NationStates Jolt Archive

Social scientist Francis Fukuyama purports in his book "The Great Disruption" that several cultural and social changes that happened in the US since the 1960´s represented a severe blow to american cohesion. Mr. Fukuyama seems to claim that the surge in crime and social unrest that the US experienced in widespread areas is caused by a breakdown of traditional social institutions, such as that of the nuclear family-father, mother, offspring. He states that single mothers cant cope with the tasks usually bestowed upon the men of the family, namely educating the children to respect the law. Mr. Fukuyama talks out in severe terms against what he senses as the end of gender-assigned roles in family life; he feels that such change lead to a weakening of a code of common values that glued the american people together, which brought about a dismal social disruption in terms of crime and social exclusion.
So, is Mr. Fukuyama right or is he just the intelectual mouthpiece of the conservative movement?

Just a mouth peice. Not only is his ideas insulting to those who were raised in a single family household (and turned out just fine), but his use of the nuclear family is a popular myth. The great 'nuclear' family actually showed up very late in American history, noteably after WWII when retuning GIs decided to move away from their parents across country (usually to areas they had enjoyed RR at). For most of American history, the extended family was the norm. Perhaps Fukuyama should call for a return to those golden years when parents and grandparents lived together.

And one of these days I WILL nail a conservative to the floor and not let them go till they tell me when this supposed golden age of theirs was and what was so golden about it.

Just a mouth peice. Not only is his ideas insulting to those who were raised in a single family household (and turned out just fine), but his use of the nuclear family is a popular myth. The great 'nuclear' family actually showed up very late in American history, noteably after WWII when retuning GIs decided to move away from their parents across country (usually to areas they had enjoyed RR at). For most of American history, the extended family was the norm. Perhaps Fukuyama should call for a return to those golden years when parents and grandparents lived together.

And one of these days I WILL nail a conservative to the floor and not let them go till they tell me when this supposed golden age of theirs was and what was so golden about it.


Hmm. I'm a conservative, but I don't believe there was a golden age.

Hmm. I'm a conservative, but I don't believe there was a golden age.
But being a conservative, do you believe that Mr. Fukuyama´s apraisal of the breakdown of the nuclear family and its replacement by a single-parent model caused a surge in crime among american youth?

But being a conservative, do you believe that Mr. Fukuyama´s apraisal of the breakdown of the nuclear family and its replacement by a single-parent model caused a surge in crime among american youth?
You mean besides the minor fact that youth crime has been going down?

You mean besides the minor fact that youth crime has been going down?
Fukuyama also contends that recently a powerful morals movement has entered american culture, and gained a clear foothold...included in this morals movement would be the renewed respect for the traditional family.

Fukuyama also contends that recently a powerful morals movement has entered american culture, and gained a clear foothold...included in this morals movement would be the renewed respect for the traditional family.
It has? News to me.

But being a conservative, do you believe that Mr. Fukuyama´s apraisal of the breakdown of the nuclear family and its replacement by a single-parent model caused a surge in crime among american youth?

No. I believe that most of the surge in violent crime in the US was caused by the Great Society programs of the Democratic Party, which concentrated masses of poor in urban ghettos and invited them to live lives of hopeless indolence from which there was no escape. Those programs, and those that followed, caused the majority of the problem.

Violent crime is not surging across ALL american youth. Just some of them.

Same thing with AIDS - it's not affecting all subpopulations equally - otherwise the percentage of heterosexuals with AIDS would be the same as the percentage of homosexuals with AIDS. And it's not. So there must be something else that isn't being looked at.

It's not the nuclear family thing.

Social scientist Francis Fukuyama purports in his book "The Great Disruption" that several cultural and social changes that happened in the US since the 1960´s represented a severe blow to american cohesion. Mr. Fukuyama seems to claim that the surge in crime and social unrest that the US experienced in widespread areas is caused by a breakdown of traditional social institutions, such as that of the nuclear family-father, mother, offspring. He states that single mothers cant cope with the tasks usually bestowed upon the men of the family, namely educating the children to respect the law. Mr. Fukuyama talks out in severe terms against what he senses as the end of gender-assigned roles in family life; he feels that such change lead to a weakening of a code of common values that glued the american people together, which brought about a dismal social disruption in terms of crime and social exclusion.
So, is Mr. Fukuyama right or is he just the intelectual mouthpiece of the conservative movement?
Partly right, although it largely has to do with a bunch of laws being passed which are unnecessary and in the end largely unenforceable. Any markets that are affected by the laws are then taken over by various forms of gangs. Kids see the gangs as the fastest way to get rich and being young and generally male, are convinced of their own immortality. As such they shrug off the inherent risks and enter a criminal life. That and there's the fact that Ever since Johnson's "Great Society" was instituted single parents have increased severely in number, the poverty rate has been completely stagnant even though it had been decreasing almost steadily, was only marginally affected by the Great Depression, and then continued to decrease since the early 1900's. Immediately after his "reforms" were put into place the poverty rate pegged itself at around 13%. Then of course many gun laws were put into place in the 1960's as well, EVEN THOUGH gun laws have never really shown an adverse effect on a criminal's ability to aquire a gun in the U.S.

I didn't think that he could come up with a more ridiculous argument than he did in the "End of History". I stand corrected.

As a few people have already mentioned, his theory is just simply devoid of reality. He is almost a cheerleader within the academic world. His theories are not explaining politics so much as promoting a certain ideological agenda.

Indeed, he's full of crap, I'm afraid.

Social scientist Francis Fukuyama purports in his book "The Great Disruption" that several cultural and social changes that happened in the US since the 1960´s represented a severe blow to american cohesion. Mr. Fukuyama seems to claim that the surge in crime and social unrest that the US experienced in widespread areas is caused by a breakdown of traditional social institutions, such as that of the nuclear family-father, mother, offspring. He states that single mothers cant cope with the tasks usually bestowed upon the men of the family, namely educating the children to respect the law. Mr. Fukuyama talks out in severe terms against what he senses as the end of gender-assigned roles in family life; he feels that such change lead to a weakening of a code of common values that glued the american people together, which brought about a dismal social disruption in terms of crime and social exclusion.
So, is Mr. Fukuyama right or is he just the intelectual mouthpiece of the conservative movement?

The latter.

Almost all of his premises are false. The nuclear family golden age never existed. Crime isn't surging. Etc, etc, etc.

His conclusions are even more faulty.

Mouthpiece. 100% ideologue; useless except as an example of same.

The latter.

Almost all of his premises are false. The nuclear family golden age never existed. Crime isn't surging. Etc, etc, etc.

His conclusions are even more faulty.

garbage in, even worse garbage out

of course, what do i know? i'm not smart enough to figure out that we're living at the end of history, like this guy is.

The latter.

Almost all of his premises are false. The nuclear family golden age never existed. Crime isn't surging. Etc, etc, etc.

His conclusions are even more faulty.
Didn't actually read what the poster wrote, did you? The word experienced was past tense. I would assume Fukuyama was discussing the late 60's, 70's, and 80's in his book when crime was most certainly surging. Besides which, the current decrease in crime largely has to do with abortion more than any other factor.


Edit - The book was first published in 1999 and probably took several years to write. I'm going to assume that he though the decreases wouldn't last at all.

Didn't actually read what the poster wrote, did you? The word experienced was past tense. I would assume Fukuyama was discussing the late 60's, 70's, and 80's in his book when crime was most certainly surging. Besides which, the current decrease in crime largely has to do with abortion more than any other factor.
What garbage. Proof, I assume, would be too much to ask?

What garbage. Proof, I assume, would be too much to ask?
I assume you're discussing the linkage to abortion, yes? Abortion became mandated legal in 1973 by the RvW SCOTUS decision. However there were 5 states that had legalized abortion at that time. Three of them had legalized it in 1970, the other two had legalized it in 1967 or 8, I forget which. Anyway, the crime rate in those respective states began to drop pretty much exactly the number of years they had legalized abortion before the rest of the country's crime rate began to drop. The crime rate began to drop almost exactly one generation after RvW. Normally this could be derided as correlation is not causation, however it is the only common thread in major laws passed between the states that could explain the nationwide drop that began in the early 90's.

I assume you're discussing the linkage to abortion, yes? Abortion became mandated legal in 1973 by the RvW SCOTUS decision. However there were 5 states that had legalized abortion at that time. Three of them had legalized it in 1970, the other two had legalized it in 1967 or 8, I forget which. Anyway, the crime rate in those respective states began to drop pretty much exactly the number of years they had legalized abortion before the rest of the country's crime rate began to drop. The crime rate began to drop almost exactly one generation after RvW. Normally this could be derided as correlation is not causation, however it is the only common thread in major laws passed between the states that could explain the nationwide drop that began in the early 90's.
You've yet to provide anything resembling proof for this. You want to know what's neat though? The crime rate for the first generation after Roe jumped in California. Shoots that nice little theory in the head, doesn't it?

Social scientist Francis Fukuyama purports in his book "The Great Disruption" that several cultural and social changes that happened in the US since the 1960´s represented a severe blow to american cohesion. Mr. Fukuyama seems to claim that the surge in crime and social unrest that the US experienced in widespread areas is caused by a breakdown of traditional social institutions, such as that of the nuclear family-father, mother, offspring. He states that single mothers cant cope with the tasks usually bestowed upon the men of the family, namely educating the children to respect the law. Mr. Fukuyama talks out in severe terms against what he senses as the end of gender-assigned roles in family life; he feels that such change lead to a weakening of a code of common values that glued the american people together, which brought about a dismal social disruption in terms of crime and social exclusion.
So, is Mr. Fukuyama right or is he just the intelectual mouthpiece of the conservative movement?
Hmm, I hadn't heard much of Fukuyama's stuff outside of his stances on biotech (some of which are downright scary).

Anyway, he here makes the classic mistake of assuming the past was ever so much better than the present in terms of $QUALITY, and then arguing that $QUALITY is linked to $MODERN_OCCURANCE, when the past really either wasn't a great deal different or wasn't better in terms of $QUALITY.

You've yet to provide anything resembling proof for this. You want to know what's neat though? The crime rate for the first generation after Roe jumped in California. Shoots that nice little theory in the head, doesn't it?
Source? Post murder and rape rates from 1985-1995. Also, of the 5 states that legalized it, California has the highest influx of illegal immigrants by far, many of which are age 16-26.

Source? Post murder and rape rates from 1985-1995. Also, of the 5 states that legalized it, California has the highest influx of illegal immigrants by far, many of which are age 16-26.
Table 2. Arrest rate per 100,000 California juveniles ages 10-17
reported by joint legislative/gubernatorial Task Force
Year Total Felony Misdemeanor
1964 3,808 1,730 2,078
1969 5,406 3,324 2,082
1974 9,313 4,173 5,140
1979 8,653 3,319 5,334
--- RVR generation
1984 6,333 2,237 4,096
1989 7,008 2,897 4,111
1994 6,550 2,621 3,929
--- end RVR generation
1998 6,111 2,021 4,090

http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/myth/table1.jpg

See that jump around 84 that stayed constant until 1991? Notice a similar jump around 1991 in the age bracket above it as the RVR generation moved into it?