I don't really know much about the author but his columns
often appear in the local newspaper. Sometimes the advice is good and I admit
this despite my general hostility to the theological and philosophical
underpinnings of psychology and much of the counseling movement.
This piece was of particular interest and I wanted to share
it. However despite its acumen there are some points and issues to which I take
exception... or at the very least I would urge readers to consider.
The link opens up several columns. The one I'm referring to
is the last on the page entitled: Postmodern Psychological Parenting Is Causing More Harm Than Good
He makes a lot of good points but the shift he references
didn't occur in the late 1960s. That may have been when the doctrines were
formalised. However the actual shift took place with the Greatest Generation in
the 1950s. They were the parents of the Baby Boomer generation and embraced a
new set of values which indeed trickled down to their children, though in many
cases they took an unintended direction.
Consumerism, individualism, self-expression, desire as well
as 'progress' fostered an attitude that turned its back on the past. By
progress we don't necessarily have to mean Social Progressivism in the sense of
improving conditions for the poor etc., but instead an optimism and eager
embrace of technology as a means to improve domestic life and defend the
nation. A new way of life and standard of living were celebrated.
The new way of living, middle class life, suburbia, the automobile,
television, a new pop culture all changed lifestyles and ethics. Even a reaction to the perceived harshness and
forced conformity of the enemy led to a break with convention. New ideas about
child rearing were entertained and accepted. The next generation would simply
take many of these ideas and work out (and apply) their implications.
People seem to forget Playboy, Elvis and even the pill were
all products of the 1950s. The trend was already there.
Everything Rosemund says is right but the cultural roots are
a lot deeper than many conservatives are willing to admit. The conservatism of
the 1950s is something of a myth or at the very least misunderstood. It was a
construct that in many ways broke with convention, it was a snapshot of a
moment in time as well as a vision. Today the 1950s have been turned into a
type of romanticism. They're conservative when compared with today but at the
time though the 1950s seemed conservative even to those who lived through it...
the period did in fact represent a shift in ethics.
If we're going to go back in time then let's go back to even
earlier eras. If you return to the 1900s and even the 1910s, the social
consensus of Christians and the 'everyman' would (if looking forward) decry the
1950s and 60s as decadent.
I identify the two imperial 'triumphant' decades of the 1950s
and 1990s as the foundations for our cultural decadence... They resulted in the
1960s and 2000s.
I'm not going to elaborate it here but a case could be made
that the 1970s and 2010s are times of severe nihilistic decadence, even
despair. There are discernible patterns. The mistake is to draw too many exact
parallels and analogies.
Will US culture rebound? Will we have another 1980s? Of
course the 1980's as a repeat of the 1950's also sowed the seeds of its own
destruction.
But what if we don't have a social 'rebound'? I use the term
broadly setting aside its real meaning and ethical implications.
If we don't, then frankly we're likely to enter a phase of
collapse.... or a new paradigm.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.