One of the things I strive to do as a mom is to make life better for my boys. Better than I had it as a child, with the opportunity to thrive when they become adults.
That's not to say my childhood was bad, per se. It was what it was. Adulthood has had its ups and downs, but -- through hard work and determination -- I do think I'm better off than my parents were.
Some people get very, very offended at the notion that part of a parent's job description is to give their children every advantage to succeed in life. Whether it's rooted in laziness or jealousy or political animus, many people think it's 'unfair' when some parents give their children advantages over others.
I wrote about the reaction to this earlier:
Yes, but at a social level, it is not good to allow parents to do everything possible to advantage their children over the children of others.
— Megan McArdle (@asymmetricinfo) August 21, 2024
But it warrants a deeper dive into the mentality that makes someone not only believe this, but to post it on a public platform like X.
In the context of the thread, McArdle is talking about the advantages that come with parents who leave large financial estates to their children. But her words imply that limiting the 'advantages' parents give their children does not stop at their bank accounts.
I distinctly remember a story about how it's 'unfair' (there's that word again) for parents to read to their children. I hadn't realized this story is almost a decade old by now, but here it is:
In an interview with ABC Radio last week, philosopher and professor Adam Swift said that since “bedtime stories activities . . . do indeed foster and produce . . . [desired] familial relationship goods,” he wouldn’t want to ban them, but that parents who “engage in bedtime-stories activities” should definitely at least feel kinda bad about it sometimes:
“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,” he said.
But Swift also added that some other things parents do to give their kids the best education possible — like sending them to “an elite private school” — “cannot be justified” in this way.
Professor Adam Swift was a bellwether for some of the Leftist insanity we see today. That being on time, working hard, and having manners is 'white supremacy.' As is enjoying reading and writing, what the Left calls 'worshipping' the written word (ya know, that thing that binds civilizations together).
Even our ancestors knew the importance of the written word, back at a time when they were hunter-gatherers living in caves.
But contemporary academics? Nah. That s**t isn't important anymore. In fact, it's racist.
I wonder if McArdle -- herself a graduate of a rather elite private school -- realizes the full implications of her statement. I wonder if she realizes what sort of Harrison Bergeron world she's really advocating.
In Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron -- everyone is equal. The smart are dumbed down, the beautiful made ugly, and the able-bodied disabled. All enforced by the ruthless Handicapper General and his agents because the new constitution says everyone is exactly equal. A Leftist's wildest dream made to reality.
It's also dystopian, but it's the world McArdle is arguing for.
I doubt she's aware. She'll argue she's merely talking about financial advantages.
But that's not what she said. She said 'not good to allow parents to do everything possible to advantage their children over the children of others.'
The reality is I -- short of winning the lottery or striking oil in my yard -- will never be independently wealthy. Fine. I've made it 41 years so far and however much time is left in my hourglass, I'll be okay.
There are, however, a slew of other things I can do to -- and I'll do everything possible, Megan -- to make sure my boys have every advantage and opportunity I didn't. And 'everything possible' is a vast menu of options.
I'm blessed to live in a state with school choice, so they go to Catholic schools. Good ones, too, rather than the failing and bloated public district we used to live in.
For the last several years, we went on summer road trips. My attempt to expose them to other parts of the country and build memories in the wake of my divorce. This summer, we went to Hawaii, an adventure we'll remember for the rest of our lives.
They have access to a gym with a pool.
They have books and trips to the library.
I take them to movies -- both contemporary and classic -- to show them the wonder of cinema and expand their wonder and creativity.
My eldest has a used car so he can get himself and his brother to/from school and his summer job. Soon enough he'll use it to go to college.
All of those things are me doing everything possible to give them a better life. And nothing is off the table -- not moving elsewhere, not scrubbing toilets if it means putting food on the table -- nothing.
(The economy sucks, but it isn't that bad. I'm just illustrating a point).
In McArdle's view -- a view shared by Kamala 'Equity' Harris -- I am committing a grave political sin: I am being a good parent. Rather than praising my efforts and encouraging others to do the same, they are demonizing me (and parents like me) with a collectivist guilt.
Much like the communists who sowed division among citizens by blaming food shortages on 'hoarding' by neighbors, the Left truly thinks doing well for your kids -- in any way, shape, or form -- is unfair.
Some parents, somewhere, might not be doing the things I'm doing (or you're doing) for their children. So shame on us for putting in the time and effort to elevate our offspring. And they'll pit neighbor against neighbor to achieve their desired outcomes.
One solution to those outcomes is, naturally, exorbitant taxes on estates and capital gains. Take that wealth away so you can't leave it to your children. But that only addresses the financial aspect of it.
How do they make sure parents like me aren't harming kids we didn't give birth to by giving our own sons and daughters those awful 'advantages' like bedtime stories and good work ethics?
More laws, of course. Draconian, communistic laws that punish individuality, squash parental rights, and make sure that anyone who isn't a member of the elite class lives under the crushing boot of equity -- where we're all equally poor, equally uneducated, equally miserable.
Much like Orwell's 1984, Harrison Bergeron was a cautionary tale, not an instruction manual. Some people would do well to remember that.
