THEODORE DALRYMPLE’s observations of Great Britain (which he recently shared at Hillsdale College) are sadly true of America as well:
“. . . the notions of dependence and independence have changed [in Britain]. I remember a population that was terrified of falling into dependence on the state, because such dependence, apart from being unpleasant in itself, signified personal failure and humiliation. But there has been an astonishing gestalt switch in my lifetime. Independence has now come to mean independence of the people to whom one is related and dependence on the state. Mothers would say to me that they were pleased to be independent, by which they meant independent of the fathers of their children – usually more than one – who in general were violent swine. Of course, the mothers knew they were violent swine before they had children by them, but the question of whether a man would be a suitable father is no longer a question because there are no fathers. At best, though often at worst, there are only stepfathers. The state would provide. In the new dispensation, the state, as well as the television, is father to the child.”
R.J. Rushdoony: “The family is a very powerful institution, with a capacity for survival and revival which has outlasted empires. Nations which work to destroy the family succeed thereby in destroying themselves. The state then perishes, and the family survives.