbringing why would sex or sexual preference matter especially in a utopia? Wouldn't that only make a favored (or higher social class standing) parent in this new social order and only serve to support an existing biological hierarchy? Can men adopt in this imagined future? How would potential lgbt parents fit into this? What happens to child abusers in institutionalized settings? They usually protect the systems frame work and their people instead of individual victims. Last question. So, what made you want to join hexbear 2hrs ago? Nuclear family needs to be changed but through class struggle solidarity in the environment of massive social change.
And after the bonding infancy and toddler stages for developmental purposes of course but one reason why the nuclear family is so strongly inscribed into post modern era politics is the degree of alienation and individualization people feel in contemporary society. For many people, in the ruins of all social institutions, the family is the place of community and sanctuary (unfortunately also the place of great suffering in many cases) from capitalism today, hence the nuclear families persistence. But that is also a reflection of the lack of counter hegemonic forces in society that could changes possible. Abolition of the nuclear family is fine but from our current material circumstances is unlikely and ultimately unacceptable to the majority of people only through long term historical processes largely outside of our control could even make possible (climate change, world war, mass scale human migrations, disease, bio tech terrorism etc.)
Child-rearing should be more socially embedded and distributed, but this is extreme and, frankly, more a reaction to the primacy of the nuclear family than informed by any clear necessity for the destruction of genetic parenthood as a social institution. We're still just animals, most people bond with their babies and arbitrarily depriving them of that is unnecessary cruelty for no benefit that couldn't be achieved by simply having a greater culture of strong social bonds and caring for each other in a communal context.
Also, new account posting an extremist position named "marquisdesadestan".
Those are a lot of words yet seems an interesting topic, could you make a BMF summary?
Pretty solid post. We already recreate these collective relationships anyways through school and childcare, part of a move to socialism should require rethinking family relationships and child rearing.
As material conditions worsen in the US, communal living will probably become more common due to necessity. Plenty of people would live that way already if it was socially acceptable - everything is easier and less stressful when we raise children and take care of chores together.
Like you said, there is a huge stigma against anything of the sort. Kids and parents would hear "oh you live in a hippy commune cult, etc" and people would sneer at them. Not that it really matters, though some people would lose their job if their boss found out they lived communally. Mostly we live in a society.
