Many MRA bloggers have researched and written about the root cause of the gender wars started by the feminist movement were based on the deliberate, planned subversion of Western Culture by Communists.
When one looks at the current state of marriage and the Divorce industry, the proverbial proof is indeed in the pudding. The corrosive effects of the divorce industry on the entire mindset of a people is an insidious threat to a free society that has largely gone unrecognized by the mainstream.
Dr. Stephen Baskerville has written an excellent column entitled How to Turn A Free People Into Slaves, in which he plainly makes the case that the no-fault Divorce industry is a significant front in undermining a free society by empowering government authority to intrude into the most personal area of any individuals life; their family.
Divorce sends many harmful messages to children and future citizens: that we can break vows we make to God and others; that family members may be discarded at will. But among the most destructive are about the role of government: that government is their de facto parent that may exercise unlimited power (including remove and criminalize their real parent) merely by claiming to act for their greater good.
While feminists push divorce-on-demand as a “civil liberty,” in practice divorce has become our society’s most authoritarian institution.
I'm sure any man who has been through the system would certainly agree that the machinery of the family court and child support system is about as authoritarian as it gets.
And while most divorces that happen in the West directly affect Men for the most part, one of the most deleterious effects the system inflicts upon society as a whole is the instilling of a mindset in children of a divorcing family with regards to the role government plays in one's own private life.
Using instruments of public criminal justice to punish private hurts turns the family into government-occupied territory. The children experience family life not as a place of love, cooperation, compromise, trust, and forgiveness. Instead they receive a firsthand lesson in tyranny. Empowered by the state and functioning essentially as a government official, the custodial parent can issue orders to the non-custodial parent, undermine his authority with the children, dictate the terms of his access to them, talk to and about him contemptuously and condescendingly in the presence of the children as if he were himself a naughty child – all with the backing of state officials.
Eventually the children understand that the force keeping away one of their parents is the police, who are the guarantors of the custodial parent’s supremacy. Thus the message the children receive about both the family and the state is that they are dictatorships, ruled by an arbitrary power which can be marshaled against private enemies and even family members for personal grievances.
Oh but it gets even worse than that. The system also takes a woman who takes advantage of her position of power granted by the courts and law enforcement, and encourages the children to take an active part in reducing their father into a role of nothing more than a wage slave who's only involvement is the monthly child support check.
While many children are materially impoverished by family breakdown, in other cases the systematic bribery dispensed by the divorce industry extends to the children themselves, who may be rewarded for their cooperation with material opulence, forcibly extracted from their father and used to corrupt his children and give them too a stake in his plunder and exile.
The term "wage slave" is really a fitting one in describing a divorced father being crushed under the gears of the child support machine. But Baskerville makes an even better point that shows just how apropos it is to call it that:
It is not difficult to see that this is a highly unhealthy system to have in a free society. In fact, the logic is reminiscent of another system of domestic dictatorship that once tried unsuccessfully to co-exist with free civil government. Politically, the most powerful argument against slavery – and what eventually did more than any other to bring about the realization of how threatening it was to democratic freedom – was less its physical cruelty than its moral degeneracy: the tyrannical habits it encouraged in the slaveholder, the servile ones it fostered in the slave, and the moral degradation it engendered in both. Such dispositions were said to be incompatible with the kind of republican virtue required for free self-government.
Slavery was an institution that was antithetical to the tenets and ideals that founded America, and for the United States to continue to exist under them made a conflict with that institution inevitable. If only more people would wake up to the reality that the Institution of Divorce is in the same place today - as the very antithesis to a free people as a whole.
Divorce not only damages individual men, but society as a whole...for it plants the seeds of a mindset in each successive generation that increasingly accepts authoritarian rule of an ever-expanding and intrusive Government without question, and at the expense of the freedom and liberty of what was once a free and prosperous civilization.