Children of the State
by Joseph A. D’Agostino (more by this author)
Posted 03/03/2008 ET
There is no such thing as other peoples children. — Hillary Clinton
Conservative Americans fancy that socialism has been largely defeated or that its greatest remaining threat lies in taxation and spending. They forget that the dream of leftist revolutionaries for centuries has been not only to equalize wealth and social status, but to eliminate all distinctions among the citizens of their ideal republic. All of these revolutionaries from Marx on down have targeted the family for destruction…(Full Story)
That article in Human Events contains an excellent and important review of Stephen Baskerville’s book, Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family.
Note: Hillary Clinton’s aphorism for the concept of state-ownership and control of children is fairly recent and not all that well known. Its historical form, used by communists for more than a century to promote totalitarian state-control of society, is familiar to far more people and is a long-standing staple of feminist dialectics: “There are no illegitimate children.” That means that all children, regardless of the marital status of their parents but especially those children who are full orphans or — primarily on account of divorce or separation of their parents — semi-orphans, are the full responsibility not of their parents (except for the paying) but of the state and of all of society.
It is only a short step from that to the claim by many social reformers that any conceivable grouping of people constitutes a family, in the words of the former German family minister, Ulla Schmidt, the then new SPD-health-minister in Berlin: “Family is, if all eat out of the same refrigerator.”
Stephen Baskerville explores the concept of state-ownership and control of children in one of his articles: “Hillary and the Politics of Children” (Human Events, 2007 01 24)