Fathers for Life
Fatherlessness, the lack of natural fathers in children's lives
| Home | In The News | Our Blog | Contact Us | Share

Fathers for Life Site-Search

Site Map (very large file)
Table of Contents
Children—Our most valued assets?
Educating Our Children for the Global Gynarchia
Child Support
Civil Rights & Social Issues
Family Law
Destruction of Families
Divorce Issues
Domestic Violence
Gay Issues
Hate, Hoaxes and Propaganda
Help Lines for Men
Law, Justice and The Judiciary
Mail to F4L
Men's Issues
The Politics of "Sex"
Our Most Popular Pages
Email List
References - Bibliography

You are visitor

since June 19, 2001


Germany devours its children — Excerpt 1

An excerpt from:

Germany devours its children — Families today: Exploited and burned out, by Karin Jäckel

(German Title: Deutschland frisst seine Kinder — Familien heute: Ausgebeuted – ausgebrannt, Karin Jäckel, September 2000, Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag GmbH, Reinbek bei Hamburg, ISBN 3-499-60929-0)


Of the endangerment of our families on account of political distortion of reality

. . . .

 Friedrich Engels and Simone de Beauvoir, the
shining apostles of contemporary family politics

Family politics are accepted by the public with moaning and groaning, as if they were a quasi-God-given plight. The fleecing of families, the preferential treatment of women in general and specifically of lone mothers, the glorification of women and mothers in the work force with the simultaneous slandering of the MERE housewife, the defamation of man in general as perpetrator of violence and specifically of man as family provider and father as «absent father», the shunting of children and youth to state-operated institutions and the call for continuously more professional daycare to benefit the liberation of woman from the duress of motherhood and work in the family, the proclamation of abortion as a sole right of women, the demands in connection with facilitating divorces and the cohabitation of non-marital partnerships through normalizing homosexual partnerships with traditional marriages and families – all these and more cracks in the framework of the institution of the family are now so common that questions concerning the sources regarding the difficulties of managing the problem entangled with these cracks hardly arise anymore. I asked them and could not escape the necessity to occupy myself with the youth of today's government elites. The majority of today's

Friedrich Engels and Simone de Beauvoir, the shining apostles of contemporary family politics


50- to 60-year-old politicians and especially those of the red-green government party looks back at active political presence or passive sympathizing in connection with the student revolts of the late sixties to seventies. Some made their reputations as rioters and throwers of tomatoes. Others sympathized later with the RAF. [RAF: Rote-Armee-Fraktion, in English: The Red Army Fraction]

Quite thoroughly affiliated as 1968-high-school graduate and 1975-university graduate with the late generation of those who studied in the late sixties and cut red wounds into the black flesh of politics, I know the roots and the aim of today's kind of political women's power.

They lie in a flower-power-formed epigonism of world-improvement ideals that were eternally yesterday's. A new mensch was to be created, a super-individual who rejected in perfect freedom any power of order, with just and equitable distribution of even the air we breathe. How this new world of the new mensch could be created and what was meant by «just» was taken in romanticizing closeness from the maxims and demands of socialism.

In today's hindsight it is no wonder that the red thread from the revolution-novellas wove itself around the brains of youth and more or less entangled them. On the one hand we were fed up with being the children of the war mongers. Were fed up with taking on the heritage of those whom the whole world pointed to with its finger. Traditions, inherited values – the Götterdämmerung of the Nazi-Germans caught them all cold. After all, what was still valid? What would put a halt to it? The USA had lost their credibility through their inhumane actions in Vietnam. Socialism alone seemed to offer a future «from brother to brother» and «from sister to sister». Therefore away with the bourgeois rules, the bourgeoisie of the Nazi past. Away with the role of the father as head of the family. Away with the image of women as mothers, as stewards of the inner family, as servants of the father. Away with the preservation of virginity for just the one, away with marital


Of the endangerment of our families on account of political distortion of reality

fidelity and the until-death-do-you-part at the matrimonial altar. Away with the hang-ups and the fear of the consequences of free love.[*] Away with the Church and her hatred of women. All was to be new, better, more just.

With the privilege of youth, which always wants to change, always make things better than the Old-ones did, especially the activists but also the band followers and trend-conscious submerged themselves in the idea of the equality of all classes.

In the meantime it has become clear beyond all doubt that the movement of the student revolts of '68 had been financed and promoted out of the ex-GDR, over and above the private motivations of youthful ideologues.

The red brother only too eagerly assimilated the black one. No means to achieve that were to be despised, not even the training of militant powers such as the later RAF terrorists in military camps. In short, to be «red» was taken to be a synonym for being idealistic, modern, educated, to have equal social rights, to be free and oriented toward the future. Simply, for everything that made the new mensch and the new togetherness valuable beyond the old traditions and world-view. Who wasn't «red» was despised as «conservative-reactionary» and fought as a «capitalist pig» or being «women-hostile».

It seemed that the solution was to be found especially in the internalization of the wealth of egalitarian thought of the socialistic atheist Simone de Beauvoir as well as that of the world renovators Marx, Lenin and Engels. Their literature was quite literally devoured by the education elite that was politically interested during my youth, out of which the presently standing politicians from the SPD [Socialist Party of Germany] and also of the Neulinge Bündniss 90 / Die Grünen [a coalition of new extremist socialists and the well-established environmentalist and to some extent socialistic Green Party], preferentially recruited themselves.

At that time we unruly and restless youth sat all night long in groups and grouplets, discussed and agitated. Some peacefully, others radically. Most «objected», even though they weren't always clear on what they actually objected to. And those

Friedrich Engels and Simone de Beauvoir, the shining apostles of contemporary family politics


«revolootioners» that stemmed from the educated, well-situated high-society families of the medical professions, -jurists, -magnates of industry, -professors and teachers, or those whose grandfathers and fathers didn't come to terms with rank and name acquired in the Second World War, kept pace most passionately.

One of the compulsory subjects was the «feminist bible» by Simone de Beauvoir, the student and life partner of Jean-Paul Sartres, that had been published in Germany in 1951 under the global name of «The other sex». As if it were a written version of the Oswald-Kolle movies about man «the unknown being», some reached for it and hoped to find therein fundamental truths about «relationship boxes». Others devoured it as a new doctrine of healing and a sign-post to the true meaning of life, something that the doctrines of the Church seemed to guarantee no longer.

Carried by the idea that every mensch is the product of his own achievements, Simone de Beauvoir announced the self-realization of the mensch through the total rejection of all constraints as well as [through] the total engagement in work based on performance. How that was to function she demonstrated by means of the example of men. They appeared to her as «complete human», because as absolute individuals they were in the position to liberate themselves from the constraints of fatherhood and family, by concentrating on their total performance and thereby «transcended» into a higher state of consciousness.

It seemed to Simone de Beauvoir that women were on account of their role as mother and housewife estranged from this desirable state of «becoming human». Motherhood and family-work were deemed to be instruments of the oppression of woman. A woman who wanted to «transcend» and find self-realization had to extricate herself from such constraints, through abortion if necessary. In the ideal case she had to become like a man.

Whether Simone de Beauvoir, who passed away in Paris in 1986, considered herself to be a pioneer in a merciless war of the sexes with the goal of the


Of the endangerment of our families on account of political distortion of reality

oppression of men or more likely interested in true equalization is open to debate. It is a fact that she defended the liberation of women from the constraints of motherhood as one of it's strongest champions and actively participated in abortion campaigns together with ladies from high society who were inspired by her.

Many women of the generation of '68 let themselves be convinced through the lectures in her work «The other sex» and from thereon divided the world, here into liberated men who had found self-realization, and there into women who are oppressed by men and hampered in their self-realization through their children and families. Particularly into women whose life-goal it had to be to shake off that yoke and to experience the true meaning of existence by self-realization through achievement. The most important mile stones on this path that were proclaimed were the right of the woman to her own belly, to a career, and to the upbringing of the children by the State.

The second compulsory subject of '68 was deemed to be Friedrich Engels' 1884 paper in which «The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State» is rolled out.

Hardly anyone from the younger generations still knows Friedrich Engels. Even the older ones almost forgot or never knew him.

Nevertheless, it is his world-view which like no other molded our present.

He, who never had to lift a finger to earn a living, writes as follows in his already mentioned pamphlet about family and State:

«Then it will become evident that woman's liberation has as the primary pre-requisite the re-introduction of the whole female sex into public industry. And that this in turn requires the elimination of the property of the individual family as an economic unit of society. ...The private household will transform itself into a social industry. The nurturing and education of the children becomes a public affair, Society will care for all children equally,

Friedrich Engels and Simone de Beauvoir, the shining apostles of contemporary family politics


be they legitimate or illegitimate. Thereby falls away the worry about the «consequences», which today forms the most essential social – moral as well as economic – momentum, that prevents the unencumbered devotion of a girl to a loved man. ... The duration of the attack of individual sexual love, however, varies considerably with individuals, namely with the men,… and makes divorce a treat for both parts as for society. One will merely spare people to have to wade through the unnecessary filth of a divorce process.«

Can actual women's- and family politics be described more fittingly?

And how much has been achieved already! Isn't before all else the dissolution of private households by means of the annually increasing number of people who are being blessed with the «treat» of divorce outright breath-taking?

Anti-Family Propaganda with the Help of the Media

Whoever wants to pursue women's liberation within the meaning of Simone de Beauvoir and Friedrich Engels, by means of participation in the work force and simultaneous abolition of traditional family work and mother-role, may naturally not rest with the long-achieved equal rights for the sexes. Then it is insufficient that already in 1996/97 more than half of women aged 15 to 64 years were in the work force. Then it doesn't go far enough that almost every second marriage ends in divorce and that every year an additional 160,000 children become orphans of divorce. It is just as insufficient that already today about 40 percent of all recipients of social assistance in cities are lone mothers whose partial family along with its children enjoys the questionable «treat» of divorce together with the «gift» of egalitarian poverty.

No, the propagandizing and manipulating must be extended. And, indeed, most effectively, with high-impact campaigns that have the widest possible dispersion. Therefore, with the help of the media....

Next Excerpt: German family politics seem bent to try their fullest to destroy the families of the nation

Back to main page of Germany Devours its Children

About Karin Jäckel

My Note: * Free love, as the early communists called it, is today called sexual freedom.  See also The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage, The Atlantic Monthly, July 1926
(See also a more exhaustive history of the evolution and destructive social impact of Soviet divorce laws)

Posted 2001 04 16
2001 04 18 (corrected typos)
2001 06 20 (inserted links to German family politics and to main page of book)
2001 07 26 (added reference to Free Love)
2007 12 15 (reformated)