Political compass for the21st century

[pbrower2a]

(02-19-2019, 03:16 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(02-19-2019, 04:19 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(02-18-2019, 11:13 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I question the notion that the counter-culture was composed of people who neglected their families. For one thing, most hippies were under 30 years old, and probably didn't have children or married partners. Some of them formed communes in which children were looked after by everyone there. They engaged in free love because they could. Later, many settled down. The birth control pill made freer sex out of wedlock more possible. This pill was not the result of the self-actualization movement.

...if they did not have children, or at least put off child-bearing and child-raising until they were through with the counter-culture. The party is over, at least for women, once they have children. If a man has any character, then the party is over for him.

I wouldn't want to put it like that; I'd put it in a more positive way: more responsibilities have begun.

I can't see a logical difference between what I say and what you say.  If one is a good person, then taking responsibility for children that one bears or sires rightly takes precedence over hedonism and even intellectual absorption.

Quote:

Quote:Gen Xers gained a lot because they were neglected. They became excellent survivalists and independent, self-reliant people. The Awakening era saw a rise in divorces and single-parent families, which was the main reason for this neglect. There were latchkey kids, which was also the result of more women working. Single-parent families was not necessarily a good thing, for many children. I remember Bradshaw said it wasn't. But it was a general trend of the time, and it was not a direct result of the counter-culture or the self-actualization concept. But the general trend of the Awakening was for more freedom in lifestyle, including freedom from marriages that were not happy or supportive for women's aspirations (e.g. The Feminine Mystique), and divorce laws were weakened. So the trend of those times did create more neglect of children. But people who just wanted more freedom were not necessarily self-actualizing people.

Getting stoned was obviously not self-actualization.

Not unless it opens the doors of perception, which can then be followed up by a sincere quest on the path toward genuine self-actualization, if the user is so inclined.[/quote]

Changing the smelly diapers and attending to the formula come before the Voyage to the Interior come before any contemplation of high philosophical inquiry -- or the parents stand to pay for negligence later. If one has the choice of taking a day trip to visit the Art Institute of Chicago or the Auburn-Duesenberg-Cord Museum in Auburn, Indiana from Kalamazoo, Michigan or take care of the child, then one had better choose the child. Infants are demanding, and any shortchanging of them will cost one later. Neglected children more offten than others grow up into dangerous critters.