The Global Liberty Community
6 Ways Parents Teach Their Children Socialist Values
All the time we hear older generations saying that millennials need to grow up. Some have said that they do not care about college readiness they just want “out of my basement readiness”. That the younger generation needs to take personal responsibility for their lives. We hear that the younger people have no work ethic and that they feel entitled to everything. For the most part, this is true, but it has resulted from a parental generation reinforcing socialist ideas at home.
Socialism is the idea that everyone is responsible for everyone else. No one in the community should have more than another person no matter your productivity. If someone were to make more money than the authority figure, government, would redistribute that money to people in need.
Here are 6 ways parents teach socialist values to their children.
1) Sharing
Forcing children to share is the laziest form of parenting. A parent hears two children fighting over a toy and comes into the room yells at the children to share the toy and walks out. Parents who do this are teaching their children that whenever someone comes to steal your possession you should just give it to them. If you hold onto your property, then the authority will come in and punish you.
Solution
Teach your children that they are not allowed to steal. If a child is playing with a toy in the house, then that is theirs, and they do not have to share it. Simplifying the rules in the house makes it easier for children to know right from wrong. Children will naturally share because they are social. They want to play with others, and the only way to do that is to share. Sharing is good when it is a choice, but when it is forced it is unnatural and results in strife. Reduce conflict in your house by stopping the stealing.
2) Teaching Obedience
When a parent says, “because I said so”, they are teaching their children blind obedience. This is also a form of lazy parenting. It reinforces the idea that a child has no say in their lives. They are supposed to obey authority no matter what. As children grow up hearing this phrase it results in some of the most heinous of crimes and the defense is, “I was just following orders.”
Solution
Parents should explain their decisions to their children. As a child grows, he should have more control in decision making. Also, if you want to teach your children personal responsibility, then allowing your children to make poor decisions is a learning lesson. Yes, sometimes this is more stressful, but it results in a child that takes charge of their lives and learns to deal with their consequences.
3) Unnecessary Force
Sometimes when a child is not obedient, it is easy to use unnecessary force to obtain compliance. When punishments are too harsh a parent can usually manipulate a child to do almost anything. This teaches our children that punishments can never go too far. After growing up with harsh punishments it is no wonder majority of Americans agree with government torturing prisoners.
Solution
There are natural consequences to every action that we take. As parents, we should try to mimic these natural consequences. If Johnny hits his sister, then he is not allowed to play with her. This is a natural consequence. This way children will grow up to become more sensitive to injustices in the world.
4) Managing Play
In a socialist society, there is one business that supplies one product. Competition is restricted because it promotes profits. Therefore, schools determine how a child can best serve the community. Then the child is put in that occupation. This is becoming more accepted because parents are managing a child’s play or traditional “free-time”.
A school-age child wakes up, and they go to school for 8 hours. At school, they are told what to read, what to watch, and what to study. Then they go to sports practice where they are told how to play. Then we wonder why they sit around “bored” all the time. They are never given the opportunity to explore their own decisions.
Solution
Give your child more freedom! Let them decide what they want to learn. Let them decide what they want to play. Let them explore their curiosity. As a child grows in this freedom so will their learning potential. Children naturally will learn to take responsibility of their time.
5) Chores Without Compensation
Many children are given weekly and daily chores with no compensation. Some parents say that they pay their children with rent and food. It is not true because if the child does not do the chore then the parent will still provide the rent and the food. This reinforces socialistic values that no matter what you do you will be provided housing and food.
Solution
Teach your child how to make a deal. Chores should resemble work and with work there is compensation. This does not mean that your child should be given a weekly allowance. It simply means there should be a trade for their work and time. Teaching them that their work and time have value is good for their work ethic.
6) No Options
Bernie Sanders, a Socialist presidential nominee, recently said that there should be one kind of deodorant. In a socialist society, there is no choice. Parents who do not give their children options are reinforcing the value that the authority knows what is best for the individual and that the children should rely on them for that decision.
Solution
Give your children freedom of choice. When they eat breakfast, let them choose what they are eating. When planning a vacation or going out to eat, allow the children to have a democratic voice in the decision making. This teaches the children how to have an opinion and defend it. By consistently allowing your child choice, they learn the value of freedom, what they want in life and how to get it.
Want to get updates straight from The Stand?
Subscribe Here
Want to join the global liberty community? Become a Liberty.me member.
Join The Discussion
15 CommentsThoughts? Comments?
Please login or register to post a comment.
Lina Bryce June 9, 2015 , 4:21 pm Vote3
This has been my way of testing my own parenting approach. I am more self-aware b/c of stuff like this! I’m going to post this on the Libertarian Parenting Page. 😀
Michael Reith June 9, 2015 , 4:58 pm Vote1
The ideas given have little to do with socialism. Socialism is about forced redistribution of wealth at the point of a gun. I taught most of the things that you advise against. And it had nothing to do with teaching my child that socialism is right and good. From the sounds of it, Jesus would be a socialist in your book, and he was anything but. But I get one good point–we should not instill socialist values unwittingly in our children.
Cathy Cuthbert June 9, 2015 , 6:04 pm Vote4
Michael Reith, I couldn’t disagree with you more.
Michael Ecsh, great article. The forced sharing is a real bugaboo of mine, especially when enforced in schools. It’s essentially telling children they have no property rights. A neighbor berated me once for not making my children share, to which i answered, “Can I have your car keys?”
We had a house rule that our children’s bedrooms were off limits to their friends so that they could keep any of their stuff they didn’t want to share behind a closed door and safe from that conflict.
But the compensation for chores, f’getaboutit. Not everything should have a price tag, and helping mom around the house is one. I did favors for them all day long, they should return the favor. That’s the give and take of family life. You start to get into the “Punished by Rewards” syndrome if you’re not careful with this. If they needed money for something, I would suggest they do something that was not part of our every day needs and that I would often pay a third party for, like washing the car. We also had chickens, so that they could sell the eggs for pocket money. Encouraging entrepreneurialism is a better idea to paid chores.
Two really important socialist traps you missed on your list are:
1. Allowance, essentially being paid for nothing, ie welfare.
2. The biggest socialist lesson of all–sending your children to gov’t school, where they are immersed in a socialist system that teaches socialism all day long.
I’ve been mulling over writing an in depth article on this very topic for years and never got around to it. We libertarians spout off our philosophy to every Tom, Dick and Harry, but don’t teach it by example to our children. Libertarians send their children to gov’t school in a higher percentage than the general population. It drive me crazy.
Thanks for your great work.
Dave Burns June 9, 2015 , 7:38 pm Vote3
Statism begins at home.
Long Lost Friend June 9, 2015 , 11:32 pm Vote2
I suspect the author does not have his own children.
The outcomes are obviously what we want. However, depending on their age, children do not have the cognitive ability or life experience to have agency. I would not have wanted my toddler to experience the “natural consequences” of sticking a fork into an electrical socket. Likewise, I want them to value private property, but I want them to grow up exercising their liberty along with generosity and compassion. Actually creating consequences for selfishness is not the same as compelling them to share.
Lastly, teaching them responsibility to their family without putting a price tag on it is not socialist, any more than me providing a roof over their heads and food in their bellies is welfare. We can teach principles of liberty without having our children growing up continually asking, “What do I get out of it?”
Michael Esch June 10, 2015 , 4:45 am Vote1
@longlostfriend I do have children. I also have taught k-12 in public and private schools. I found that in practice when children are told that they do not have to share. It actually reduces the chaos of the classroom. Children are more polite because they understand that they have no right to the toy or object. They have to ask to use it and if they are not nice then they throw out all hopes of getting to play with the toy.
Sharing comes naturally to children because children naturally want to play with others. Parent/teachers foster a sense of resentment between children when they intervene to solve the problem of “sharing”. I encourage sharing, but I do not force it. Sharing is only of value in a society on a big scale or small scale when it is done voluntarily. A forced deed cannot be called a good dead.
Long Lost Friend June 10, 2015 , 3:14 pm Vote1
“I found that in practice when children are told that they do not have to share. It actually reduces the chaos of the classroom.”
But a private home is not the same as a classroom. And the fact is that items in a classroom are often community property and not the property of the kid using it. What if a kid were guarding the only pencil sharpener in the class and wanted to charge the other kids a quarter to sharpen their pencils? Hopefully the teacher would intervene, not because they are trying to make yet another statist, but because the student does not have the right to claim ownership of something that, in reality, is not his to claim.
“Sharing comes naturally to children because children naturally want to play with others.”
And, other times, selfishness wins out. If it is a solitary pursuit (such as use of a tablet device), then “playing with others” can quickly take a backseat. If I let my son do so, he would spend hours on a smartphone watching Minecraft videos and playing games.
Furthermore, I think that most parents can attest that one of the first words a child learns to use is “Mine.” Sharing doesn’t come naturally to kids, but may be voluntarily done (albeit grudgingly) if they see that there is something in it for them. A charitable spirit has to be instilled in us humans.
“I encourage sharing, but I do not force it. Sharing is only of value in a society on a big scale or small scale when it is done voluntarily. A forced deed cannot be called a good dead.”
Agreed. And, when it comes to my kids’ own possessions, I do not force them either. In my home, I have been known to reward selfishness by creating scenarios that leave the selfish person out of an activity s/he would like to have done. I remember one time my son was ostracized by his sisters because they wanted to have fun without him. So, I engaged in a game with him. Soon after, one of the sisters was taking a bath or something, and the other sister came into the living room and announced that “he could play with her now.” I told her that we were busy and that she needed to find something else to occupy herself with.
I don’t disagree with any of the outcomes you propose in your article. It’s just that, in our efforts to keep our kids from growing up to be “good little statists,” we overcompensate and neglect our roles as guides and authority figures in the lives of our children (especially when they are younger).
rachel mills June 11, 2015 , 3:02 am Vote1
I agree with a lot of this, disagree with some but find a lot of the logic in here… just odd. Probably makes sense once your kid is around 5 or 6, but I agree with Long Lost Friend that toddlers and younger just can’t rationalize and make decisions like the author is describing. So unless your kid comes out of the womb at age 5, a lot of this just falls flat on its face and the parent is left having to figure out something else and feeling like a failure to boot.
My first reaction also was “This guy can’t possibly have children of his own that he’s spent all day with.” Or possibly he has one daughter… 🙂 Just a guess.
On the sharing issue. Sometimes sharing is necessary and appropriate. Sometimes property rights are appropriate.
On obedience: you’ve never walked through a parking lot with a rambunctious toddler, have you? Listening and obeying is literally a matter of life or death in certain instances. This is why it is critical to teach a small child to listen and obey. So they don’t manage to get themselves killed, as they are constantly trying to do. Being a parent to small children is akin to a 24 hour suicide watch. They are constantly trying to dart into traffic, eat pills, drink cleaning fluids, cut themselves open with anything sharp they can reach, climb to and jump from high places, bash their heads open on the furniture… etc. You can either put them in a padded cell, go insane yourself with all the hovering, or teach them obedience. When we get to ages 9 or 10, yes it would be lovely for them to have more autonomy. This article is really not relevant to small children, and I hope people expecting to be parents at some point in the future will take these sorts of judgey parenting diatribes with a huge grain of salt. It’s nice to have an overall guiding philosophy, but when it comes down to it and its YOUR little snowflake darting into traffic, well… Your common sense and your instinct will kick in and THAT is what parenting is all about.
Michael Esch June 11, 2015 , 3:18 am Vote0
@rachelmills I have two children 3, almost 4 and 1, almost 2. They are both taught under these guidelines.
My children both choose their own meals. They both understand sharing. Do they fight? Yes, they fight, but my 3-year-old can articulate what happen using the words steal and hit. My 3 yr old also understands the concept of trading. Which he shows the 1 yr old at a remarkable level. Many parents do not believe this because they have not raised their children to take on a large level of responsibility.
Obviously, there are extreme circumstances when a child will need to obey. Quite interestingly enough, our focus in our household is not on obedience, but on expression. Neither one of my children has ever run away from me in a grocery store or in a parking lot.
Our relationship is based on love and respect. My children know that something is serious when I command them to do something, because it is rarely done and only in extreme circumstances. The facts are that these extreme circumstances are rare not a regular occurrence. At least that is how it is in my house. I am sure that some other people might live more dangerous lives than us.
Freedom works especially with little children. My wife and I both have worked in pre-schools too. I am confident in my theories because they have been well practiced and found successful.
Cathy Cuthbert June 12, 2015 , 12:32 am Vote0
I have to support Michael on this obey baloney. Obeying is for dumb animals. It was never a goal for our children.
Rachel, could I have been lucky? I have never experienced what you described as a 24 hr suicide watch. In fact, I had the opposite experience. The problems were so rare I can count them on one hand. I obviously can’t speak directly to your situation. I will direct all to Alison Stallibrass’s book, The Self Respecting Child.
And on the sharing topic, for Long Lost Friend to think he is trumping Michael by saying that young children say “mine” shows a lack of knowledge of brain development and child psychology. The fact is that Michael is 100% correct, one does not need to force children to share to have them “learn” to share. It comes naturally without interference when development allows. You share with them, they share with you. There is no mystery here, children learn by example is all we are saying.
Brave The World June 14, 2015 , 3:56 pm Vote3
My family is a family of business owners. In fact, my dad was one of the first after the collapse of the Soviet Union. We have a business in Canada now. My parents abhor socialism as a political structure…and as do I.
Having said that, in our home, it’s socialism. We share everything. And we are expected to help. Unlike a lot of American kids, when our parents endeavoured to start their business, both my sister and I, without having to be asked, put out heart, time, and soul into helping my parents. It’s thriving because of this team effort now…and we did not start to get paid until later when the business thrived, and we did not expect to. We have insane respect for our parents and what sacrifices they’ve made for us. Force was never needed because we LOVE helping them.
I compare this to the households of my Canadian friends. I find them revolting. No one gives a shit about anyone…this is independence? For example…my ex-boyfriend’s brother who was 25, living off his mom (she paid for his car even) charged her for a website he made for her. I think that’s fucking disgusting.
I like some of your points, but I think family units should be an uncompromising team. We are individuals, but we are social individuals, and we are nothing without support. I dislike the whole notion of “your kids down owe you shit, they didn’t ask to be born” …well you were born. And your parents chose to birth you. And you have life because of them. And unless they are horrible and abusive, respect them, and don’t expect to paid for washing the dishes that just had the dinner you didn’t pay for on them.
Brave The World June 14, 2015 , 3:58 pm Vote4
“Give your children freedom of choice. When they eat breakfast, let them choose what they are eating. ”
I think freedom is important in play. But if my kid want’s to eat pop tarts for breakfast every morning, I’ll not sacrifice their health for the sake of ideology. They are children. That’s why they have parents.
Cathy Cuthbert June 19, 2015 , 6:46 am Vote1
Another exposition on the obeying topic, from The Advocates for Self Government and The Libertarian Homeschooler.
You’ve Taught Me to Think, Not to Obey.
http://www.theadvocates.org/youve-taught-think-obey/?utm_source=Liberator+Online&utm_campaign=d69599f9bb-Liberator+Online+-+Vol+20+No+21&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_4bfd05d6af-d69599f9bb-209504577
Akin Fernandez June 21, 2015 , 12:45 pm Vote0
“We have insane respect for our parents and what sacrifices they’ve made for us. Force was never needed because we LOVE helping them.”
[…]
“And unless they are horrible and abusive, respect them, and don’t expect to paid for washing the dishes that just had the dinner you didn’t pay for on them.”
I like Russians. They are one of the few European groups that appear to remain natural when it comes to families. Its a great testament to them that after a horrific 70 years that their families are still intact.
Families and how they run if they are run normally, have nothing to do with Socialism. In a normal family, the children are, as Rothbard correctly states, the property of the parents until they reach their majority, whereupon they own themselves. In a natural and normal family, the children behave and think like those in Russian families described above do. The families in many other countries operate correctly, with more or less the same basic natural innate structures.
The countries where faddish, conjured out of nothing, absurd and unnatural parenting is practised have terrible problems; take for example the UK, where feral children cause havoc in the cities, there is widespread abuse of every imaginable substance, the near total disappearance of discipline, and the abuse of children themselves running at epidemic levels because they are not being parented.
This behaviour is found mostly in the indigenous British; foreigners coming from countries where natural families are still the norm have strict, beneficial and absolute control over their children.
In the UK, the State is the de facto parent of the indigenous population’s children. Their schools are brainwashing centres, and Home Education, which is unregulated and growing was nearly outlawed in 2009 by a group of hard core Socialists…but I digress. (Read this https://www.hslda.org/docs/news/200907130.asp if you’re interested, and use the Google)
As long as the styles of parenting are not enforced by the State, and the parents who break with the way the world actually is do not try to force their ideas on others, I have no problem with them teaching their children that up is down or any other nutty rules they magic out of the ether; its not my business.
However when they try to say that other parents cannot raise their children as they see fit, then there is an immediate and very serious problem; an intolerable one that no decent parent can accept. Keep your own ideas in your house, and everyone can live in peace.
Gary Bendall July 8, 2015 , 10:42 pm Vote1
I have implemented these very same things in my house with great results. My four year old is actually teaching these principles to my two year old now. My pet peeve is also the sharing point. John Allison makes a good point on this very subject by using the sand box as an example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPSGMbqEGU0
Start at the 41 or 42 minute mark.