How the nuclear family was forced on black families

[josie_L]

I am not denying the existence of tribes or extended family but the social unit at the root of any society starts with the family (through the sacrament of marriage) as God himself shows through Scripture.

Moreover, my argument is not that nuclear families should live in isolation from each other only that this family is a reflection of the Trinity.

So anyone saying that this construct of the family is being imposed on others is false.

 

[JimG]

LBJ inadvertently aided the dissolution of the black family by providing better benefits for fatherless households in his war on poverty programs.

 

[josie_L]

This is a Canadian publication, so no, this is not about a uniquely American model of the nuclear family. He denounces the nuclear family vis a vis the more supposedly superior African model which is matriarchal in structure and more communal than the patriarchal model in the West, which fosters materialism and competition.

He makes it so that the nuclear family as understood in the West/Christianity is juxtaposed against the greater good of society.

This is a false dichotomy.

The CATHOLIC article which I posted states emphatically that the nuclear family is reflected in God’s own Trinitarian communion of FATHER, SON AND HOLY SPIRIT. And that this nuclear family forms the basis of any society.

The family, as the “ domestic Church ,” is the foundational building block of the greater Church, and of society on the whole. It was part of God’s plan for humanity from the beginning. Indeed, Jesus Himself incarnated into a family, in order to highlight its institutional importance, and to personally sanctify them. (CCC 533)

The Church then further clarifies that:

Fortunately, God has not left us orphans. He has left us His Church. He has left us the sacraments, which can heal and make us whole again. Even if we come from irreparable marriages and broken families, God has provided us with the communion of persons found in the Church. This is the supernatural family of God. (CCC 1655) Jesus Himself points to the Communion of saints, not biological or hereditary bonds, as His true family in faith, saying, “ Here are My mother and My brothers! ” (Mt. 12:49) Our families are the closest natural approximation to the spiritual communion of Persons in the Trinity. However, beyond that, we have our supernatural communion of Persons in faith and the Church, in which, we can also live a Trinitarian life. The Catechism states, “ For if we continue to love one another and to join in praising the Most Holy Trinity – all of us who are sons of God and form one family in Christ – we will be faithful to the deepest vocation of the Church.” (CCC 959) Our deepest vocation is to live in communion with each other in our marriages, in our families, and in our Church, serving the universal brotherhood of man, with mutual self-sacrifice and life-giving love, in imitation of the Most Holy Trinity.

 

[YADA]

And why do you think the Traditional nuclear family excludes the on involvement - love interaction and support of the extended family? They are integral … intertwined. In fact I would posit that the stronger the nuclear family the more support and involved are those other family members and even family friends.

 

[Cathoholic]

Motherwit . . .

The modern word ‘nuclear’ family was first used in 1949 in “Social Structure,” by American anthropologist G.P. Murdock.

That is irrelevant.

That’s like identifying the first time the word “blue” was used
in such and such a year,
and attempting to posit that
the sky was not blue before in the years before that word came into usage.

 

[Culter]

Culter:

Could this be an anti-family Westerner attacking Western conservatives ?

According to traditional Christian family structure, there’s a core (nucleus) based on a mother and father and the children they bring forth that also doesn’t exclude extended family members.

What are they saying is better? A single mom helped by other single parents? We kind of have that now in many Western places with the government taking the place of the rich uncle (are they complaining about that Western imposition? ).

You’ll have to read the rest of the thread again. No one is against the nuclear family. I just said that the nuclear family will need support from time to time and during the past, that support was given by the extended family. I shake my head sometimes. Is the concept of extended families so alien to Americans?

I reiterate that we can start with the rebuilding of the nuclear family but we shouldn’t stop at that. We can strengthen the nuclear family by giving it additional support via the extended family.

Those of you who are against government welfare should be for this. Rugged individualism for the individual and for the nuclear family, isn’t enough especially during the difficult times. If you are against government welfare then the help should come from extended family. Or should nuclear families tough it out on their own?

But, who has ever spoken against extended families? Did they say that nuclear families with help from extended family is ideal and/better or did they say extended family can be an alternative to the nuclear family? If the former, who are they arguing against? If the latter, then they’re just another Marxist or New Age group criticizing the most just, loving system in history.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

And why do you think the Traditional nuclear family excludes the on involvement - love interaction and support of the extended family? They are integral … intertwined. In fact I would posit that the stronger the nuclear family the more support and involved are those other family members and even family friends.

I don’t know which tradition you mean. The 18th century? The 19th century, the 20th century? I think the 18th and 19th century traditions did emphasize more community and extended family involvement. But that aspect gradually faded out in the middle or end of the 20th century. Since then it has been put grandma in a nursing home and get a home in the suburbs where neighbors pretty much keep to themselves. The sense of community has been degraded.

 

[Motherwit]

I am not denying the existence of tribes or extended family but the social unit at the root of any society starts with the family (through the sacrament of marriage) as God himself shows through Scripture.

Moreover, my argument is not that nuclear families should live in isolation from each other only that this family is a reflection of the Trinity.

So anyone saying that this construct of the family is being imposed on others is false.

I think we are talking at crossed purposes here. The original article wasn’t promoting ending the basic family structure, but that western society doesn’t support other cultural family models such as the one that was explained. The Church has constantly addressed structures and ideologies that don’t support the family and in fact work against it. Pope Francis launched and education plan last September designed to change attitudes and policies that work against the ‘village’ and a fraternal humanity.

http://www.vatican.va/content/franc...cesco_20190912_messaggio-patto-educativo.html

 

[Annie]

western society doesn’t support other cultural family models such as the one that was explained.

The “one that was explained” was described so generally and attributed to the entire continent of Africa without consideration of the many different types of societies that existed there, so it is very hard to tell what he thought should be supported.

Moreover, as I pointed out before, as a Marxist the author would support a different sort of system altogether, and quite probably does, given the agreement between what he wrote about African society and Engels’ ideas of early societies.

 

[YADA]

That maybe your experience but it definitely is not my experience. In fact where I see the breakdown of families - see Uncle Sam and programs that are antithetical to an intact family to the point that it discourages two parent families. Those government programs enable and even reward irresponsible behaviors and punishes and or discourages responsible parenting and traditional marriage. Single parent households are a number 1 predictor of poverty and of children dropping our of school. A lack of fathers in the home is also a predictor of criminal activity and incarceration. Extended families exist but it’s grandparents and extended families often trying to patent as opposed to providing a support role to parents.

 

[josie_L]

Actually, he was saying a lot more than that. He was insinuating that the nuclear family as defined in the West is patriarchal and therefore in some way detrimental to the common good.

I just can’t believe how he glosses over the fact thst a majority of black children are growing up fatherless and implying that the imposition of a NUCLEAR family stucture which ORGANICALLY consists of a mother and father is the issue and not ABSENTEE fathers.

 

[josie_L]

That is false. Extended families in countries like Italy, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Spain. . . etc., play a crucial role in the rearing and raising of children.

Mothers and grandmothers are at the hearth of the home.

 

[silentwitness]

If we go back long enough Europeans lived in clans and more like the village concept.

Basically they were all related, had the same religion, education, viewpoints, culture etc.

In the modern west there is a complete lack of that. In fact it is preached that diversity is our strength. There are attempts by a section of society championing the breakdown of family, religion, shared history etc. and at the same time pushing the village concept for children.

This makes no sense until you realise that it is these people’s viewpoints, pushed through the state that they see as forming children.

Just your typical socialist, fascist take over of culture and religion and the deification of the state.

As faithful Christians, we already know this.

 

[JonNC]

LeafByNiggle:

Not every slope is slippery. Sometimes slopes have well-maintained stairways on which one may move to whatever level they want. It is mistake to assume that every slope is slippery.

The entire point of progressivism is, well, progress. Change, movement. Those who base their thinking on a continual evolution do not have stairways, only slippery slopes. We are all being nudged.

And the slope runs from the high ground of individual rights and limited government downward toward authoritarianism.

 

[RogueSemicolon]

Here’s another take on the American nuclear family, but this time from David Brooks:

The Nuclear Family Was a Mistake

The family structure we’ve held up as the cultural ideal for the past half century has been a catastrophe for many. It’s time to figure out better ways to live together.

www.theatlantic.com

This is the story of our times—the story of the family, once a dense cluster of many siblings and extended kin, fragmenting into ever smaller and more fragile forms. The initial result of that fragmentation, the nuclear family, didn’t seem so bad. But then, because the nuclear family is so brittle, the fragmentation continued. In many sectors of society, nuclear families fragmented into single-parent families, single-parent families into chaotic families or no families.

If you want to summarize the changes in family structure over the past century, the truest thing to say is this: We’ve made life freer for individuals and more unstable for families. We’ve made life better for adults but worse for children. We’ve moved from big, interconnected, and extended families, which helped protect the most vulnerable people in society from the shocks of life, to smaller, detached nuclear families (a married couple and their children), which give the most privileged people in society room to maximize their talents and expand their options. The shift from bigger and interconnected extended families to smaller and detached nuclear families ultimately led to a familial system that liberates the rich and ravages the working-class and the poor.

This article is about that process, and the devastation it has wrought—and about how Americans are now groping to build new kinds of family and find better ways to live.

 

[Sarcelle]

It has even further degraded when one couldn’t settle down in one community, get a job and stay n that job until one retires.

Now in today’s lay-off happy economy, one has to move several times to find jobs. This is an increasingly transient society.

 

[Annie]

I think there is a lot to be said on this topic, about the sources of the problems and the problem itself.

However, the author of the original article is a Marxist, and it was certainly not clear that the two things he was contrasting, the nuclear family and whatever he was talking about, are the same two things that the article which you posted is talking about, especially since he is discussing black families only, as if black people have different needs than other people do.

Thanks for posting this excellent article.

 

[Culter]

Is it saying that close relations should help each other? I agree. I’m going to write an article about how cousins should play with each other and share toys.

 

[Annie]

Is this a recent development, or is it a traditional thing?

 

[Annie]

I feel totally silly; I misread your previous post and understood you to be saying that putting an elderly relative in one’s own home was considered low…

Anyway, I would say here in the US, most children feel the same way, but parents have other ideas!