See also: https://newrepublic.com/article/145734/costs-millennial
On this father’s day, I’d like to take a moment to briefly challenge the world and to make my position clear for peer (and not so peer) review.
Put simply I think the civil rights division of children and adults needs to be effectively abolished.
There is a false dichotomy implicit in the assumption that children must be treated as property, or allowed to destroy themselves and society with complete freedom.
I believe that a person should be born a full and complete citizen of the species with all the default human rights and liberties. Not as an infant, property of parents and the state for some arbitrary time.
So what is the alternative?
Simply treat them exactly as we treat newly awakened coma patients with good prognosis.
Think about what a coma patient is. A blank adult. An adult in need of orientation and (re)education.
Functionally and qualitatively I can see no substantive difference between such an adult and a child. The legal frame work is already in place.
There are guardians with enhanced temporary authority, but ultimately the patient in question is still a person. No one has the right to beat them, or arbitrarily control them. Their treatment must always take into consideration their default rights as human beings.
This is exactly how children should be treated because that is exactly what a child is.
A coma patient isn’t assigned a religion, or a social role, they are given empowerment and choice. They are protected from themselves but that protection ends not on an arbitrary date, but based on objective criteria of development and ability.
Explain to me if you can how the current treatment is ethically or functionally superior.
We don’t need schools, we need habilitation facilities and libraries. The term for this in one case is particularly brilliant.
The Awakening Unit of the St John the Baptist Hospital, Rome, Italy, which opened in 1997, has the usual radiology and diagnostic equipment for assessing patients with head and brain injuries, and those in a coma. But also the medical staff specialize in rehabilitation, physiotherapy and occupational therapy, aimed at helping patients to recover from their injuries.
Instead of raising children, we should Awaken them.
The future could be so wonderful. If only I could make you see.
I’ll spare you the links you wouldn’t click anyway. 🙂
West Wing Children’s Suffrage (pro-vote) Segment. (Edited for continuity and focus.) on Vimeo.
Addition 2015-08-22 0705 AM:
It needs saying, I suppose, that you could give kids the vote without playing with any other laws. (Age of consent for example.) After all, society is layered with such age specificities. Gun ownership, drinking, driving, consent, trial as adult limits (if any) etc. I see no reason why society couldn’t parse children as voters. Hell, voting often happens in school gymnasiums anyway.
I’m sure adjusting those age ranges would be among the many issues that children would be disproportionately interested in. And hey, that’s politics for you so I’m fine with that. Along with the issues noted in the West Wing episode, like longer term environmental policy, education, etc.
While I’m talking about it, I think the best reason to give kids the vote from a practical standpoint is civics education and future engagement. It’s sort of silly to take them on field trips to Washington DC and the like when everyone in the room knows they are essentially pigs as far as our legal system is concerned.
I, for one, would like to see all that change.
We live in a man hating culture, and if others are honest the first thing they think of when a white nerdy pudgy guy with glasses talks about empowering children is, stranger danger, complete with vans and sweaty trench coats.
(Never mind the statistical realities of child abuse. We all know facts are 99% irrelevant anyway.)
Beyond that the hideous fact is this: We, as a society, love having a domestic slave class to whip and command. We’re not morally ready to treat children like human beings yet. When we start to be, you’ll see more movement on this issue.
See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youth_suffrage#United_States
“The Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified on July 1, 1971, lowered that age to 18. The primary impetus for this change was the fact that young men were being drafted to fight in the Vietnam War before they were old enough to vote.”
So then step one would be pointing out that kids as young as 11 (at least) can be tried as adults. So fine lower the limit to 11.
See also:
http://underlore.com/oppositional-defiant-disorder-is-a-crock/
http://underlore.com/things-every-kid-should-know/
Added comment 2015-10-24 0220 AM:
The whole basis of the assertion that you can teach your kid what you want is that they are property. And there aren’t any parents of which I am aware which refute that assertion.
Everyone that talks about protecting kids from this or that are in my view to some degree hypocrites because really what they mean is protecting other peoples’ kids from parenting choices they themselves would not make.
No one is really willing in other words to protect their children from themselves.
The fact that we all to one degree or another endorse this assertion that children are slaves to be trained is why “education” debate persists. Because it lives in the distinctions and the fine print.
No one (except me apparently) is arguing that we should adopt a universal set of laws that applies to all humans from the moment they emerge.
Ultimately until you admit that children are human beings and should have the full compliment of human/citizen rights from the outset, then you’ll never really have a solid basis for refuting what other people do to other kids no matter how repugnant or harmful.
Cliche tough guy comments about what kids “need” logically justify all manner of abuse and blame every possible victim so long as they are under 17.999999 years of age. No actual thinking healthy mind truly believes such things, and those that claim that they do can safely be dismissed as either delusional or disingenuous.
This kind of systemic disregard for your own young is something we abandoned around the time we started breathing air and internally regulating our body heat. The tough guy arguments are the kind of thing a fish would say if they could speak in defense of their practice of spraying sperm on a clutch of eggs and leaving their thousand young to fend for themselves.
Mammals on the other hand learned to care for their young, and as you climb the ladder towards sentience you find more and more regard for children as valuable. In fact there’s a strong argument that child care and long development periods are the root and requisite of culture itself.
Sadly humanity has not yet extended full human rights to children but eventually we will. Or we’ll die out as an opportunity cost for our failure to do so having collectively squandered their learning speed and cognitive flexibility. Extinction our price paid for continuing to treat them like livestock to be trained or machines to be fashioned.
Addition based on modified comment.
I totally understand where the child human trafficking market comes from. It’s literally just an extension of what amounts to average parenting logic. Really think about this. I mean, if I have the right to basically plan “my” “child’s” entire life such that I can force them to live however I want them to live for eighteen years with the backing of the state, up to and including beating them and drugging them when they deviate (!) why shouldn’t I be able to sell them? Especially when there’s such a huge foster adoption market. The ONLY difference between the average American parent and a human trafficker is degree, supply chain, and commitment to the logic.
Well, I’m the other end of that logical consistency. I want the entire concept of “child” removed in the EXACT same way it’s removed for adults with the minds of children and adults recovering from brain injury. It is 100% possible to “awaken” a child instead of raise it.
http://underlore.com/the-tyranny-of-compulsory-schooling/ (I didn’t write this one, but I adore it. I suspect you won’t read it. Too scary.)
The entire “parenting” position is one of submission defense and the desire to force it on the next generation. It’s literally no less cliche than “well I had to walk uphill in the snow to school and so should you, builds character.”
How I would raise a child today is exactly like how I’d take care of my father if he had a stroke and forgot everything. I’d care for him and love him and do everything I could to protect and awaken him. The implied need to oppress and control a “child” is 100% myth. It simply does not exist for the same reason I would have no need to apply that treatment to this hypothetical version of my father.
This is not hard to understand, it’s just inconvenient because we’d have to give up our slaves.
As for how I’d structure society, that’s a big question and it’s subject to a lot of change and further learning. underlore.com/emperor-innomen/
But in the case of children it’s actually very simple. I would simply remove the concept of “child” as a legal entity and instead parse them, again legally, as adults with a regenerative brain condition. Everything about their handling would include the dignity and human rights implied thereby. Would those children turn out radically different from me? Of course they would. Am I crapping my pants in terror at the change that implies? No I am not. Because look around outside your bubble. Change is NEEDED.
I’m not trying to FORCE all future humans over which I have opportunistic power to become copies of me. Why would you?
‘If you want to get laid, go to college. If you want an education, go to the library.’ ~Frank Zappa
Sexual Consent
Lets just get this out of the way because it comes up 100% of the time eventually whenever I talk about liberating the child caste.
People always eventually balk at the idea of children having citizenship because of the idea that they could be manipulated into legally consenting to sex long before they are ready. False consent basically. Here is my response to that:
We do not have to enslave people to protect them from sexual predation. That argument is absurd. We’ve already solved this problem. For example, go try having sex with someone in a coma, or an adult with the mind of a 10 year old being properly cared for, or any other vulnerable adult in a sanctioned functional setting, and see how many layers of protection those fully adult recognized citizens have.
It’s conceptually trivial to protect people, and honor their rights at the same time.
The argument is bankrupt because it implies an exchange of liberty for security is required and that is famously not the case. Implying that the desire to liberate children is equivalent to the desire to legalize raping them is specious to put it gently.
Wow. So true and to the point and I would’ve clicked the links, btw. Love you.
Love you too 🙂 And I know _you_ would have clicked my links, but you’re not my average reader 🙂
There actually is a functional difference between a child and an adult coma patient. Cognitive abilities in humans develop into ones 20s. I do like that you are advocating the voice of children though. It’s a worthy cause. One that I applaud.
I see no meaningful functional difference. Have you not encountered the adult population of this planet? Do they strike you as particularly cognitively developed to you?
Thanks though. First comment in months. Typical, for the day I pull my ads lol
/sighs
/gonna die poor
If you mean ethically meaningful I could easily agree. I hope that your efforts thrive.
Well, I agree with your idea of extending the franchise to children. However, I find your characterization of current child welfare laws to be a tad bizarre. Where on earth do you live that allows parents to beat their children and use them as slave labor? (there are places like this to be certain but you seem to be writing from the US)
Obviously, as I have said in our other discussion I disagree with your view of child development, there are real differences both psychologically and neurologically between an adult coming out of a coma and a child. These differences are systematic(true in all or most cases) and significant.
However, I would like to pose a different question to you. If children should be considered emancipated at birth does that remove a parents legal responsibility for that child?
> Where on earth do you live that allows parents to beat their children and use them as slave labor?
Guess your house is or would be one of those places since it’s perfectly obvious what I’m talking about but you’re gonna sit there and pretend your euphemistic labels for beating and slavery actually mean something different. I’m not gonna play along. Grab a dictionary if you don’t know what “beat” and “slave” mean.
> Obviously, as I have said in our other discussion I disagree with your view of child development, there are real differences both psychologically and neurologically between an adult coming out of a coma and a child.
And which of those differences exactly would strip an adult of their human rights? For example, the right to refuse arbitrary commands on pain of torture? Oh right, none of them, because “adult” as a legal definition and social label means literally nothing EXCEPT “greater than child” or put more honestly “Actual person.” As opposed to some fractional value reminiscent of the pre-civil war south.
> If children should be considered emancipated at birth does that remove a parents legal responsibility for that child?
Do doctors and nurses and hospital administrators have legal responsibility for incapacitated patients? Did you actually think you had a point with that empty headed question? Did you even read the post?
Funny how an adult can literally have the mind of a child and society still manages to give them a full compliment of human rights, but when it comes to actual children people like you are apparently baffled completely at the notion of them being anything other than livestock and replicants.
I am so goddamn tired of this charade. This fucking culture has fully three sets of legal slaves. 1. Prisoners, 97% of which didn’t see trial. 2. Workers, for whom the “choice” is find a master or endure homelessness + dental torture + decades less life, and 3. Children, for whom there are thousands of blogs and books and even medical diagnosis purpose written on how to turn them into obedient little domestic servants until it’s time to sell them to the nearest corporation, beatings optional to parental preference.
And those are just the legal ones, in this country.
It’s quite fucking simple. “Child” as a legal designation is no more ethical than “slave” precisely because it means almost the exact same thing. Historical slaves outside of the antebellum south in fact on average enjoyed more rights than a typical American child. Drink that in.
Like I said in the comment, if aliens showed up and said “Surprise humanity! You’re all “children” now.” And that meant a complete lack of substantive agency in our lives. We would have Absolutely no moral high ground to complain from. Our ONLY possible response is ultimately a hypocritical or arbitrary one.
How we treat children 100% explains how spineless, hateful, and stupid humanity as a whole is.
Thanks for commenting.
1. You work for this system.
http://underlore.com/the-tyranny-of-compulsory-schooling/ (Written by a 30 year teaching veteran, not me.)
2. What children “need” in this society is completely predicated on the above being a legitimate goal. Sure, turning them into obedient self destructive workers that’ll live by the Nuremberg defense, requires exactly what your system forces on them. It’s working as intended.
> However boundaries, not merely those created by natural laws are important across the board.
Yeah nice straw man. You’re forgetting culture. I’m not saying kids should be above the law, I’m saying whatever law we deem useful needs to be universally applied. It’s fucking hilarious how blind you people are to the type of argument you’re making.
Personally I suggest to see it clearly changing “children” to “women” to see how disgusting your brain is. Like instead of “children” need this and that pretend you said “women” need this and that.
Imagine how hard you’d resist if some Saudi Cleric came up to you making YOUR exact arguments only aimed at females instead of kids.
> Children without boundaries end up feeling as though their world is chaotic and unsafe.
How would you have any idea? Where exactly in life anywhere on earth or in history have kids ever been treated like human beings?
> who have no boundaries at home
Implying a level of separation between school and home that literally isn’t possible.
Your ageism is so pervasive you can’t even think around it. I’m positive you’re just talking about abandoned neglected poor kids. But even if some kid magically had a free space, they still because of the world they live in had no income or even the distant chance of one, no voting rights, no access to a culture that gives them the slightest clue how to live free, no ability to travel, no secure access to food or supplies or healthcare, no anything that wasn’t a baited slavery training hook. Everything a child can possibly access in this culture is 100% exploitative.
We tell them “You get food and clothing and a roof and in exchange you BECOME what WE WANT you to BECOME. Who you are now is IRRELEVANT. And we’ll judge our success at it by how well you serve later and how obsequiously you THANK us for it.”
Sidenote: Even home schooled kids still are slaves to their parents because culture says so and ultimately if they run away, the full force of society will drag them back should the parents request it. The best they could hope for is becoming a missing child, with all the horror that implies since we’re all too eager as a culture to scare the crap out of them if it keeps them in the program.