№ 8/72.VIII.2022
Советская система воспитания основывалась на социальном равенстве советских граждан. Это было условием эффективного общественного воспитания через детсады, школы, кружки, лагеря и пр. А в 90-х все это рухнуло. Формально все было то же, но фактически детсад или школа 2000-х уже не были равны аналогу 80-х. Другая среда, другие цели, другие кадры, другой контингент. Если учесть, что далеко не всем стали доступны даже эти социальные институты — детсад, кружки, лагеря, — то мы увидим, что сравнивать напрямую отношение родителей к детям категорически нельзя. Родитель 80-х был уверен в школе, а родитель уже 90-х и тем более эпохи ЕГЭ уже совсем не уверен.
Плюс в 90-х резко просела безопасность ребёнка в обществе. Если в 70-х можно было быть уверенным, что ребёнок благополучно дойдёт до школы на другом конце города, а если заблудится, то ему помогут, то в 90-х преступность, алкоголизации и наркомания, психопатизация и сексуальное насилие зашкалили и реально стали угрожать детям. Потому функцию эту взвалили на себя родители. Ребёнка за ручку до 13-14 лет водят в школу, и это нормально. Мой ребёнок реально сталкивался с подростковой бандой вымогателей по дороге в бассейн. В СССР это было ЧП областного масштаба, в 2000-х было нормой. Приходилось лично ловить и бить придурков — полиция не работала.
Далее. Сейчас мы имеем поколение родителей, родившихся в 80-х — начале 90-х, прошедших весь хтонический ужас перестройки и развала в детском возрасте. Это было в основном скудное и не изобиловавшее ни белками, ни сладостями питание, дешёвые шмотки плохого качества, невозможность купить игрушки и резко проявившееся неравенство. Когда у меня дочка просит колбаски на завтрак вместо полезной молочной каши, я вспоминаю, что в её возрасте я колбасу видел раз в месяц как деликатес, и отказать не получается. Родители пытаются дать детям то, чего сами не получали в детстве, трудно за это упрекать и невозможно это остановить или затормозить, тем более разговорами.
Относительно вхождения во взрослую жизнь. В СССР вхождение означало труд, который был почёте и единственным легальным способом социального лифта. В буржуазных же условиях труд автоматически равен ЭКСПЛУАТАЦИИ. Какой родитель добровольно продаст своего ребёнка в рабство ублюдку-предпринимателю? Какой родитель отдаст его буржуазному государству, которое с лёгкостью сожжет его в танке во имя очередной яхты Абрамовича? Упрекать родителей за то, что они оттягивают встречу ребёнка с рабством и армией — это напрямую буржуазная пропаганда.
Макаренко многократно писал, что воспитывает не родитель, воспитывает среда. Возможности родителей по созданию среды минимальны. Они могут только вторично реагировать на среду в очень узком коридоре решений. Потому надо начинать со среды, то есть с РЕВОЛЮЦИИ, восстановив социальное равенство, систему общественного воспитания, обеспечив достаточный уровень безопасности и уровень жизни, и тогда можно что-то с родителей требовать. Буржуазное же общество не может толком создать даже устойчивую семейную среду, учитывая, что 50-70% браков распадается, в основном по экономическим причинам.
…С точки зрения марксистов, хороший родитель — это тот, который борется за коммунизм, потому что понимает, что только в условиях без товарно-денежных отношений можно воспитать достойного человека. Но при этом коммунист не будет упрекать пролетария за «подушку безопасности», которую родители пытаются дать детям при капитализме в условиях, когда до революции ещё далеко. Это форма стихийного сопротивления капитализму, который хочет максимально эксплуатировать пролетария, а пролетарий пытается увернуться.
И. Бортник
19/08/2022
Прорывист 
спасибо.
Honest articles that contrast the difference between USSR and bourgeois Russia are extremely valuable for young people like me.
«To reproach parents for delaying the child’s meeting with slavery and the army is directly bourgeois propaganda.»
«The communist will not reproach the proletarian for the “airbag” that parents are trying to give their children under capitalism in conditions when the revolution is still far away. This is a form of spontaneous resistance to capitalism, which wants to exploit the proletarian to the maximum, and the proletarian tries to dodge.»
I hadn’t thought of this angle. In the USA, we are bombarded by bourgeois propagandist of every stripe to start internships and job training for children as soon as possible. I am not a parent, but I have seen the pressure and the self-blaming when a parent compares herself and her child with other parents and their children. It was very painful for me to try to console a parent’s sobbing during her mental breakdown. The comparison between proletarian parents between middle-class parents is especially traumatic for proletarian parents. The proletarian parent believes that she has ruined her child. =(
Of course, bourgeois psychologists talk about self-acceptance and so forth. The reality is that poor people are considered failures in bourgeois society. In effect, bourgeois psychologists are telling people to accept that they are failures and don’t be so hard on themselves. Their “analysis” is may help in consoling some, but is missing the point.
Just accept it! But how can a parent just accept their own failure to bring up a child? How can a parent ever accept that her child is considered a failure, and by extension, her as well? It is extremely traumatic for a parent. In reality, It is not even the question of accepting a harsh reality because bringing up a child is a social responsibility. Furthermore, raising children cannot be done by proletarians who are already busy raising capitalists of all stripes who refuse to work like proper adults!
For Marxists, we are saying that private property relations and the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie ultimately ensures the poverty of the many. The bourgeoisie controls money creation, production, income, living conditions, education, universities, news media, culture and so forth to ensure maximum physical and mental domination to continue the extraction of surplus value. The situation is this: (A) The powerful bourgeoisie promote itself as being successful, then anyone who is not a bourgeoisie is automatically a failure in some ways. No amount of sophisticated mental gymnastics psychologists can teach is able to counter the overwhelming bourgeois cultural reality of our societies. (B) Under capitalism, the majority will always be poor and often unemployed. Therefore, one can see that mental illnesses and depression are INEVITABLE within capitalist society! QED!
Until psychologists become Marxists, all they do will just be fixing the symptoms and not the disease. And no, nobody really believes that a homeless person or a person on governmental assistance is as successful as Jeff Bezos. Don’t be silly..
When you think about it, it’s not even the bourgeoisie that is doing the self-promoting, but unconscious proletariat (who may be well paid, so the truth is harder to see) who do that for the bourgeoisie. They are just like the idiot scientists who invented the atom bombs for the United States government, so that the US bourgeoisie could drop the bombs onto the Japanese people when Japan was already surrendering, in order to nuclear blackmail the USSR. To this day, science professors still promote science as a good in itself without deeper analysis or any qualification. Sure, an endeavor to find the truth is good. However, when your society is controlled by the psychopathic bourgeoisie, then science is easily twisted into something darker. My professors’ inability to think or act two steps ahead is also the result of capitalism. After all, creating thoughtful, courageous. principled, farsighted, holistic, and decisive leaders who are able to look at reality and organize people towards a new way of life does NOT help the bourgeoisie’s extraction of surplus value! In capitalism, representatives (of capital) are fine, but not leaders. We don’t want leaders!
Some people mature faster. Some people mature slower. Some people want to choose another profession after a while. All people are distracted by endless stream of brainless entertainment, which slow down their mental development. In capitalism, none of this is considered for the majority because capital only cares for profits, which is always made at the expense of the majority, as Marx showed. In communism, everyone, no matter their differences, can be a confident and truly free member of society working for a better living standard of all. not rather the market or the bourgeoisie like it. Only a communist society can raise children properly. Practically, having family and children has now become a middle-class privilege in the US. Let the shameless white-haired professors keep defending capitalism!
One of the reasons why proletarian parents and children are even listening to these clueless middle class professors is the same reason of their misery—culture under capitalism which places money as an indicator of success. The professor has a position and has been given the privilege to reproduce so he must know something. Lets be fair: yes, he may know proper grammar and even some half-truths here and there but he has nowhere near an adequate comprehension of what needs to be done. In fact, he is more likely to work against communism during every single waking moment.
All the privileged middle-class nonsense about early training and so forth within capitalist society ultimately amounts to trying to find the best seats on the sinking Titanic of capitalism. Proletarian parents listen to the middle-class parents’ “solutions” that are physically not possible for them: How can a private school educate all children? How can a laboratory let all high school children do volunteer work for them? Would middle class parents be honest about these opportunities in the first place? What happen to the child who didn’t get the opportunity? One of my students once told me that education should be limited so his own education can be valued more highly! Middle class parents can’t see the bigger picture (much less acting against it), and they have reasons to keep society unequal out of narrow-mindedness and naked cynicism! Even when proletarians are all educated, we will have saturated the market. Congratulations. Now we get college professors who have to work three jobs to survive! Now you get scientific researchers who have to rely on governmental assistance! Working harder and smarter will only exacerbate the saturation of the market, but as long as one is a narrow-minded «genius» then I guess capitalism is just fine.
However, Importantly, the middle-class/petite-bourgeois “solution” here is diametrically opposed to actions that are scientifically appropriate for social development (ie revolution and creation of an equal society).
The situation is this: On the sinking Titanic, bankers, speculators, insurers, stockbrokers, corrupt proletarians, corrupt trade unionists, liberals, conservatives, rabid conservatives, social democrats, Trotskyists and open fascists, selfish and ignorant petite bourgeoisie, proprietors of gambling, investors of real estate, bourgeois politicians for all stripes, priests of all religions, bourgeois professors of all stripes, stock market parasites big and small, bourgeoisie big and small, landlords big and small, and all their hangers-on and menials all struggle for the best seats within the sinking Titanic. Every single group has their own silly idealistic “theories” and narrow “truths” to justify their own selfish existence and way of life. All these groups are often against the other groups, but they always ultimately sustain themselves at the expense of the oppressed peoples of the world. All these groups pay lip service to the fantastical ideas of freedom, fraternity, and democracy while, in practice, they support the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the private property relations that bourgeois governments guard, since private property relations is their very lifeblood. In contrast, the solution for honest people everywhere in the world wherever they are forced to work, as Lenin et al showed, is that under the leadership of a Marxist party together the oppressed masses, the Titanic CAN be steered clear of the iceberg and towards a scientific organization of human society!
Unlike all those groups mentioned before, Marxism offers a real way forward. The road requires a titanic physical and mental struggle as well as endless self-improvement, but it is the only road to happiness for all!