The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State - Engels 
Tweet warning full of chauvinists including midwesternmarx
Watching patsocs 'unwittingly' re-invent every tenant of Fascism the same way crypto-bros 'unwittingly' re-invented every tenant of modern banking and finance.
Can we just like stop calling them -socs part and just pats? These are just your average reactionary patriots trying to pander to younger people via a very, very, very flimsy faux socialism.
Let's just call them nats.
Maybe add the soc as the end
Natsocs
Oh wait...
What part of "abolition of the bourgeois institution of the nuclear family" is so hard for these dipshits?
"The family consistes of one man, one woman, and 2.5 child" is a formula for greasing the mechanisms of capitalism with blood you absolutely too online toolbags! No society in history has lived that way until the industrial revolution, which constitutes .00005% of human history. And while I don't want to invoke the naturalistic fallacy, I do think it's significant that with 450,000 years to experiment modern homo sapiens never did this until it was imposed, by force, from above, by capitalists, to staff their factories!
Patsocs? :gulag
I don't care if there are only fifteen of them, this basic failures to understand even the most superficial shit is annoying.also it didn't even happen in the industrial revolution. Workers in industrial London lived in multi-family slum houses
a yard 2 kids with a wife who doesn't have a job is immediate post ww2 America
Did they miss the part where Thatcher used the traditional family as a way to destroy community?
There was some kind of famous quote of hers about it... Ah well, nonetheless.
The nuclear family isn't community. It's the result of communities being destroyed by capitalism, forcing parents to care for children in an atomized way rather than the way they were taken care of for the vast majority of human civilization.
then I made sure that your whole village has to work 60+ hours a week to stay homed.
What part about abolition of the family did these people miss.
(yeah I know, they're fascists and don't actually care)Engels spinning so hard in his grave he could power an entire continent
"this thing that's basically a product of capitalism? actually, it's our last refuge against capitalism!"
only
takes here folksWorth a read if I'm yet to peek at it? Got SO many books to get through
I'd say yes as a book that's still theory but on a distinctly different topic. It'd be like reading up on a book on the origins of religion and Christianity from a historical materialist perspective.
However it isn't a book you have to labour through like Capital. It is much more okay to skim it and vibe with it.
Origin of the family is a pretty short read and all about interesting stuff on the discussion of where the state and patriarchy come from so it goes by not too slowly. The chapter on the Iroquois is particularly interesting imo
I think "family abolition" discourse is cringy and rightfully (probably) off-putting to most people with more immediate problems but this ain't it, sis
Yeah, it's a boring old conversation for me at this point to explain to an "apolitical" person that Marx was talking about the mandatory nuclear family and then give them a litany of examples of how people are so often forced to stay in toxic households by material pressures. By then, I can reframe the topic (often paired with the same fear for religion) as being about the removal of factors that force people to live or worship in ways that they don't want to
Whether or not they learn anything from it, they usually act like they have something new to think about
I mostly like the "embrace doing absolutely everything that would piss off a republican" angle tbh
Somewhat off topic but I think "(X) abolition" is almost always a rhetorical mistake, even when the actual ideas are good. Like prison abolition for instance, I fully support it and people often understand and agree when I actually explain the concept but if you just say the words "prison abolition" people will jump to it meaning just letting all criminals go free with no other mechanisms in place to dissuade serious criminal behavior, and often leaves them predisposed against it even after you've explained it, as opposed to if you'd started with the actual nuanced policy proposal. Same thing happens with family abolition, school abolition, etc... it's just a needlessly inflammatory way to sell it, particularly to normies
The concept of the nuclear family was popularized in post-war America, so in a way, that is exactly what a nuclear family is.
Posters of people having families in socialist countries = nuclear family now.
I'm beginning to think a lot of these people base their entire ideology on what they think certain posters say
"Communists would be wise to re-orient their entire politics around some shit I, a self-important twitter putz, has said in a post."
Also you can literally give the pitch they make at the end, without re-orienting everything around traditional families -- yes, capitalism is making it increasingly impossible to have a "traditional family", or family at all, but you can offer communism as a solution to that without throwing "non-traditional" people under the bus and sounding like a religious conservative.
