JL > But keep in mind that the kind of people who JL > do these studies are psychologists and JL > sociologists and such, literally 98% leftist JL > Democrats.
I STRONGLY question the 2% among them not being leftists.
And I would add that a huge portion of them are not even main stream left but extremists like socialists and communists.
Arthur W Calhoun, one of the founding fathers of American Social Work was an avowed socialist and later an avowed communist.
Further, these views infected his writings/teachings about social work.
He wrote that children are too important to be trusted to mere parents and should be raised by the state or the "collective".
Various US Judges have confirmed that government is the worst possible parent.
Yet Calhoun is STILL quoted in many College Social Work textbooks.
Communism is enjoying somethig of a revival in Russia and Eastern Europe - not so much on account of its virtues as the vices of the ostensibly capitalist regimes that replaced. Parties that get a significant proportion of the vote in free elections aren't usually seen as extremist.
Socialism doesn't count as extremist in any sane person's view of the world. Sweden was run by the Social Democratic Party for many years, and they are still the largest party and lead the governing coalition. Most of Northern Europe looks socialist to Americans, and their social welfare systems conform to the Fabians's notion of a democratic socialist society.
One of the founding fathers of Social Work, Arthur Wallace Calhoun, in 1919 wrote that kids are too important to be trusted to mere parents.
If the avowed Socialists who actually started ""Social Work"" had their way, all children would be property of the "Socialist Commonwealth".
Look up Parens Patriae and you'll find out that all kids already are "children of the state" in the USA.
It is not only in anticipation of wartime that children are important to the state.
Ironically, the state has proven over and over again to be the WORST possible parent.
As such, being "second guessed" by these incompetents is surreal.
Some other American founders for Social Work were the Fabians. They had a logo (crest or artwork) that was a wolf in sheeps clothing, which apparently the Child Protection INDUSTRY has taken to heart as evidenced by much of their behavior.
Arthur Wallace Calhoun, PhD taught at Brockwood Labor College and the CP's Workers School. (Communist Party)
A Social History of the American Family: From Colonial Times to the Present 1919 by Arthur H Clark Company Cleveland, Ohio
In 1927, for the American Academy of Political & Social Science, he wrote "The Worker looks at government" 176 pages.
"The family goes back to the age of savagery while the state belongs to the age of civilization. The modern individual is a world citizen, served by the world, and home interests can no longer be supreme"...
"socialism is"... "we may expect in the socialist commonwealth"...
G > Please explain to me where the dignity of the family G > fits in with that OUTRIGHT socialist political agenda G > to trash the US Family in general?
formatting link
Early 20th Century American Progressives also saw the care and teaching of small children at home as a problem. As the historian Arthur Calhoun wrote in his influential 1918 volume, A Social History of the American Family:
The new view is that the higher and more obligatory relation is to society rather than to family. The family goes back to the age of savagery, while the state belongs to the age of civilization. The modern individual is a world citizen, served by the world, and home interests can no longer be supreme.[5]
formatting link
Cuddy article also quoted on several other web sites.
MENTAL HEALTH AND WORLD CITIZENSHIP By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D. August 11, 2004 In a recent article, I related that the Bush administration's Secretary of Education Rod Paige last October 3 declared that the U.S. is pleased to rejoin UNESCO where we could develop common strategies to prepare our children to become "citizens of the world." Then on June 21 WorldNetDaily published "Life With Big Brother: Bush to screen population for mental illness" describing President Bush's "New Freedom Initiative" that would have every citizen receive a mental health screening. What one needs to guard against is the use of mental health to pursue world government. The theme of the administration of President Woodrow Wilson was "The New Freedom" and it pursued the ideals of PHILIP DRU: ADMINISTRATOR, written in 1912 by President Wilson's chief adviser, Col. Edward M. House, who wrote of "socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx." Education would be a primary vehicle for achieving the objective, and John Dewey, the father of progressive education, promoted socialism. He said the society or group is most important, and that independent individualists have a form of "insanity." By the late 1940s, Dewey's progressive education was becoming dominant in American public schools. And in 1948 an International Congress on Mental Health was held in London with publication of a document "Mental Health and World Citizenship," declaring that "world citizenship can be widely extended among all peoples through the application of the principles of mental health." The Congress promoted the U.N. as the vehicle for promoting this objective, and UNESCO's director-general Sir Julian Huxley the same year wrote in UNESCO: ITS PURPOSE AND ITS PHILOSOPHY that "political unification in some sort of world government will be required." The 1950s and 1960s saw the growing strength of Dewey's progressive educational philosophy and mental health advocacy, and in 1965 the Joint Commission on Mental Health of Children was established. In
1969, the Commission released its report, which stated: "As the home and church decline in influence...schools must begin to provide adequately for the emotional and moral development of children....The school...must assume a direct responsibility for the attitudes and values of child development. The child advocate, psychologist, social technician, and medical technician should all reach aggressively into the community, send workers out to children's homes, recreation facilities, and schools. They should assume full responsibility for all education, including pre-primary education." In the 1970s, a representative of HEW (U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare) approached North Carolina Governor James B. Hunt, Jr. about developing a model for child health care around the nation. The N.C. Plan was called "Child Health Plan for Raising a New Generation," and included establishing a "health care home" for every child, stating "responsibilities belonging to child and family are required." The plan was released in 1979, the same year the N.C. State Health Plan was adopted, linking in two places religion with mental illness and mental retardation. In the same year (1979), Bill Clinton (supported by Hillary Clinton) began Arkansas' Governor's School for the Gifted and Talented, modeled after the first Governor's School in the nation which was established in 1963 in N.C., was funded in part by the Carnegie Corporation, and was attended by the writer of this article. We were given various psychological tests which, I believe, looked at us as guinea pigs to be remoulded for the Brave New World of the future. When Hillary Clinton became First Lady of the U.S. in 1993, she was in charge of a health care task force, about half the members of whom were connected with the Robert Wood Johnson (RWJ) Foundation. On the NBC "Today Show" (January 23, 1990), Dr. Michael Lewis of the New Jersey Robert Wood Johnson Medical School had claimed: "Lying is an important part of social life, and children who are unable to do it are children who may have developmental problems." What Hillary Clinton's task force was proposing was basically socialized medicine. Hillary's friend, former N.C. Gov. Hunt, became director of RWJ's Mental Health Services for Youth program. And regarding a January 4-5, 1996 symposium in Frankfurt, KY, attended by attorney Kent Masterson Brown, the attorney said: "He (former Gov. Hunt) came to Governor Wallace Wilkinson in Kentucky and told him that RWJ would like Kentucky to become part of this mental health program for youth, and said we'll give you $100,000 to plan a program....That's what they do. I mean, you think that's just buying legislation. Well, it is." The next year, early in 1997, former Gov. Hunt was chairman of the National Education Goals Panel (NEGP) and promoted the Early Childhood Public Engagement Campaign that actor Rob Reiner and others were starting, with the Carnegie Corporation once again playing a critical role (the Carnegie Institution in 1904 had financed the establishment of a biological experiment station related to eugenics at Cold Spring Harbor, NY). The NEGP indicated a desire for the creation of a nationalized system of child care from age zero based upon the principles of brain research (mental health). Roy Roemer, Governor of Colorado at the time, stated: "The ideal system would be...in every community or county you have an organizational structure that is responsible for the zero to 6, zero to 3 age level for the child....And then finally put in a hooker and say, 'Hey, you don't get any payments from state on their highways until you do this job.'" It may be this same type of coercive tactic that is used to facilitate the current New Freedom Initiative. Mental health screenings may be attached to the current vaccines most children are required to receive to attend public schools. And for older people, they may be asked by insurance companies to "voluntarily" accept the screenings if they don't want their premiums to increase. In 2001, President George W. Bush worked with U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy to pass the federal "No Child Left Behind" legislation, which includes provisions for expanding school-based mental health programs. This fits with the report of The New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, which stressed that "schools must be partners in the mental health care of our children."
--------------------------------
Where is all this leading? In the third volume of Arthur Calhoun's A SOCIAL HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN FAMILY, published in 1919 and widely used as a social service textbook, one reads: "The new view is that the higher and more obligatory relation is to society rather than to the family; the family goes back to the age of savagery while the state belongs to the age of civilization. The modern individual is a world citizen, served by the world, and home interests can no longer be supreme....As soon as the new family, consisting of only the parents and the children, stood forth, society saw how many were unfit for parenthood and began to realize the need of community care....As familism weakens, society has to assume a larger parenthood. The school begins to assume responsibility for the functions thrust upon it....The kindergarten grows downward toward the cradle and there arises talk of neighborhood nurseries....Social centers replace the old time home chimney....The child passes more and more into the custody of community experts....In the new social order, extreme emphasis is sure to be placed upon eugenic procreation....It seems clear that at least in its early stages, socialism will mean an increased amount of social control....We may expect in the socialist commonwealth a system of public educational agencies that will begin with the nursery and follow the individual through life....Those persons that experience alarm at the thought of intrinsic changes in family institutions should remember that in the light of social evolution, nothing is right or valuable in itself."
-------------------- Relevant to this, Clinton administration official Mary Jo Bane said almost 30 years ago that "in order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them." (TULSA SUNDAY WORLD, August 21, 1977) And about that same time, HEW Executive Assistant Eddie Bernice Johnson (who would later become a Congresswoman from Texas) advocated the licensing of parents before they would be permitted to have children. Licensing of parents has also been proposed by Prof. Gene Stephens (THE FUTURIST, April 1981) and Dr. Jack Westman (LICENSING PARENTS, 1994). Under the American socialism planned for our future, government will increasingly control our lives via mental health screening and education, among other means. Only if the American people resist these efforts as soon as possible will we be successful in thwarting the plans of the power elite. =A9 2004 Dennis Cuddy - All Rights Reserved
formatting link
The Perils of Parens Patriae, or When the State Becomes Daddy by William Norman Grigg
"In our dreams, we have limitless resources, and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand." ~ Frederick Gates, chairman of the Rockefeller-created General Education Board, 1902.
For those of us who love and understand individual freedom, it sometimes seems as if the Atlantic just isn't wide enough to impede the collaboration of Anglo-American elites seeking to re-mold the world closer to their hearts' desire.
That last phrase, incidentally, assumes that those elites, who look at us with =93bright, dead alien eyes,=94 could be said to have human hearts.
The government of departing British Prime Minister Tony Blair has announced a new initiative entitled the =93Nurse Family Partnership=94 that would (in the words of the Guardian of London) =93intervene as early as possible in troubled families, first-time mothers identified just 16 weeks after conception [who] will be given intensive weekly support from midwives and health visitors until the unborn child reaches two years old.=94
This program could be considered a form of pre-emptive parens patriae; that phrase refers to the fatherhood of the State. The Guardian captured the essence of the British early-intervention initiative in its headline: =93Unborn babies targeted in crackdown on criminality.=94
The Blair government, summarized that left-leaning periodical, =93is prepared to single out babies still in the womb to break cycles of deprivation and behaviour.... Under the programme, which has been copied from the United States, young, first-time mothers will be assigned a personal health visitor at between 16 and 20 weeks into their pregnancy. They will continue to have weekly or fortnightly visits until the child is two....=94 (Emphasis added.)
=93Children belong to the general family, to the state, before belonging to private families." ~ French Revolutionary leader Bertrand Barere, whose memory was later invoked by French parents to scare disobedient children (I'm serious)
The objective is for these intruders, who are clothed in the supposed authority of the State (the =93coldest of all cold monsters=94), to instruct mothers how to care for their own flesh and blood. The program is =93voluntary,=94 for now. It will not remain so.
As noted above, the Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) was devised in the United States by Dr. David Olds of the University of Colorado. It has been implemented in 22 states, and legislation proposed by Senators Ken Salazar (D-Colorado) and Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) would =93expand access=94 to the program to all 50 states and the District of Columbia =93through the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) ... providing at-home nurse visits for up to 570,000 first- time mothers each year.=94
For more than a century, collectivist social engineers have extolled the merits of home visitations by State-assigned social workers as a way of circumventing parental authority and establishing a proprietary claim on children. The most notorious recent examples =96 on this side of the Atlantic, in any case =96 are Hillary Clinton and Janet Reno, the latter demonstrating her solicitude for children by immolating more than a dozen of them at Mt. Carmel and sending stormtroopers to seize another from his Miami relatives at gunpoint.
In her ghost-written opus It Takes a Village, Madame Hillary rhapsodized that she =93can't say enough=94 about the merits of home visitation programs. The Nation's Alexander Cockburn, whose household acquaintances in England included members of the Fabian Socialist movement, has pointed out that Hillary's blueprint for social engineering bears a familial resemblance to Fabianism.
"Time and again, reading =85 It Takes a Village, I was reminded of [Fabian founder] Beatrice Webb," Cockburn has observed. "There's the same imperious gleam, the same lust to improve the human condition until it conforms to the wretchedly constricted vision of freedom that gave us social-worker liberalism, otherwise known as therapeutic policing."
Photo captions: "Home visitation" =E0 la Janet Reno in Miami.... ... and in Waco.
In his 1919 book New Worlds for Old, Fabian activist H.G. Wells (better known for his science fiction offerings), laid out the basic premise of =93therapeutic policing=94: =93Socialism regards parentage under proper safeguards as 'not only a duty but a service' to the state; that is to say, it proposes to pay for good parentage =96 in other words, to endow the home.=94
By making the mother dependent on subsidies, the State became the surrogate father. And, as Wells pointed out, the State claims the right to raise =93its=94 children, should the natural parents be found unsuitable. This is the tacit but unmistakable threat that accompanies every State official who is permitted to violate the sanctity of the home.
The Blair regime's NFP Action Plan makes this quite plain, at least to people alert to the nuances of State-speak:
Section 1.2 of the Action Plan claims a mandate for the government to assure that nobody is permitted to =93waste=94 his =93human potential,=94 since this is =93bad for the whole country.=94 Section 1.6 asserts the State's right and capacity to take =93preventative action=94 within the home in order to =93tackle problems before they become fully entrenched and blight the lives of both individuals and wider society.=94 Section 1.9 attempts to cast =93wider society=94 as a victim of unregulated families, since =93the behaviour of some people =96 particularly some of the most challenging families =96 causes real disruption and distress in the community around them.=94
ZZ Top they ain't, but they are one of history's most notable power trios, "The Therapeutic Police": Fabian founders Beatrice and Sydney Webb (from the left, appropriately), and Fabian popularizer George Bernard Shaw.
Thus the need, as the Blair regime and its American consultant describe it, to =93develop and promote better prediction tools for use by front-line practitioners=94 and take measures =93to ensure that those identified as at risk are followed up.=94
Some sense of the purpose of =93following up=94 on =93at risk=94 families c= an be found in the British Government's Policy Review paper, =93The Role of the State=94:
=93The state ... has the legitimate monopoly of force in a given territory,=94 that paper begins, immediately laying a totalitarian foundation (from Lenin =96 the State exercises =93power without limit, resting directly on force=94; from Mussolini =96 =93Everything within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State=94).
Photo caption: The Fabian Socialist crest depicts a wolf in sheep's clothing =96 a suitable symbol for that subversive movement, and an apt metaphor for government "home visitation" programs.
The NFP initiative, the paper continues, is inspired by the vision of a =93strategic and enabling state=94 which would be =93less about command and control and more about collaboration and partnership.=94 The state will =93focus on ends, not the means by which [its] goals are delivered,=94 working through =93a new partnership between the State and the citizen.=94
Ah, but remember that the =93collaborator=94 and =93partner=94 offering its assistance to the citizen claims =93the legitimate monopoly of force,=94 which means that in the event of a dispute, it is the citizen, not the State, that will be compelled to yield.
To anyone even slightly familiar with the tenets of the Clinton-era =93Third Way,=94 or the nostrums of the attenuated variety of Marxism called =93Communitarianism,=94 none of this will be new. It may strike some as remarkable that the American version of the NFP program has become so deeply entrenched during the reign of George W. Bush, but this wouldn't be considered odd by those who understand =93compassionate conservatism=94 to be politically enharmonic with Clinton's =93I Feel Your Pain=94-style corporatism.
Furthermore, as much as it pains me to admit it, the British Fabian Socialists have nothing on their American counterparts regarding the long, patient campaign to subvert the family.
=93Since the 1840s =85 American social history could be written as the deliberate dismantling of the home-centered economy, and the consequent decay of the foundations of our liberty,=94 observers Dr. Alan Carlson. =93[T]his turn against the home was not a natural consequence of industrialization or the emergence of a modern economy. Rather, the change derived from the application of statist ideology and consciously-made political and legal choices.=94
"The first direct assault on family autonomy grew out of the reform school movement during the 1830s," whose influence was particularly strong in New York and Pennsylvania, continues Dr. Carlson. In 1839, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, acting on assumptions inspired by the reform school movement, invoked the concept of parens patriae to justify the state's actions in supplanting parents it found "unequal to" or "unworthy of the task" of educating children.
In 1882, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled: "It is the unquestioned right and imperative duty of every enlightened government, in its character of parens patriae to protect and provide for the comfort and well-being of its citizens.... The performance of this duty is justly regarded as one of the most important governmental functions, and all constitutional limitations must be so understood and construed so as not to interfere with its proper and legitimate exercise." (Emphasis added.) The principle of parens patriae, properly understood, requires the demolition of all constitutional limitations, rather than their =93redefinition.=94
In 1913, Dr. Arthur W. Calhoun published A Social History of The American Family: From Colonial Times to the Present, which would become an authoritative text for American social-service and welfare workers. Calhoun was remarkably unabashed in promoting a perspective on State supremacy that could have been offered by Marx and Engels (who brazenly called for =93abolition of the family!=94 in the Communist Manifesto):
"American history consummates the disappearance of the wider [or extended] familism and the substitution of the parentalism of society.... The new view is that the higher and more obligatory relation is to society rather than to the family; the family goes back to the age of savagery while the state belongs to the age of civilization. The modern individual is a world citizen, served by the world, and home interests can no longer be supreme."
By 1930, the year that President Herbert Hoover convened the White House Conference on Child Health and Protection, it was possible for an American president to describe, in public, the individual child as someone "who belongs to the community almost as much as to the family," and a citizen of "a world predestinedly [sic] moving toward unity.=94 The latter phrase seems to foretell, by roughly six decades, the claim contained in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child that government is the primary custodian of all children, with the UN itself at the head of a global system of parens patriae.
For more than a century and a half, collectivist cliques on both sides of the Atlantic have been engaged in a kind of dialectical pas de deuxwhere State control over the family is concerned, each side propelling the other to ever-greater heights of presumption. As I said, sometimes it seems a pity that England is just one ocean away.
May 26, 2007 Copyright =A9 2007 William Norman Grigg writes the Pro Libertate blog.
Quotes posted under the FAIR USE exceptions to US copyright law.
But you don't cite the book or article where you think he made that claim.
In fact human children take a lot more care for quite a lot longer than those of our great ape relatives, and - fairly obviously - more than our great ape ancestors. In most human societies this load is spread across the extended family, which is to say, the immediate community.
formatting link
If Calhoun was restating this obvious point, it wouldn't be controversial. The Israeli kibbutz movement institutionalised community child-care delibrately limiting child-parent contact to a few hours a day, which comes a lot closer to what you seem to think he was advocating.
formatting link
This is now generally perceived as having over-emphasised the communal component, but doesn't seem to have significantly dis-advantaged the children involved.
Very few socialists ever favoured this point of view, and the Israeli kibbutzim are the only one's that I know of who put it into practice.
Which intervenes if the parents or other guardians aren't looking after the kids properly. They don't actually look at that hard for evidence of inadequate care, and that have been known to act where the kids were in fact being looked after properly, but most people seem to appreciate that intervention can be the lesser of two evils.
the state.
ible parent.
There are some pretty bad parents out there in real life - no state is on record as having treated a child as badly as her natural parents treated Genie
formatting link
Genie.pdf
Some social workers are incompetent, but their performance is subject to more frequent inspection than that of parents, and the competence level expected of them is rather higher.
formatting link
The Fabian's were gradualists, rather than revolutionaries, thinking - correctly - that they could make a persuasive a rational case for the changes that they wanted to see made in society. The Fabian society still exists, and still sees areas where society could come closer to their ideals, though they've got much of what they wanted.
The child protection business is a human enterprise, and as such it is less than perfect. Anedotal evidence that it sometimes does the wrong thing doesn't devalue the much more numerous occasions when it does rescue children from inadequate or frankly abusive parents or guardians. Presumably you have a particular reason for not liking them.
At a time when the communist party wasn't seen as subversive organisation controlled from Moscow - an idea that was popularised by Senator Joseph McCarthy from 1950 to 1954, with a lot of help from J. Edgar Hoover who used the "second red scare" to double the size of the FBI from 3,559 in 1946 to 7,029 in 1952.
This is just the usual right-wing propaganda.
Allan C. Carlson equates modern intervention in child-care with Plato's demented proposition that women should sleep with everybody so that nobody would know who their father was, and every male would have an equal obligation to help raise every child.
This does make a good story with which to frightlen the credulous, but it's also obviously nonsensical. The idea that society should intervene when children aren't being treated well is also well- established in the Christian tradition.
Jesus said, =93Temptations, stumbling blocks, enticements are surely to come, but whoever causes one of these little ones to sin, it would be better that a giant millstone would be tied around their neck and they would be thrown into the heart of the sea=94 which is a fairly drastic form of intervention.
Modern society does have an interest in the proper education of children, so that they know enough to recognised misleading propaganda when they see it - a skill that you don't seem to have acquired.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.