Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • BlipBland@netscape.net
    One essential task a society must do, is raise the next generation. Institutions often form around fulfilling one of society s basic needs. However, even
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 8, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      One essential task a society must do, is raise the next generation.
      Institutions often form around fulfilling one of society's basic
      needs. However, even before organized society existed, nature had
      developed a way to continue the species and ensure the next
      generation. Note that the act by a caveperson to have and care for
      offspring did nothing to benefit his/her individual survival; but did
      everything to benefit the future survival of the species. Thus nature
      (or God) caused there to be a physical (bodily) attraction between
      male and female, and for mothering instincts so that individuals
      would do what otherwise didn't benefit them, -that otherwise was an
      expense in effort and resources. So that the essential societal need
      of producing the next generation already has a mechanism for being
      fulfilled, even without the institutions of marriage and family. -So
      that the 3rd, modern meaning of marriage (that is, for the personal
      fulfilment of the body/mind provided by nature/God) is not really
      new, but is instead, ancient and existed prior to recorded history.

      As civilization developed more structure and organizaton, perhaps the
      institutions of family and marriage then grew into the main way to
      supply society's need of producing the next generation. (Note, the
      institutions of family have traditionally included arranged marriages
      for the purposes of keeping wealth and family properties together and
      prospering. -This representing a more traditional meaning of

      Men have been running things since the beginning of recorded
      history. -There has not been one woman US president or vice
      president, yet women make up half the population. It is at this time
      we tap men on the shoulder and say: haven't you had a long enough
      turn? -that its time to trade places and let women have a turn? So we
      politely tap men on the shoulder, ask them to step down and
      relinquish the reigns of power to women.

      Looking at the task of producing/rearing the future generation: those
      who must do this task are prevented from attending to the power
      struggles of the present generation. Because it is the women who grow
      an embryo to a fetus and bear the children and are semi disabled in
      being pregnant; because women have the equipment for feeding the
      children; and have a mothering instinct: it is women who do more of
      the task of producing the future generation than men. Over history,
      this has left men free to dominate their present generation (while
      the women are busy taking care of the kids). With men making the
      rules, they became the order givers and women the order takers.

      Looking at the task of producing the future generation of our
      species: since all of society is benefited by its successful
      completion, it is reasonable to expect all of society to bear the
      expense and burden of this task. However, the institution of family,
      ties completely the burden and responsibility for offspring a couple
      bears, to that couple, and frees the rest of society from any
      responsibility whatever. And this burden becomes especially intense
      when the father steps out and leaves only the mother to bear the
      whole burden.

      This doesn't represent parts of society cooperating and working
      together to accomplish a common important social task. Thus the
      institution of family is not a part of the structural-functionalist
      theory, at least not concerning the important (essential) social task
      of producing the next generation. Females have and raise kids for the
      benefit of society having a next generation, but the other parts of
      society give nothing in return for this. The act to divide the
      societal whole into parts, with each doing a task, doesn't represent
      cooperation between the parts, but represents a shoving the burden
      onto one group (which is exploitation); -when all groups and parts
      should be helping with an important task, in order to be in
      cooperation. This represents a basic flaw in the structural-
      functionalist theory.

      The major cause of people on welfare, is the expense of raising
      children born by single mothers. But the priority of current policy
      is for poor mothers to do better in the economic system (ie working
      to accumulate wealth to the rich). This has nothing to do with the
      priority of producing the next generation. In fact, now, this is even
      more difficult, because now single mothers must juggle work plus
      taking care of their kids. -Essentially an affirmation by society
      that the raising of the next generation has no economic value, and
      that mothers must do additional work in order to recieve money. But
      is the raising of the next generation really of no value to society? -
      That the society expects to recieve this for free? Since it is the
      poor who have more kids: who will now have kids? It is now more
      important to get established in the economic system and to put off
      having kids. This only exacerbates the problem of too many old
      people, not enough young workers.

      -(The expense of raising children is real. Just look how it holds
      single mothers down.) And the dominant cannot extract from children
      like they extract from the rest of us. A society cannot say to an
      infant "pull your own weight". A religion cannot say to an infant "if
      you don't work, you don't eat". If they did, they would in one
      generation, vanish, because they would have killed all their children
      and thus their next generation.

      Because the procreation of a new generation is a benefit to all of
      society -in fact it is an absolute essential because all societies
      would be completely (but non-violently) anhialated within one
      generation without their women procreating. (Note that given today's
      advances in biotechnology and cloning research, this may no longer be
      true.) Because all of society benefits from a limited degree of
      procreation (not overpopulation), then it is not unreasonable to
      expect all of society to help shoulder any burdens involved with
      raising children. So that we can correctly call it exploitation or
      creating haves vs have-nots, when society designates family units to
      bear the total cost/responsibility of raising children and absolves
      the rest of society from any cost or responsibility.

      When someone provides a benefit to society that is absolutely
      essential to the survival of society, one might think society would
      reciprocate. But in one area they don't, because there is a natural
      process which provides this for free. As human beings we are
      considered as "human resources" in the human resources department of
      every business. Yet one area so basic to society has not been given
      an economic value. The benefit to society from what women do in
      producing /rearing the next generation, is so great that if women
      were paid for what this was actually worth to society, they would all
      be millionaires. Do you realize that women have the power to totally
      (but non violently) anhialate a society by just refusing to have any
      more kids?

      What I suggest, is not an anhialation of the US, but a collective
      bargaining whereby women ultimately recieve the monetary compensation
      and the reigns of power befitting the benefit they provide society,
      that they have been denied since the beginning of recorded history.

      Now it is true that men have military power and are able to topple
      any women ruled society easily; but what I suggest is a more equal
      sharing of power where women have considerable more power and
      economic resources than they command now; by having them organize and
      excercise their collective bargaining rights in the area of receipt
      of payment for the benefit they provide in having and rearing the
      next generation. So what I ask poor white women to do right now, is
      to have as much sex as they want, just to use contraception or
      abortion and not have any more kids. And this great and powerful US
      superpower society will be totally gone in one generation unless
      things change and women are given more.

      As for the idea for women to stop having children as a means to gain
      power: Here in the US, minorities are poised to overtake the white
      majority in number; and seeing that play out would produce more
      immediate good; and that could not happen if minorities quit having
      kids. In impoverished 3rd world countries where there is only one
      group of people where there are just the very rich and the many poor
      of one ethinic group: one might think this is where to apply the idea
      for women to stop having kids to gain power and overthrow even the
      most dastardly military dictator who ships all their economic wealth
      to the US as part of globalization, who is unlikely to be deposed any
      time soon by other means. However, birth rates are high in 3rd world
      countries. In fact, high birth rates are used by these people as
      another method to control their government -because if most of a
      country's resources go to feeding an ever burgeoning population, then
      there is little left over for guns or other economic development
      (enslavement). However, the developed countries have already defeated
      this strategy. -They provide the economic development (via
      globalization) and supply of arms, so that the population of these
      countries can fight each other and slave all day at cheap labor to
      produce the wealth imported to the US. So, to help 3rd world
      countries, and our own, we must enact this plan in our own developed
      countries, and gain control of them, and then eliminate this
      globalization and arms supplying and torture device supplying that
      the US does. But minorities should be exempt until they gain a
      majority. In China, where they have restricted the population growth
      to one child per couple so as to allow for greater economic
      development, my method would also work to overthrow that regim if
      their population so desired.

      Right now the women's union to accomplish this is yet to be created.
      What I suggest is an organization without leaders where each member
      has the ability to participate equally. The internet is an excellent
      forum for this as it allows each member to 'speak', whereas in any
      auditorium or physical place each member would have to take turns
      speaking. We would vote on issues. All members could raise issues. To
      make it so unscrupulous people couldn't come in and vote many times
      for one person, we might have a system outside the internet where a
      person would ID themselves with a drivers licence, and be given an
      internet ID number, plus many 'transaction numbers' associated with
      that ID number. Each transaction number would be used only once when
      a person voted, and then they would have to go onto the next number
      in their list to vote on another issue. That way it would be ensured
      that it was that actual person who was voting, and not someone who
      just used her ID surupticiously. When a person ran out of transaction
      numbers they could get more by snail mailing a reserve number (also
      included with the initial transaction numbers) to the understood
      group organization where they showed their drivers license; whence
      they would be snail mailed back another long set of transaction
      numbers. There would be a place for any person to write up 'laws' to
      be passed. People would vote for them over time. Only when a majority
      of the organization had voted for them would they then be passed
      after the central organization had verified ID and transaction number
      (using a computer program of course).

      But before this organization gets underway, one thing I would ask is
      that white women, poor white women, middle class white women: please
      delay having children, -or if you must have kids, do so with a
      minority who has had a hard time becomming part of the accepted US
      society ie African Americans.

      Please forward this message to all you know.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.