Get PJ Media on your Apple

Dr. Helen

Are Childless Adults Important to a Free Society?

March 13th, 2013 - 4:43 am

I read with interest Kathy Shaidle’s piece at PJM on Aaron Clarey’s book Enjoy the Decline. One of Clarey’s pieces of advice is don’t necessarily have children if you want to “go Galt”:

While I’m not saying “don’t have children,” children are very expensive “stuffs.” The average kid costs $250,000 to raise and that doesn’t even include college tuition. Also, unlike your X-Box or your computer, they bring in communicable diseases. I have also found out that they do not have “off buttons” and the authorities frown on it if you try to sell them. If you already have children or you really want children, by all means certainly have them. But if you can do without, it certainly makes Going Galt a lot easier.

Shaidle agrees and goes a step further:

Many writers insist that the best way to reverse the decline of the West is to increase the birth rate.

The trouble is, having children is one of the biggest excuses people use for not fighting for free speech and other Western values; they’re afraid their kids’ teachers will punish them for having outspoken parents; they might lose their job (and therefore their precious dental plan, and those kids need braces, you know…)

And besides: have you seen (and heard) some of the kids people are having?

I’m not convinced that creating a new crop of conformist, politically correct, helmet-wearing, nut-allergic, obese citizens is really in America’s best interest.

While I think that having children is important, I do have to agree with some of the above points. Many parents are afraid to stand up to others and speak out, as they do not want to harm their kids. Many parents don’t want their kids to be embarrassed or held accountable for what they do if they speak out against the prevailing authorities. We need people in our society who don’t have to worry about their kids being targets, held hostage, or used as weapons by the PC authorities.

Single people have more ability to speak out (not always, but often) without fear that their words and actions will place their family in jeopardy. At the same time, we need people brave enough to have children who can withstand their parents standing against the PC culture. Being childless has its advantages, though children do, too! And not all kids are “helmet-wearing, nut allergic obese citizens.” Some are brave and grow up to be amazing adults who strive to help us live in a free society. That geeky, nut-allergic guy who looks like a loser to you today can continue to build the technology that gives the individual more power in this conformist, politically correct society tomorrow. So don’t be too quick to write off the kids — they have their virtues, as do the childless adults in our society.

****

image courtesy shutterstock / mike mols 

Related at PJ Lifestyle:

I Kid You Not: The Top 4 Reasons I Don’t Have Children

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I myself had 7 children with my first husband. I am completely convinced that one of the chief reasons why Leftist activists and organizations have prevailed in Western societies is that they ARE childless, or nearly so. It is a fact that many liberals/Leftists are childless, almost all the rest only have one. (Even more so, the segment of environmental activists that is obsessed with overpopulation.)This gives them LOTS of free time,and lots of money NOT spent on kids,so they can found and run, lavishly fund, and be active themselves in their pet causes. And the homosexual activists,especially, due to their choice of partners/SOs, cannot between them HAVE children. So we are outbreeding them, but they are outspending and outrunning and outfighting and out planning US. WE conservatives with children are often reluctant to abandon them to the care of other people while WE go be activists,so we stay home and raise them, and the wrong people get and stay in power.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
*Groan* I am this close to abandoning PJM. I can't read this twaddle. Where idd my country go?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What nonsense. Children give people a stake in future. The Childless, particularly those who lack religious sentiment are going be focused on today and not tomorrow. What makes anybody think that just because you don't have children that makes you an independent thinking Libertarian or Conservative? The exit polls from the last election should tell you that that ain't so. Childless people are perpetual adolescents, a group not know for independent thinking.

The Democratic Party wants to atomize society so they can more easily exert control. No family, no freedom.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (67)
All Comments   (67)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Children are called 'Hostages to Fortune' for a reason.

An echo from another part of the forest: 'When setting sail on stormy seas,
few people choose to tie an anchor around their neck.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Having children was a neccessity, until now.

There are certain types pf people, who cannot deal with change, and who think the world revolves around them, and think the way the world worked when they were kids, is the way it works today, and forever and ever, amen. They are limited by their genetics. These are the people who can't deal with childless folks. I pity them. They are SO deficient!

Pity their kids, too. Thank God, we have the internet now, so kids can find out at an earlier age, that their parents are dopes. :)

Since I am childless, and own a mortorcycle, I need people to pave the roads. Other peoples kids do that nicely. At least, until the robots take that job, which will be in ten years.

Other peoples kids also do a good job fighting the wars, good and stupid, makes no difference.

Single people think a lot, and occaisionally come up with some good stuff. They can stay up late. Society needs BOTH. A society of only parents....will have a high suicide rate, for one thing! It would be braindead!

No, small, loving communities, are not the answer. Why do you think war has been so popular through the ages? It gave people a chance to GET AWAY FROM THAT LIVING HELL.

Yeah, parents care about thier kids SO much, they submit them to government brainwashing, and liberal indoctrination, in the very schools they pay for, for the most part. Way to be loving parents, people!

In any event, kids will be made to order in the future, which is about 40 years from now. Parents will soon be obsolete.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It's not so tough to be different when your kids aren't in public school. And we all know how much school sucks, so why be afraid? Get your kids the hell out and be yourself. Flip the bird to the conformists and live. Or you can live the life of a coward. Your choice.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It's not tough to be different when your kids are IN public school. All you need is a spine.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
This is precisely - and I am referring more to the comments - the same sort of thinking that led young people around 1900 to make suicide pacts and shoot kill thenselves, because the world was no good.

If people are that irrational, maybe they shouldn't be bringing children up. Have some anyway; we can't, and will be happy to take them off your hands.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What the weird thing to say. As long as people have children, the human race will outlive whatever temporary idiocy is currently being produced.

As we are coming up upon Passover, this reminds me of the story of the leader of the Jews in Egypt who set an example by separating from his wife, because he didn't want his future sons thrown into the Nile. So his four-year-old daughter went to him and asked what he had against girls. He set another example, and remarried his wife. And in fact, had a boy. Moses.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Ah, the good old days before hypergamy ran rampant..
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Well, Dr. Helen, I can tell that you've never been a public school teacher. Congratulations, because it's a nightmare.

I once had a girl accuse me of showing the class pornography. It was a King Authur movie, for crying out loud. Okay, there were some semi-nude sex scenes between Lancelot and Guinievere, but nothing explicit. I got hauled into the principal's office.

Where did you get this film? Um, the school library. It's in the curriculum guide. It's in my lesson plans. Haven't you read them? I was merely following the curriculum guide and using the video from the library. I thought that was what I was supposed to do.

I've had kids act out in class. I've had kids late to class multiple times. But if you file a disciplinary report or a tardy slip, it only creates more problems for you.

I had this one girl who was a real problem. She was constantly tardy, talked all the time, interrupted instruction, didn't complete her assignments, and when she turned in her paper it was full of mistakes. Then she threw a fit when I gave her the grade she deserved, a 50. Which was the lowest grade I was allowed to give her; if it had been up to me, I would have given her a zero.

The mother came down and threw a fit. I was called once again to the principal's office. This is a record of my phone calls. I've made over 30 to notify you of your daughter's behavior. This is a record of how many times your daughter has been tardy. This is a record of how many disciplinary reports I've had to file on your daughter. This is her last paper, and it's full of miistakes.

Of course, I got blamed for everything. And I resigned at the end of the year.

My grandmother had it right in her autobiography. She wrote, "The teachers are afraid of the Principals, the Principals are afraid of the parents, the parents are afraid of their children, and the children know it." That was 40 years ago.

Teaching today is a monster task. I'm glad I'm not a teacher now, although I will say that the people I deal with in real estate are complete idiots, and they're all adults.

If you want to reform education, start with the curriculum: grammar, logic, rhetoric, literature, math, scienence, and the arts.

The problem here is not about a childless society. The problem is with lack of parenting.

When men and women starti putting their children above them, then there will be some change.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Rather sad how the overwhelming majorityy of people haven't a clue that its not the classroom teacher who is the problem. But today its the populist way of parents and others placing blame on the classroom teacher for their own responsibility failures. Probably shouldn't let 'educrats' ( a new term I just learned on PJM) escape a good share of the blame either.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I like your comment, but I do have one question -

"there were some semi-nude sex scenes between Lancelot and Guinievere, but nothing explicit"

Exactly what grade are we talking about?

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All adults were children at one point. No Children no childless Galters.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
A PJTV commenter once made a very sage observation, that there are no parents of young children in "Ayn Rand's" novels.

P.S. I need to confess that I have no children. But I am not proud of it.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Many of you say that parents become more involved with politics and the community at large—"fighting for Western values"—as the result of having children. Sorry, but my experience is directly the opposite. Women in particular become obsessed with talking about nothing but their children, including the color of baby's poo and banalities such as that, and cannot hold a conversation about anything of importance in the world. JWenting's comment about those who want to run everyone else's lives for "the children's sake" sums up the remaining parents.

The argument that we need children to have someone to fight for the West and uphold our values is proving to be so much balderdash these days. A disproportionate number of today's children have serious physical and mental handicaps, such as autism spectrum disorders, that ensure that they never will work or contribute to society, but will instead require expensive care all their lives at taxpayers' expense. A large percentage of the rest are dysfunctional and are either sociopaths or simply have no work ethic, making them largely useless to employers. Tell a kid he/she's special, and they expect their future bosses to treat them as special too. In several workplaces I've seen the results with people under 30. It ain't pretty. They simply will not do the work. And that's for the ones who bother to show up, let alone on time. These are the people who are going to fight for Western values, eh?

And then we must look at the big picture, including resource depletion and pollution. The alleged need for more Western children does not account for the existence of 7 billion people and serious questions about our planet's ongoing ability to support that many. With peak oil, looming shortages of fresh water, habitat destruction, and pollution, I have my doubts—and I'm no flaming environmentalist. I'm conservative. And I want to conserve for the future instead of wiping it all out in the near future. Carrying capacity is the elephant in the room all of the pronatalist posters here ignore.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"In several workplaces I've seen the results with people under 30. It ain't pretty. They simply will not do the work. And that's for the ones who bother to show up, let alone on time."

------

I think that's always been true to a degree with young people, but men usually straighten out as they get older. They have to - for many, it's either work or be homeless or go to jail. And if they don't work and constantly move up, women (after age 30 or 35) aren't going to give them that much attention.

For women, it's a very different situation. They are "career women" as long as things are going smoothly. When trouble hits, they can just take Plan B and sit home on their fat rumps while the man pays for them.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I myself had 7 children with my first husband. I am completely convinced that one of the chief reasons why Leftist activists and organizations have prevailed in Western societies is that they ARE childless, or nearly so. It is a fact that many liberals/Leftists are childless, almost all the rest only have one. (Even more so, the segment of environmental activists that is obsessed with overpopulation.)This gives them LOTS of free time,and lots of money NOT spent on kids,so they can found and run, lavishly fund, and be active themselves in their pet causes. And the homosexual activists,especially, due to their choice of partners/SOs, cannot between them HAVE children. So we are outbreeding them, but they are outspending and outrunning and outfighting and out planning US. WE conservatives with children are often reluctant to abandon them to the care of other people while WE go be activists,so we stay home and raise them, and the wrong people get and stay in power.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And at last until recently, female media people tended to be unmarried.

I always find it interesting that you are more-or-less not allowed to publish a paper showing that children are better off if the mother doesn't work outside the house. After all, how many sociology professors are stay-at-home Moms?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
*Groan* I am this close to abandoning PJM. I can't read this twaddle. Where idd my country go?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Don't blame PJM. Blame the commenters, who are either justifying themselves or too young to know better.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The word "justify" implies that people's personal reasons aren't good enough unless they can make them persuasive to you or others. No one need justify a damned thing to you.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 Next View All