That's the ideal case yes, but a lot of links in that chain can break. Fearmongering creates paranoid helicopter parents. The village is a metaphor for the fact that 2 people will get absolutely exhausted from shouldering all the responsibility themselves while working full time (the fatigue also damages the relationship). Celebrating holidays with extended family a few times a year is no substitute for having more people be part of the household. If parents don't like who their kid hangs out with, they can ground them, and nobody can stop them. Even if most parents are reasonable, they still shouldn't have a monopoly on that power.
Wouldn't having more family in the household mean that your parents have to live with their authoritarian parents even longer? How about parents shouldn't have to work full time? Your solution to bad parenting seems to be throwing more parents at the problem,. And grounding isn't real, you can just not listen, they have no legal ground to enforce a grounding.
It doesn't have to be multigenerational, it doesn't even have to be blood relatives. But even a multigenerational family would be better simply because there are more authorities that can disagree and discuss, which would hopefully end with better decisions, or at the very least teach the child that authorities aren't absolute and there can be conflict. I wouldn't only throw more parents at the problem, I would throw more children too. Grounding is very real, the parents can enforce it themselves, or have punishments after the fact. The power dynamic doesn't even require enforcement in many cases, the child will have learned to obey.
Well, I'm glad your group living situation was harmonious enough to not be awful for a child. That's not the universal experience and making it so seems way harder than decent housing, shorter work hours, paid parental leave, Les car centric planning and a plethora of other much more practical things than telling everyone to live together in giant family units and help raise other people's kids. That's a hard sell.
I sort of took all that for granted but you are correct that under current circumstances it's a hard sell. Although you wouldn't only be helping raise other people's kids, they would also help you raise yours. I think in Full Communism(tm) you'd have a hard time arguing why you should get to keep your family out of everyone else's sight, they would suspect abuse.
Or people just like having some privacy within their own home? Our proximity to Full Communism is distant to the point that imagining its functions is speculative fiction. What about people that don't have kids? Do they have to raise other people's kids? What if your kid is an annoying little shit and no one wants to deal with them? What if the same applies to you? This just feels like you're describing Amish people with video games at best and a cult at worst.
I'm all ears if you have better suggestions, I'm just throwing shit at the wall. All children are annoying little shits, those who get spoiled by their parents even more so. The children could spend more of their day at the community center, that way the parent being an annoying shit wouldn't be a problem. Maybe if nobody wanted to move in with your family that would be a warning signal to make you reconsider and change something about yourself and the situation.
In another comment I thought, what if you help another couple raise their child before you have your own? That way their burden is lessened and you get valuable experience without full commitment, and it makes helping each other out a responsibility.
That's the ideal case yes, but a lot of links in that chain can break. Fearmongering creates paranoid helicopter parents. The village is a metaphor for the fact that 2 people will get absolutely exhausted from shouldering all the responsibility themselves while working full time (the fatigue also damages the relationship). Celebrating holidays with extended family a few times a year is no substitute for having more people be part of the household. If parents don't like who their kid hangs out with, they can ground them, and nobody can stop them. Even if most parents are reasonable, they still shouldn't have a monopoly on that power.
Wouldn't having more family in the household mean that your parents have to live with their authoritarian parents even longer? How about parents shouldn't have to work full time? Your solution to bad parenting seems to be throwing more parents at the problem,. And grounding isn't real, you can just not listen, they have no legal ground to enforce a grounding.
It doesn't have to be multigenerational, it doesn't even have to be blood relatives. But even a multigenerational family would be better simply because there are more authorities that can disagree and discuss, which would hopefully end with better decisions, or at the very least teach the child that authorities aren't absolute and there can be conflict. I wouldn't only throw more parents at the problem, I would throw more children too. Grounding is very real, the parents can enforce it themselves, or have punishments after the fact. The power dynamic doesn't even require enforcement in many cases, the child will have learned to obey.
I'm guessing you've never lived with a bunch of roomates.
I have, and while that has its own problems I still find it vastly preferable.
Well, I'm glad your group living situation was harmonious enough to not be awful for a child. That's not the universal experience and making it so seems way harder than decent housing, shorter work hours, paid parental leave, Les car centric planning and a plethora of other much more practical things than telling everyone to live together in giant family units and help raise other people's kids. That's a hard sell.
I sort of took all that for granted but you are correct that under current circumstances it's a hard sell. Although you wouldn't only be helping raise other people's kids, they would also help you raise yours. I think in Full Communism(tm) you'd have a hard time arguing why you should get to keep your family out of everyone else's sight, they would suspect abuse.
Or people just like having some privacy within their own home? Our proximity to Full Communism is distant to the point that imagining its functions is speculative fiction. What about people that don't have kids? Do they have to raise other people's kids? What if your kid is an annoying little shit and no one wants to deal with them? What if the same applies to you? This just feels like you're describing Amish people with video games at best and a cult at worst.
I'm all ears if you have better suggestions, I'm just throwing shit at the wall. All children are annoying little shits, those who get spoiled by their parents even more so. The children could spend more of their day at the community center, that way the parent being an annoying shit wouldn't be a problem. Maybe if nobody wanted to move in with your family that would be a warning signal to make you reconsider and change something about yourself and the situation.
In another comment I thought, what if you help another couple raise their child before you have your own? That way their burden is lessened and you get valuable experience without full commitment, and it makes helping each other out a responsibility.