Contemporary divorce law has placed legal authority in the hands of wives, and taken it out of the hands of their husbands. All married households are legally female-headed households, especially when considered in the context of how family courts typically operate.
The many changes in the United States since the 1970s have caused countless debates between the mainstream left and right: the causes of the shrinking returns to labor, the increase in the cost of living, the growing social chaos, the inability of the state to meet its long term obligations, and many other topics. In popular politics, both wings agree that freedom to divorce is a basic right, and that empowering women through the legal system is both a morally necessary and practical.
This contradicts what was commonly held before that time in all but revolutionary Communist countries, and even then only around the time of the Russian Revolution.
The middle class, and all propertied classes, cannot survive many more years of this family law regime.
The reason for this is that every new divorce splits the estate that would otherwise be going to the children, which prevents the appreciation of that estate, deprives the children of their rightful inheritance, and enables an entire class of vampiric middlemen charged with redistributing capital from men to women. The children that result from these unions are often impaired, and family life becomes a court-obligated set of shuttling children from one broken half-family to another broken half-family, wasting resources that could otherwise be used to form communal prosperity.
Sexual liberation is incompatible with the continuation of what has been traditionally understood as the middle class. The revolutionaries first murdered the aristocrats, who were few in number, and relatively simple to deprive of their property and their lives. The extermination of the bourgeoisie has proven to be a more difficult project, because Western Civilization managed to produce them in such great numbers and to make them so satisfied with themselves.
To destroy the middle class, their culture had to be destroyed, their morality, their religion, and their relationships with their children. To achieve this, the revolutionaries plied men away from their duties with the promises of easy sex with numerous partners. Women were promised power, autonomy, money for their illegitimate broods, and freedom.
We have reaped a nation of bastards from this arrangement.
Many millions of confident, competent, healthy, and morally straight men have been unseated by their wives using the family courts. They have been deprived of their property. Their children have been deprived of fathers and of inheritance. American society has been deprived of the strong families that used to be its hallmark, thanks to conscious subversion by revolutionaries, psychologists, lawyers, writers, and the many politicians who made it possible.
American family life has become perilous: financially, morally, and emotionally. Without the rule of fathers, the rule of brutal policemen and their dark reflections, organized criminals, step in to rule the streets.
There are many arguments that one can have over political systems, but those arguments are over the narcissism of small differences when compared to patriarchal legal systems compared to the barbaric alternative. If the law does not entrust permanent authority to fathers, then the law must rest on tyrannical ‘enforcers’ to implement the will of the state in its place.
What’s needed to restore the rule of law is what has always been needed to maintain the law: it’s to re-instate fathers as the primary means by which the law makes itself felt in this world of real things, instead of just in the world of ideas. The alternative is capricious tyranny from both above and below.