Why did marx oppose family

[Martyr]

Ok why the fuck would he destroy the family system?

[Organic Revolution]

maybe he thinks that the family system in a capitalist society is to patriarchal?

[Wanted Man]

Well Martyr, be a bit more specific, which quotes do you have a problem with and what's wrong with them?

[gilhyle]

You have to be talking about Engels on the family.

As a young man, Marx came across various left wing groups advocating 'free love, the community of women (as it was quaintly called), particularly in Paris. He rejected all such ideas as entirely unhistorical.

Engels analysis of the history of the family (based on Morgan, but different) was sometimes considered 'anti-family', but was far from it. It does not bear that interpretation.

Particularly as developed by the third international, policies relating to the collectivization of household labour and child minding were developed. But these are not in Marx's writings (although I suspect he would have agreed with them)

What can you be referring to?

[which doctor]

Families are to restrictive. Children should be liberated from their captors. The raising of the family should be done by the community as a whole. Of course they could always stay with the family if they choose, but they should also be given the option to leave if they wish to do so.

[Martyr]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2005, 01:37 PM
Well Martyr, be a bit more specific, which quotes do you have a problem with and what's wrong with them?
In the communist manifesto it says that the family is an oppressive force and shall be abolished. Now that I mean is way to extreme

[Seeker]

Without any personal property to pass on to heirs, the family becomes irrelevant.

Add to this that the raising of children would be undertaken communaly, and you have effectivly abolished the family, all without a law or somesuch passed to that effect.

If you want to live like a modern family, so be it - no one's gonna stop you - but outside the Capitalist system, there is no need to.

Also, in my oppinion, monogamy is too much like having personal property.

[Rakshas]

Communism was not an ideology devised by Marx and Engles. Communism, as a line of thought, had existed before they wrote the Communist Manifesto. Regarding the 'Community of Women', both Marx and Engles reject the idea.
For the rest, it is self-evident that the abolition of the present system of production must bring with it the abolition of the community of women springing from that system, i.e., of prostitution both public and private.
Emphasis added Marx saw family as an institution where women and children were doubly oppressed, by both the capitalist style of production and by owner of the family i.e. the husband.

You do not have to be dogmatic in your approach towards Karl Marx's view. I do not think all communists support abolition of family as a coherent unit of the society. If both husband and wife share the responsibilities of running the household while not being subservient to the other is a model for the 'Happy Family'.

[Hopes_Guevara]

Originally posted by Martyr+Dec 22 2005, 09:19 PM--> (Martyr @ Dec 22 2005, 09:19 PM)
[email protected] 22 2005, 01:37 PM
Well Martyr, be a bit more specific, which quotes do you have a problem with and what's wrong with them?
In the communist manifesto it says that the family is an oppressive force and shall be abolished. Now that I mean is way to extreme [/b]
Oh, this is the first time I have heard about something like this. Ok, Martyr, may you quote fully what Marx said about family in manifesto?

[Ligeia]

How can children be raised by a whole community?At least in the first 4 years of their life they should have a constant person who raises them , educates them and what not since too many different people disturb the development of a child.We should consider the pedagogical point of view.....

[Martyr]

Sorry I did not answer before went to seattle for a couple of days anyway here it is

"On what foundation is the present family,the bourgeois family,based? On capital,on private gain. In its completely developed form this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians,and in public prostitution.

The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.

Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty".

[Ligeia]

I dont understand it.What does family mean at all?

Doubtless children need in their very first years of their lifes a constant carer, otherwise they get bedraggled or even can die of hospitalism.So every child should have someone to cling to but what happens if nobody sees any responsibility in this?Or will all people see it?

[Hopes_Guevara]

Ok, Martyr, I have looked for to read carefully both the Communist Manifesto and Anti-Duhring, and I think that what kind of the family have to vanished in Marx's point is the bourgeoise family but not general family. Marx supposes that the parents' rights to their children have to be restricted for preventing the hildren from their parents' exploitation. This is synonymous with the socialized education. I understand that this means there're still the existence of the blood and sentimental relationships between the parents and their childrens but the economic relationships of them have be abolished. This time, the children will be protected by commune from their parents' authority and imposition.

[kingbee]

Families are to restrictive. Children should be liberated from their captors. The raising of the family should be done by the community as a whole.

I don't know about you, but I've seen and experienced the family as the most altruistic of all groups.


The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation.

This is the quote, from the Communist Manifesto, to whoever was asking.

I feel this is the stumbling block in the Communist Manifesto. I don't believe whatsoever that the family is "mere money relation".

[ComradeOm]

Marx did not oppose the nuclear family per se, he just viewed it as a result of capitalist society. Its structure is entirely dependant on the material conditions of society in which its based. As such it is quite likely that the average family structure in socialism and communism will be quite different.

[jaycee]

i think that in a communist society family would ecome a lot more inclusive, whether this means going back to having the wider family, i.e more distant relatives or simply the community in general. after all communism will create a brotherhood of man.

[which doctor]

The community that we would live in would become our family. They would raise us and comfort us when we are sad. The nuclear family as we know it would most likely fade away.

[Niemand]

Originally posted by Fist of [email protected] 3 2006, 11:54 PM
The community that we would live in would become our family. They would raise us and comfort us when we are sad. The nuclear family as we know it would most likely fade away.
Indeed, the nuclear family will undoubtedly fade away as the people start to see each other as family, as important, loving people. The family will be the entire community and will be a giant leap towards peace on earth, assuming that other nations decide to join us and live life in an efficent, loving, peaceful way.

[tambourine_man]

the "family unit" is integral in the establishment of class-based society and private property.

historically, "primitive communism" preceded the establishment of class-based society (even in its most crude form). this "primitive communism" eventually gave way to class-based society due, in part, to surplus production and permanent settlement. so did the communal "family" give way to the "private" family. that is because monogamy (and the private family unit) in particular form the basis for inheritence rights thereby both protecting and justifying the institution of private property at once.

the family is just like the nation-state. it is just a more fundamental reflection of relations of production based on private ownership.

as for the family being altruistic...i would say that it is the complete opposite...just an extension of individual self-interest to others who, by material and social obligation (maybe mutual), are positioned to gratify personal desires.

fidel castro once said something like..."we have only achieved communism when a mother mourns for a child to whom she has no relation just as she would mourn for her own child." (not the exact quote...but something like it. )and i agree wholeheartedly.

[Ligeia]

I wonder if the biological parents of a child in such a community would raise the child for a while or not when the consciousness concerning this has enterily changed.Wouldnt you fear that something like an orphanage would come out?I still wonder how the raising of a child would go on without confusing it or without forgetting one.There is doubtless no problem if the child already is 8 years old and above but below and espescially at their beginnig the raising shouldnt be done by a bunch of people´many things could get forgotten.