Hi, I'm kind of thinking that maybe when we were asked about the nurturing family versus the authoritarian family models (from John M) that perhaps he was discussing Lakoff's book? When I attended, for the very first time, my local Democratic Party's meeting (can you tell how upset I still am at how things are going? I've been tipped over the edge and have decided that instead of falling off the cliff I better learn to fly or climb...<g>) Anyway, the speaker they had mentioned Lakoff's book and let us order them for only $5 each... Anyway, I was scolded tonight for my speculating (it takes a while for me to mull over what to do, if I am ready for this, if it would be of value, etc etc) on my creating a Democracy for Kids club--I ordered info on a curriculum from the Bill of Rights Institute, have one set of lesson plans from an organization which wants kids to learn about 'heroes' (have you read the studies of what kids think are their 'heroes'?), and other ideas...throw in pizza and music and you have a party and an environment for learning. When I learned that the Republicans are doing the same, it was kind of interesting. They, of course, are using 'religion' as part of the focus--and are pretty frank about it. There really is no alternative for parents (other than the inhome teaching--and it is hard to do that, to be honest. I think that is why it is so much easier for us Scout parents, even, to have our kids do a few [if any] pre-requisites for scout merit badges and then finish [or completely do] the whole thing at these merit badge academies...(which I am now setting up a session for the World Citizenship Badge at one of the library branches--so many of the kids here don't really ever meet someone from another country [exchange student or one of the Consulates [they have a few in KC] or interact with someone who even has a remotely positive view of the UN. You can earn the badge by just visiting a federal institution of some sort and the rest, basically, by reading. Kind of defeats the purpose, too. So, we are going to partner with an organization (semi-affiliated with UMKC and the UN Association) and I am hoping, too, to see who is thinking of going, in 2007, to the World Jamboree in the UK...I need to find out more about it, but think it would be so great for these kids to meet other scouts from other places...) So...since I had been scolded because I always talk about things to my child...and he (often) has very interesting thoughts on all of it...when I saw this article, I had to smile. It did, in fact, fit... How do you parent? Do you think his ideas of political affiliation has anything to do with parenting styles? I am very curious about this, actually... Parenting, Marlena in Missouri _http://www.opendemocracy.net/themes/article.jsp?id=5&articleId=2350_ (http://www.opendemocracy.net/themes/article.jsp?id=5&articleId=2350) >_http://www.opendemocracy.net/themes/article.jsp?id=5&articleId=2350_ (http://www.opendemocracy.net/themes/article.jsp?id=5&articleId=2350) Raising childrenâ?¦and Republicans <_http://www.opendemocracy.net/themes/_ (http://www.opendemocracy.net/themes/) >Dave Belden 23 - 2 - 2005 A family difference over childrearing makes Dave Belden rethink Americaâ??s political future. When I first met my future mother-in-law I saw a well-dressed conservative American navy-and-oil-business matron. She saw an ill-dressed, long-haired, over-educated, novel-writing leftist carpenter. I was prepared. She wasnâ??t. Lacy had unlearned her small-town southern accent and married a naval officer so her daughter could sleep with this? But we came to love and appreciate each other deeply, and it happened fast. She said our wedding which was presided over by a woman minister in mufti under redwood trees, to our own non-theistic script, with gifts of roses and love spoons I had carved for us and our parents â?? was more inspiring than any she had attended, including her own. I learned where my love, Debi, had acquired much of her heart and depth. Then we had this little difference over childrearing. Lacy was alarmed that we explained everything to our baby, Rowan, even before he was verbal. As soon as he could speak, he was allowed to question: what to do today, why pre-school, why thereâ??s no money for this. If our explanations went ridiculously over his head we laughed at ourselves. Sometimes we just had to say, â??Trust me on this one, youâ??ll understand later.â?? By then even our â??Gotta do itâ?? implied there was a good reason. We never spanked or slapped him. He got it: the legitimation was not our authority, but the reasoning behind our requirements. Often the only good reason was our frailties: â??Please leave off the drumming while I have this headache.â?? Our parenting style was normal for our friends, but a few did miss out on this mutual respect side of it. At 10 we made him write us an essay explaining why he deserved to spend his money on something we loathed: a video-game console. His arguments persuaded us. But we insisted on limited hours of play, renegotiable. At 16 he is so used to arguing his point, so reasonable, so sure that we are too, that the mutual respect (usually) trumps the hormones (his and ours). Maybe we are just lucky. Or maybe the consensus among mainstream childrearing manuals, like T. Berry Brazeltonâ??s <_http://www.safebeginnings.com/WebComponents/Catalog/Public/showproduct.asp?i d=3_ (http://www.safebeginnings.com/WebComponents/Catalog/Public/showproduct.asp?id=3) >Touchpoints is right: nurturant-and-empathetic as opposed to strict reward-and-punishment childrearing works best. My parents were religious people, who had treated me in much the same way Debi and I treated Rowan: with explanations and choices, not spanking. They believed there was an overriding authority â?? God. But they thought we should all listen to God in silence to learn â??what is right, not who is rightâ??. In practice, this was not so different from our appeal to reason and mutual respect. It implied the parents might be wrong. Still, Lacy feared that we were spoiling her grandchild. She was a lovely, warm woman. But she had a different view of human â?? and child â?? nature. She believed we had to train unquestioning obedience into our child. Her own daughters had been told they were to be leaders in the world, but they were discouraged from challenging their fatherâ??s decisions at home. When Lacy looked after Rowan, then aged 2, while we hunted for a new hometown, she told us on the phone: â??Heâ??s so reasonable! If you explain, he understands!â?? He came on the phone. â??Little pool? Little pool?â?? he asked plaintively. He loved his grandparentsâ?? inflatable paddling pool. We didnâ??t understand his distress. Later we learned that Lacy had thought he should move to the big swimming pool, so she had taken â??little poolâ?? away without explanation. We were furious! Mainly because of the arbitrary way she did it. And right after admitting he was such a reasonable child. She loved Rowan, she sang songs with him and danced with him, she kissed and hugged him, she was a superb grandmother, but she felt that a primary thing was to learn obedience. And she voted Republican. Now hold on! How did politics get into this? Because a current liberal guru says that the deepest differences between conservatives and liberals arise from our incompatible views of human nature. George Lakoff, in Moral Politics: how Liberals and Conservatives think (<_http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/bookstore/moralpolitics_ (http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/bookstore/moralpolitics) >2002), argues that these differences show up nowhere so strongly as in the way we raise our children. The way we do that then forms the basic set of metaphors by which we decide what is politically moral or immoral. Lakoff says the â??strict fatherâ?? family system leads to the unforgiving reward-and-punishment politics of conservatism. The goal is independence and strength, but the result is a pathology: a constituency that doesnâ??t want to empathise with the poor and oppressed, invest in social capital and nurturance, teach rational questioning, or see the successful man as embedded in nature and interdependent with others. To create an inclusive society of rational thinkers that is sustainable in nature, you need the â??nurturant parentâ?? system. Lakoff <_http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/7747_ (http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/7747) >argues that modern American politics arises from these parenting models. It is an idea that, my better-read friends tell me, interestingly parallels the argument of the French demographer <_http://www.ined.fr/bdd/projrech/saisie/m_chercheur.php?idchercheur=131_ (http://www.ined.fr/bdd/projrech/saisie/m_chercheur.php?idchercheur=131) >Emmanuel Todd (in his book The Explanation of Ideology) about the relationship between family structure and political allegiance across Europe. Raising a child in America, I can believe that Lakoff is on to something. My parents-in-law came to appreciate that their daughter was not out of her mind, their grandson was turning into a fine young man. Gutsy, loving, vital Lacy fell prey to a neurological disease that slowly weakened and killed her. Before that took hold, she had seemed to be acquiring new ideas from her two liberal daughters. Given more time, I think she would have understood how it could be that her offspring were OK, despite their following the wrong rules, and questioning what she held to be true. Given enough time, I think a good part of middle America will discover which parenting style works best to create independent, thoughtful, loving, respectful adults. And that will change American politics. I think Lakoff may be <_http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml_ (http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml) >right. I donâ??t know that thereâ??s a quicker way. Sure, a charismatic candidate, a rising liberal religious <_http://www.beliefnet.com/story/159/story_15988_1.html_ (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/159/story_15988_1.html) >movement, and reaction at Republican excesses could swing an election or two to the Democrats. But a government truly based on respect, inclusion, nurturance, hearing the point of view of the poor and marginalised: that will take much, much more. ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html