It will shock no one for me to say that the modern American family is an institution in crisis1. There will be no shortage of finger pointing as to what (or who) is to blame for that. Most of that finger pointing will be at someone’s favorite bogeyman, and will overlook some significant factors that might just hit a little closer to home. For my contention is similar to Nietzsche’s with regard to God: His death – and that of the family – is murder, and we are all complicit.
I want to start with a somewhat personal reflection, on what it means – if anything – to bear the surname I do. At one time (a time long gone) a family name meant a lot in establishing your identity, and from that identity what opportunities may or may not be available to you. Much of your life – your economic future, your marriage prospects – would be tied to the name you bore. Our Friday evening pirate epic reeks of the connections and impacts that family name carries. Yet today, what is a surname beyond an alphabetic identifier – the alternative to the dreaded identity number. I think it highly unlikely that any of us wish to be under the familial structures of even two centuries back, let alone more. So we have stripped all of that meaning from the 3 to 12 characters that typically go into that second component of what is your name. All that remains are some hollow jokes about what it means to be an Xxxxx; in our case a joke about you know you belong to our family because you make money – for other people. I got to thinking about this with the birth of a grandson, who carries on the family name – in my case the only male name heir amongst my siblings. So heir to what exactly? If it will never mean much to him, why should it mean anything to me? If that is all true, have I hopelessly dishonored all my forefathers? Or am I simply not going along with some delusion as I perhaps should be to be a better social player?
In The Quest for Community, Robert Nisbet covers the factors that dissolved the ancient Roman patrician system. He lays a large part of the blame on the experience of the soldiers of the Roman army – having become successful within that system not falling back under the old family system. So the degradation of the family isn’t some new thing, nor is it linear, for the family fortunes wax and wane throughout history. This is the case of the Enlightenment and the seeds of the modern nation state – those forces have worked against the family, for centuries now. State authority rises by sapping or usurping the authority of competing institutions. This is something Nisbet taught me about Rousseau – that Rousseau deliberately sought to elevate state power because he saw all traditional authority… family, church, community, guild, literally all of society, to be the corrupter(s) of man’s true nature. The man was unquestionably the architect of the totalitarian project, as only the State could accomplish his ultimate goal – man devoid of his social character.
Nisbet also argues the family didn’t fare that much better in England, for Hobbes’ belief was that the family, like sovereignty, is a contractual relationship – even though nothing is written down. Hobbes really did use this argument2, for the family as justification for the sovereign relationship. While the Hobbesian argument doesn’t go to the Rousseavian extreme (only because Hobbes didn’t have the same depth of hatred for competing authority), it does at the same time pit sovereign authority (power) as superior to familial – ALL are bonded to the Sovereign over and above any other allegiance to any other authority (a very early take on “everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state”).
What both outlooks produce is the individual commitment to, and reliance on, the highest source of authority (and of shedding obedience to any lesser authority) and that is the State. In our modern times a family is a unit of convenience, an assemblage of individual citizens, not a cohesive institution that has authority, membership and interest. Every individual has a direct reliance on the State, including the very most precious part of that relationship – the guarantee of individual rights. So when we complain about the decline of the family – exactly what are we complaining about? Whatever grievance we have, who do we ask to arbitrate or ameliorate it? The State. Rather Rousseauvian isn’t it?
While all human institutions operate under some defined authority (and this mostly on tradition, not on reason3), the State combines authority with power. If accountability is a struggle in any institution (which it is) – to hold leaders accountable in particular; the struggle to hold accountable those with authority and power is more than doubled. The most frightening lack of accountability comes in bureaucracy; although we revile Anthony Fauci, he was backstopped by the rules of sovereign immunity and bureaucratic insularity. But sadly, the State is our only crutch, even as it further cripples our legs.
If we consider our social ills, our alienated youth – young men in particular, consider the context. We have bemoaned the pathologies of the fatherless since Moynihan’s report4; but of late we see that the pathologies are no longer safely contained within that segment of the populace. Even raised with a father, what is a father these days? He isn’t the sole breadwinner for the family. He isn’t the lord of his castle5. He isn’t the image of God as loving father and fearsome judge. Who is the best known father in popular entertainment of the day? Homer Simpson. And this is all fine with the State – for Big Brother is there with his comforting embrace, providing for Julia as much as all of us Winston Smiths. The State was metaphorically the Great Father to our savages on the plains – infantilized and placed in putative sanctuaries (reservations) as much embarrassment as curiosity. Our most well intended would have the State minister to all of our ills (and the only political divide is over which ills and which means). As with the war on terror, those powers were only directed externally at first; they were bound to be used internally eventually.
Now, let’s think about what a world in which family was recognized, legally, as the basic unit of society and not the individual – even beyond the individual reaching legal majority. When one brings harm upon one’s family or even just threatens to do so, who is expected to deal with that, and allowed to deal with that? If the family metes out justice to prevent greater harm to the family, that individual no longer can seek succor from the State. That violates a lot of our Enlightenment ideals, doesn’t it? But imagine if you will what social pathologies rampant today could withstand that system of accountability. Where banishment from the family would be if not quite a death sentence, one that truly meant being unmoored from key protections in the social environment. That would be a robust family life and it could be a pretty terrible one – depending on the family6. Would we accept that as an improvement or would we see that as a betrayal of our highest values?
Invoking Nietzsche as I did, I hope tipped my hand that I wouldn’t offer any solution here, only a hard look, based on reality, that questions what we mean when we say something about the decline in family. Nisbet talks at length about the subject, and that institutions that are robust are not subject to attack (as we tend to say about the family now – that it is under assault); it is the decay of an institution, any institution, that invites the assaults upon it. That’s the part I want all of us to think about.
- 30 odd years ago, when I moved to Northern Virginia, I had a room-mate who worked in DC but was renovating a Baltimore row-house. It took him a couple of years and when he completed it, he threw an open house. He did a great job, but I had to chuckle with him about the space. I quipped that when that home was originally built it housed an extended family; a generation later is was just enough for a nuclear family; by the time he restored it, it was a bachelor pad. ↩︎
- “…it ‘is not so derived from the Generation, as if therefore the Parent had Dominion over his Child because he begat him; but from the Child’s Consent, either expresse, or by other sufficient arguments declared.’ In short, contract is, in Hobbes’s rigorous terms, the cement even of the family itself. Not from custom, or divine law itself, does the solidarity of the family proceed. It proceeds from, and can be justified by, voluntary agreement, either express or implied.” (internal quote marks are Hobbes, Leviathan), Nisbet, The Quest for Community, p. 126 ↩︎
- And here is Rousseau using reason to undermine tradition – the very essence of The Enlightenment. Though he does employ reason, it is in service of his most violent passion. That is an irony worth noting. ↩︎
- “The report concluded that the high rate of families headed by single mothers would greatly hinder progress of blacks toward economic and political equality. The Moynihan Report was criticized by liberals at the time of publication, and its conclusions remain controversial.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Family:_The_Case_For_National_Action ↩︎ - Another illustrative anecdote. In the early 90s, when I moved from Oregon to Virginia there was a news story about a family in the Willamette valley and the early-teen daughter who had an anonymous suiter. This would’ve been a non-story if it had been another teen, but the suiter was more stalker and as I recall in his late 20s, maybe early 30s. The family (including the father) were powerless to stop this man; they had sought out police and the courts and were rebuffed as nothing the man did was technically illegal. The family would ultimately move – go into hiding to protect their daughter. I recall discussing this at the time with family and friends and we were somewhat stunned that the father, perhaps a brother, a cousin, or two and maybe some friends did not visit some rough justice on the stalker – which would of course have actually put them on the wrong side of the law; even as justified as they would’ve been, both for protecting his daughter and teaching the stalker some manners. ↩︎
- Tolstoy and Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. ↩︎
There is a very good chance my family name ends in this generation (at least here in the US). To my knowledge, there’s only me and a cousin who are males with the family name (my dad had five sisters, and two brothers). I’ve produced no offspring that I’m aware of, and I believe he’s just had two girls. To me, it’s a name. My immediate family, we’re close enough, we see each other a couple of times a year, and there’s no bad blood among us (that I’m aware of). But once you start getting into the extended family, things change. Hell, I’m not even sure at this point how many cousins I have, and probably wouldn’t recognize half of them if we ran into each other in public. Back in the 90’s, I actually wound up becoming friends with one of my cousins and neither of us recognized each other until someone the last name was said by someone else.
My family name will probably end in this generation. I have one nephew who has our name, but he’s in his 20’s and has no kids. There were a lot of kids on my dad’s side of the family, but most were girls.
When I was born my grandfather told my father good thing you have a boy, or we would have lost the family name. I did not manage to have children so my granpa would be disappointed. But the name endures as it is the second most popular in Romania and many thousands have it.
I am the eldest male with the family name in my generation, which means that I got my grandfather’s first name. If I had a male child, it would be expected that I would name that child after my dad, with my middle name.
I feel bad for my parents. They had 3 kids, and none of us have given them grandchildren. Although I assign more blame on my sister than myself.
I learned “-escu” is “son of” so what of the last name Curvescu?
you laugh but starting April I will be able to fly there come to where you live and SUE YOU (which I can do for any reason if I understand the americanese legal system )
So, when are you going to visit?
no idea
@Pie
If you go to a commie state, you can take over someone’s house, change the locks, and claim it as your own.
PieInTheSky:
Too bad that we’ll only be able to pay you in TrumpBucks come April, since at that point the US will be under the command of Trump the first and second.
Visa Waiver extended to Romania?
yes starting april 1st if trump does not cancel on us
My brothers have been slanging it around* and have produced 4 boys between the two of them, so the family name will go on.
I’m vaguely pleased by that as it’s an unusual name in this country – unusual enough that I own .com.
My wife’s family may see their name go – she’s 1 of 3 girls and her only male cousin on her father’s side has just had girls as well. My wife has kept her own last name, so it’ll keep for the moment (and I try not to tease her that keeping her father’s last name isn’t exactly sticking it to the patriarchy).
* with their respective wives, I should add
What’s in a last name? My father was born with a different last name than I. He took a legal alias as a child and never bothered to request a name change.
Apologies for the crappy formatting, but the best I could do with WP Block mode, and thanks to the editors for getting the footnotes to work.
I want to start with a somewhat personal reflection, on what it means – if anything – to bear the surname I do
imprudent is not the most auspicious name but could be worse.
There are arguments that dissolution of clans and extended families were a major reason for western economic and technological development, whatever value we put on that
many societies seen as backwards are clanish…
Someday the Celts will reclaim western Europe.
Yes, this isn’t all bad news. It was a real strength of the book Technopoly, that emphasized the trade-offs that come with progress.
Greetings from North Nowhere Vermont. Please excuse me if I abuse the hospitality of this forum by engaging in a bit of venting.
Canada is a country rich in natural resources. One of these is frigid Arctic air and apparently Trump’s threat of tariffs prompted the flappy heads to dump their stockpile before it became too expensive to do so. This morning’s temperature was -12F which, I have to admit, is merely unseasonably cold and not unreasonably cold. It’s still cold enough to prompt me to stay in the cabin and keep the wood stove hot all day long lest the water system freeze.
I know that our distinguished member from Central Nowhere Minnesota would dispute with me that a mere -12F is “cold”. It is my sincere hope that I never acquire the experience required to agree with him.
You might note the conspicuous silence of the Alaskan and British Columbian Glib contingents.
Dammit, Albertan, not BC. I recognized the mistake as soon as I clicked on submit.
That’s because with all the cold air shipped south they’re enjoying the outdoors in t-shirts and shorts.
Here in the balmier single digit temps this morning, the trinity of happiness was remote start, heated seats, & heated steering wheel.
It is -3 here in Indiana. On our wedding day in Feb. of 1999, it was -17. It happens, but not that often.
I feel bad for my sister-in-law. Her furnace is out and they’re waiting for a part that’s due today.
6C here as we speak…
Above Freezing?
What sort of Tropical hellscape do you live in?
Last two mornings have been a -31, Richard. Those are in all likelihood going to be the coldest days of winter. Cold but not anywhere record territory.
Had visitors from Manitoba on Sunday (-26 Sunday morning). John, the male, was wearing a t-shirt and a winter coat, his wife, dressed more conventionally. They’d spent the night in Fargo, same temps as here. They did let the truck warm up before they left NoDak though.
The coldest I recall it being in my 30+ years in North Nowhere Vermont is about -25F. Unlike you in the upper Midwest I’ve got a barrier of big lakes, mountain ranges, and valleys to defend against Canadian intrusions.
Some years ago during a nighttime return walk from visiting some neighbors when it was -20F-or-so I passed a crack/cave right on the side of the road and something growled at me from it. I was unarmed but I figured that whatever it was wasn’t going to come out so I growled back in my most menacing manner. I guess it was a coyote.
-29 deg F this morning just north of Duloot.
My truck was … reluctant … to move.
I like to say it keeps the riff-raff out, but they let me in!
What I’m taking away from these comments is that there needs to be a raid on some Sabines to address the shortage of offspring and heirs.
STEVE SMITH HELP MAKE BABIES
Somewhere between the amoral familism of tribal and quasi-tribal societies and everything for the State/Party totalitarianism is a precarious balance point that allows historically brief periods of free and prosperous society.
so keep the nuclear family get rid of feminism got it
I don’t think those are properly amoral, just a different moral basis (and authority). But clearly your family relationship would be dominant over your status as an individual citizen.
I would say they are amoral since I believe that calling “what advantages me and mine is moral, what disadvantages me and mine is immoral” is the principle you are left with once you remove morality. What I am trying to get at is that morality in any meaningful sense has to be somewhere between pure family advantage and pure subordination of the self to the society. You cannot have the rule of law unless you accept the idea that your loved ones can rightly be punished for certain acts. And the rule of law becomes meaningless in the other direction if you accept the unlimited authority of a sovereign.
It was the Roman patriarchal system that built Rome, and the dissolution thereof that contributed to its decline. You wouldn’t argue that late Rome was more moral than the earlier era, would you?
The Roman patriarchal system was not an amoral familism. I am not saying that family over state is amoral, or immoral inherently. Amoral familism is a specific type of social organization, examples of which exist throughout Africa and the Arab world in which morality is subordinated to familial advantage. I’m not making a libertarian argument for individual over family here at all.
I am not really arguing against your post, except insofar as I am saying it should not be an all or nothing choice between individual, family and state. I agree with you that we have expanded the role of the state at the expense of the family, and that the classical liberal ideals so beloved here are a driver of the erosion of the family and empowerment of the state.
Yeah, I’m not arguing all-or-nothing either, and it is deep currents that have brought us to where we are. There won’t be any sudden changes, at least not for the better.
I think the real problem across the board is the death of God. The problems that arise from primacy of any of the three (individual, family, or state) are only mitigated by virtue, and we have not found Nietzsche’s superman yet, to create a post theistic framework to build virtue. Not that we did a great job even with God’s judgment as an incentive. We are living in the world Nietzsche’s pessimism predicted. I am as bad as anyone about this, my sins tend to be sins of sloth so I don’t have dramatic confessions to make, but I have wasted my life and my talents to a very great degree.
Consider that you and your family were wealthy enough to have a last name!
Prior to the Meiji Restoration, family names in Japan were reserved for the aristocracy, and although affluent commoners could pay to bear a surname, they could only be used in local circles and not on official documents. It was only in 1870 that previous legislations which prevented commoners from taking on family names were removed; in 1873, a new law came into effect, requiring everyone, regardless of socioeconomic status, to have a family name.
https://www.sg.emb-japan.go.jp/JCC/E-Magazine-Jun-2021-Names.html
After the mandated last names folks often created them from some geography in the village where they were from. For example, one of my friend’s last name is “Morishima”. Mori – forest and Shima- means island. So she is Yukari from the forested island.
Interesting bit of perspective – obviously aping Western values there.
Yes, that was part of the movement to bring Japan into the world and embrace the west.
Interestingly, 23andme has racial/ethnic breakdowns of many last names in the US. A surprising number (~10%+) of the ones I looked at were not Asian or two or more races.
No Morishima, but Hoshino (星hoshi = star, 野no = field) as an example
https://discover.23andme.com/last-name/Hoshino
2000 2010 Change
Asian/Pacific Islander 82.02% 77.12% -5.97%
Two or More Races 7.64% 10.06% 31.68%
White 8.68% 9.27% 6.8%
Hispanic 1.45% 3.55% 144.83%
Black 0% 0% 0%
American Indian and Alaskan Native 0% 0%
lol Two percent of my last name are Hispanics or Asians – I wonder how that happens. Adoptions, I guess?
Cuz my name is McWhiterson.
rhywun:
I would figure adoptions. One of my friends back in the day (and his sister) was Korean born, but adopted by a family with a last name that screamed “pasty”. It lead to quite a few double takes when he was carded or payed with a credit card. Of course his nickname was Irish %firstname%.
I read once that “Mister” used to be a legit honorific that was reserved for the armigerous.
I used to use that as a reward in my D&D campaigns.
So we’re allowed to state that the conclusions are no longer “controversial”, right? 🙄
Among thinking people, of course. I wouldn’t trust the reaction of progressives.
I believe that family may make a comeback as we balkanize and whitey heads toward minority status. Trump’s Presidency may put a hold on that for a few years. We’ll see if his reforms outlast this term.
Maybe I’m a little optimistic because we joined a fairly large growing church in the deep south. Across the 3 services every morning there is at least 1 baptism. Currently 20 families in the queue. Usually several generations up there with the child celebrating the continuation of their families.
I wrote this thinking I might be an outlier – as I often am. Though perhaps less than I imagined.
Lots of people, including some of my extended family, bought into the big daddy state concept. Then they witness failure after failure of government to protect them. Sending money to be laundered in the Ukraine while disaster victims are homeless in NC and CA. Letting violent criminals cross the border and victimize citizens with impunity…
If the state keeps failing, the family, and eventually rough justice makes a comeback.
‘I believe that family may make a comeback as we balkanize and whitey heads toward minority status’
Curious how you mean to correlate race and family here. Will white adopt more family-centric values or are you saying the state-trusting values of whites are on life support because there are more family-centric people in other races?
Whites led the charge to replace family with the state and at least some of them are feeling very betrayed right now.
Immigrants’ family ties vary of course. Indians tend towards being clannish – which was an ingredient in the big H1B kerfuffle.
So far he is doing little wrong.
Mrs OBE and I will be headed to Norway sometime this year and one planned excursion is to my family namesake…or so legend goes.
I’m guessing they will be like…nah man…it’s not.
Another instance of posting and leaving for a few hours: Suffice to say I’m the opposite of all that. I’m the oldest son of the oldest son. I’ve understood since earliest childhood my duty to uphold the family name and carry it on. I’ve also known since childhood where I would be buried – in the plantation cemetery that’s got 5 previous generations in it. And I know where the other smaller cemeteries are that aren’t so new. Later this year I’m planting more trees that I’ll never see cut, with my sons’ alignment on the plan. Etc.
How does a Somewhere like you tolerate all of us Anywheres?
My tangential thoughts:
It seems to me that we have a choice of one of three life priorities in this society.
Work, Hedonism, or Relationships.
You are a slave to your employment or to your passions or to your relations.
Our culture, particularly, seems to value the work and passions over the relationships. Prioritizing relationships is bad because it is hopelessly not egalitarian. It’s also much harder to assume and hold power over. I can threaten your job to cow you into a shot. I can promise bread and circuses for your tolerance. It’s much harder to manipulate your relationships to get you to behave. It can be done, but it’s much less predictable, and it usually has to be extremely blunt.
The other option is to erode those relationships and to force people to prioritize work and hedonism so theyre easier to manipulate.
Family, community, culture, patriotism and religion are threats to those who want power. That’s why those in power want them compartmentalized and de-emphasized. It has worked like a charm.
Now I read and I see that this wasn’t as tangential as I thought. Sorry for retreading some of what you wrote JI.
You are a slave to your employment or to your passions or to your relations.
And here I thought my outlook was dismal.
Excellent piece, JI.
I think most institutions are as you describe: they grow too large and centralized, become weak and disappear.
Is it possible that certain institutions have more built-in resilience? The Church and the family have been declared dead before, particularly in certain countries, yet they never actually disappear. Chesterton wrote about the five deaths of the church and this article picks it up in more current times:
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2018/09/20/the-sixth-death-of-the-church/
I don’t think the family is doomed. As the non-traditional but massively powerful institutions fail to deliver, the decentralized communities will become necessary and desirable again.
I don’t think the family is doomed. As the non-traditional but massively powerful institutions fail to deliver, the decentralized communities will become necessary and desirable again.
Yep. I’ll point out that while all the “family is dead” people are having 0-2 kids, the traditionalists are having 4+ kids. Anti-family comes with anti-natalism, and it’s self correcting.
Um, yeah, but – you’re missing the point about family – as in its full context, not just nuclear reproduction. I would expect strong, extended families to rapidly gain ground – when the system goes to shit and individualism (and the nuclear family) doesn’t get you anywhere.
I was letting “traditionalist” do too much work in my comment.
Most of the traditionalists I refer to are living close to and under the influence of the extended family. It’s not a perfect example of the familial units of the past, but it’s much more familially based than Braxton and his girlfriend Rachel raising one of her kids from a prior hookup and four furbabies while living 1000 miles away from where either of them grew up.
Oldest son living in California right now we had a large discussion about community and how there is just none in California. He wants community and I told him “We got it here in rural-adjacent Kentucky and you have my address”
So it is becoming desirable. People look around at large disasters that could have been mitigated better or how a community reacts under certain stresses and people are feeling let down. Eventually they will realize its them and their neighbors who will be doing the heavy lifting.
Interestingly, community can crop up in all sorts of places.
We’re in the middle of a densely populated city but in a cul-de-sac with 5 houses / 10 families (all 2-unit condos) and we have a great little community.
Everyone knows each other and we look out for each other, do favors, trade tools, have mini-block parties & cook-outs (one place as a nice backyard), etc.
Probably helps that every place is owner-occupied vs. renters.
One of the whole purposes of meritocracy is to weed out familial influence. And to whom do you then owe your loyalty for your success under such a system?
And to whom do you then owe your loyalty for your success under such a system – the good people of Islay
In my line, the seed is strong for producing males. We apparently import all our women. Dad’s father had only one brother, same as my dad, and I also have only one brother, who has three boys of his own.
I never wanted kids and this hasn’t changed. Before it was cuz as a teacher, I couldn’t fathom actually wanting to go home to your own. I still have no desire to have ’em, but also now I’m financially in need and medically… it’s likely “extraordinarily dangerous” for me to father one. Living near bro with his 11, 9 and 4yos is a priority, specifically to offset my bro’s nature and cuz the youngest is considered by the family to have My DNA more than the others. Had a great time with just me and the 9 and 4yo yesterday. I’ve made significant and steady progress with ’em, and am primed to be a semi-official Cool Uncle. I strongly, strongly approve. I’ll eventually be joined by an obligatory Bachelor Hound when I’m settled. We’ll conquer much. Repent and despair, all!
So I conclude that in the last the minutes of the Biden administration he pardoned a whole bunch of people who hadn’t been convicted of anything and in the first few minutes of the Trump administration he pardoned a whole bunch of people had had been convicted of something. And many of the first set were the prosecutors of the second set.
Pandora’s box comes to mind.
Pandora’s box was the moment DOJ utilized 18 U.S. Code § 1512: Obstruction of an Official Proceeding as the basis of nearly a 1/3 of those charged.
I hate to think what the left is learning from all this. I fear it will be that next time, there should be executions.
That’s what abolishing the civil war reconciliation is all about.
Random question…starting to look at dates for doing stuff here in Europe. If Oktoberfest is 20 Sep-5 Oct…would it be best to be there right at the beginning (Munich presumably), or later in the period?
DEG is your man. Do you have his email?
Also I think he has done an article or two.
Oktoberfest – dont be such a tourist
What? Oktoberfest is the event…I’m just not going to hang around for 2+ weeks.
🎶 Cause everybody hates a tourist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuTMWgOduFM
Honestly, Fish, I would look for a city other than Munich unless you just want big, seething mobs. One of my fond memories of my trip to Europe after law school (1987) was visiting friends in Bad Tolz, a little town (maybe even a village) near the then-border with East Germany. We just happened to be there for their Oktoberfest, and it was a lot of fun – the whole town was in the square, there were big tents set up with long tables, the beer was served in stoneware mugs (liters for the men, pints for the ladies). We didn’t speak a word of German, none of the locals spoke a word of English, and we just had a blast.
That works for me – I just want convenient – cheap, good beer. Doesn’t have to be Munich – and probably good not to be too close to an Army base. Given the time of year, something in the Alps might be a lot of fun too. Guess I can ask if MWR here recommends a location too.
Since I’ll probably be by myself (or not)…I’m a little angsty about being in too deep without some language connection.
My time was spent in Pirmasens, a smaller city not far from Kaiserslautern.
Octoberfest was a great time to be 20 years old and celebrating with my newest friends in a tent, drinking Parkbrau. I did hit Munich about 10-12 years later, I can’t remember if it was Octoberfest but we drank bier in a big tent and sang songs of which I have no idea but we were still singing in the party mode.
I agree with RC
München by proxy.
Great article. There is a middle ground between rigid familial constellations and nuclear families. A good friend married into an Indian clan (here in America), and their support system has been eye-opening. Nobody is forced to a path, but they have an extensive network of relatives ready and enthusiastic to propel success or step in to help if need arises.
I think the pertinent issue is, where does your greatest loyalty lie – family, or state? Not that either one is without complication and pitfall, but you have to choose one or the other.
I’m assuming these are dot Indians?
There is definitely a much more balanced family-state relationship. Partly because the state is so, so corrupt back home. Interestingly, you can see the clan/family dynamic shifts in India depending on where you are from and the relative competence of the state. I’d really never considered JI’s thesis before, but seems to be borne out.
A little snippet of discussion from aforementioned Friday night pirate epic [SPOILER] in re Celia’s in/ability to have children:
I think this may be part of the big cultural break between England and America that came to a head with the Revolution. We didn’t cotton to the cloistered outlook of English life. You are straddling that with this story, and given what I’ve read since I wrote this up, I’ve been anticipating it.
I refuse to be involuntarily collectivized, asshole.
Now, with that out of the way *begins reading article*
The Rolling Stones – Sympathy For The Devil
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwtyn-L-2gQ
More tangentially related stuff:
“You are going to die. And everyone you know will die. And just like most people cannot give you the name of their great grandfather; people, very soon, will not remember you. More than that. In order to be forgotten you must first be known. But very soon. Sooner than you think, you will not be known by anyone. ”
https://x.com/RealMattFradd/status/1881738629560570250
Odd take from a purported Christian.
I read it as a take from Ecclesiastes. Don’t chase fame and noteriety, it’s all vanity. Find something more eternal to focus your heart on.
It’s thematically aligned with my post above about what we’re enslaved to. I left off the second half of the thought. The part where the career and the passions disappear instantly, but the relationships last beyond your death. They’re the only way to leave a true legacy.
I still see it as a nihilistic take. You will know and be known by God. Even if your name isn’t on a statue. I do know the names of my great-grandfathers and hopefully mine will know mine. Not sure why cultivating a large and strong familiy isn’t honoring God and preparing for death.
I’ve been grappling with this “gonna die, leave nothing behind who will remember or honor you” thing. I don’t need honor. I know God knows who I am. I just need to know my mortal life wasn’t lived in vain, that I mattered to SOMEONE.
You do have a family and kids – who you’ve done a great job raising so far – from all accounts here. I’m still…bumming around so to speak trying to figure out how any kind of relationship actually works – maybe I’ll wind up in one someday.
But by the same token – from Suthenboy’s earlier thread – that doesn’t bother me so much in the big scheme of things either.
My grandpa had 6 daughters and no sons. The name lives on elsewhere and it’s a common enough name, so it doesn’t matter if HIS particular line carries on. I don’t know what he thought about having had no sons. He had his opinions on his various prospective sons-in-law, though. That said, because there are SO MANY of us out of those 6 sisters, and my gpa was a church bigwig around here, we all carry around, “I’m a [gpa’s last name]” as a method of identifying ourselves in our church community because it’s still known. But he had to make a name for himself for that to happen.
My dad also had a concern to carry on the family name, but that name isn’t common AT ALL and local to one very tiny footprint in Belgium, and I know how I’m related to everyone in the world with that surname. Bro1 has a “son” (MtF). Bro2 has a son (who might be gay).
XX changed her last name because while my husband’s surname is COMMON, it’s also an obvious schoolground bullying target, and that’s the only reason she changed it. Still hurt my husband’s heart, though. XY … who knows, with that boy.
As a woman, a family surname was immaterial to the carrying on of a line because unless I was a never-married mother, it was stopping with me.
Off topic (sorry, JI)
The more I found out about Aunt Susie, the more I want to [redacted].
Mom tells me today. “I asked Susie, if she hates me so much, why does she want to live with me?”
My heart is fucking BROKEN.
Sadly, it’s quite relevant, isn’t it?
Yes. Here’s the saga:
When Susie was barely 16 or just about to turn 17, I don’t remember, she ran away from home with her much-older boyfriend and weren’t heard from in DECADES.
Then she came back to the family and the church just before her husband died. By the time she moved in with my mom, she was, for all intents and purposes, a stranger my mom just really didn’t know. She was her sister, not some rando with a background of deceit and a lifetime made with a grifter.
Best timeline?
Dumbest timeline.
I’ll also accept “most amusing”
I hate to think what the left is learning from all this. I fear it will be that next time, there should be executions.
There are a bunch of people loudly bitching and moaning because Garland did not pursue Trump aggressively enough right out of the gate.
All that lawfare sure hurt his reelection.
Speaking of failing institutions:
https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1881767482979131589
🙄
I’ll also accept “most amusing”
They should have rounded up a couple more guys and had a chicken fight.
I never cared to carry on my family’s last name. My father was a mean drunk. My uncle diddled his own son. Another uncle beat a man until he was paralyzed. My grandpa diddled my female cousins. Not a lot to be proud of there.
This branch of the family tree ends with me.
Has any of your family ever been on Jerry Springer?
I don’t have that “nesting” gene. I have never wanted to get married, settle down, and have children.
You ever work in family law? 😉
Bio. We are relatively newcomers, my dad and family arrived from Latvia in 1905. My dad and his brother grew up, married and begatted, my uncle had one son and daughter. Son died in Germany in WW2, never married. I have two brothers, between the 3 we produced 4 boys. Oldest brother’s son never married, died recently. Younger brother had 2 sons, each produced two girls. My son was married for a very short time and no kids at all. The name dies.
If you google the family name every hit will be a close relative of mine. Only one in the US, although there are some derivatives. We will soon be history and forgotten, for better or worse. My brothers and I spent a lot of time moving around in our adult life and settled away from the family home and each other, though I am in proximity of my parents’ last home, where I had spent 4 years, before I left. My kids live in TX, where we lived when they were growing up.
Speaking of failing institutions:
I actually made it to “fear for their lives”. What a noxious delusional useless twat.
Lesbian priest with a masked profile pic gives lesbian virtue signaling sermon, film at eleven. Also, render unto Caesar you grandstanding bitch: Jesus knew that religion and politics don’t mix.
Trump should totally drone strike her ass.
The never ending effort to overcome human nature goes on. All of the possible replacements for family have been tried, each one the worst nightmare in its own way.
Notice the visceral reaction this morning to the story of the kid that turned his daddy in to the Stasi over the Jan6 Reichstag fire.
“Who your daddy was doesnt mean shit. The only thing that matters is what YOU do.” – heard a million times from my grandfather.
I agree but I still have a strong protective instinct about family. If it meant dynamiting the levee and washing away the state of Louisiana to save my offspring I would do it in a second.
I should add the George Burns joke: “Happiness is having a large, loving family…..that lives in another state. ”
I think family is not a problem as much as nepotism is. It is possible to have both family and a meritocracy.
I am just rattling off talking points, aren’t I? I will shut up now.
Veterinarians in the Washington, DC region have been put on alert for any unusual illnesses in their non-human patients amid today’s presidential inauguration—a nod to the significance of potential zoonotic bioterror threats.
Or you could worry about people with ladders and rifles.
TW- Ars
https://arstechnica.com/health/2025/01/dc-area-veterinarians-on-heightened-alert-amid-potential-inauguration-risks/
chimp piss
Stop treating pangolins doc.
My family name ends with me. My paternal grandfather came from a small family in Mississippi, and he had my dad and my deceased aunt. My Dad had two sons and one daughter. My brother is 47 and isn’t married nor have any kids and my sister don’t really have that strong of a desire to have children. I have two daughters and would have probably tried for a third one but after the second one which was a sort of difficult pregnancy, my wife didn’t want anymore.
On my Mom’s side, my grandparents had 14 kids who each had 2-3 kids of their own. My Mom’s maiden name will never die out.