UNDERMINING PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AND POWER

UNDERMINING PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AND POWER                          1/18/17

By Domenick J. Maglio, PhD. Traditional Realist

France became the 52^nd nation to end any and all forms of corporal punishment of children. This movement has become a well-financed global progressive initiative. Sixty-two percent of French citizens polled reported spanking their children. This is a deflated figure due to political correctness, with 82% of the respondents clearly voicing opposition to the ban, which passed. Statist governments are dictating to parents in 52 nations of the world that spanking for any reason or in any limited form will no longer be allowed by the parent or guardian. This is a direct attack on the right and power of parents to raise their children.

The extraordinary effort to limit parent’s discretion in child rearing has been gradually happening over a half century through the psychological and educational expert’s advice. This indoctrination by the media to brand any spanking as an abusive act has fallen short of the desired results. This campaign wanted a total ban on any form no matter how responsible and appropriate the spanking.

Parents in developed nations have been brainwashed to be conscious that politically correct “do gooders” will be upset to witness any form of a verbal reprimand or moderate spanking.  They are aware they would be reported to the government authorities. The citizens are encouraged by the media and government authorities to report any overt acts, which parents use to demonstrate their power to get their children to obey their authority. 

These so called, child advocates are short sighted. Often they had not raised children of their own or had less than sterling results with their own children. They believe that their children should be on an equal power plane as the parents. These utopian egalitarian ideas sound wonderful and are more important to comply with than the actual outcomes that are disastrous. They are more focused on making themselves and their children delusionally happy than preparing them for reality.

When children are not functioning normally they are labeled with a mental disorder. The child’s own thinking, listening and behavior is evaluated not the parent’s child rearing practices. It does not seem to matter that parents’ lack of consistency, follow through or any other aspect of their child rearing practices that has had a negative impact on the child. The child is viewed by the mental health professional as an independent individual rather than through the broader lens of being one element of the family dynamics in this process. The child is labeled as defective while the “loving” parent becomes the martyr for dealing their problem child.

The stigmatizing or prohibiting any method of asserting parental power has been devastating to children’s development. Without parents being in charge, the children are left to their own devices. The lack of parental authority means little daily structure or boundaries.  The child’s lifestyle becomes chaotic. The parents become solely observers of the child doing his own thing. These are missed opportunities to teach necessary life skills, politeness, gratefulness and many other moral values that are needed to perform well in a complex society.

Moderate spanking has been used throughout human history. It is and was very rare, even in this permissive era for a child to never have been spanked. The vast majority of adults have been spanked in their lives without any emotional, social or psychological damage. As adults these children have turned out to be psychologically, socially and emotionally healthy people.

Elizabeth Owens and Diana Baumrind of the University of California, Berkley authored a ground breaking longitudinal study of 100 families on their child rearing practices. They found there is no detrimental evidence that moderate spanking of a child causes any ill effects on their development. It does note that any verbal or physical consistent and severe abusive behavior does negatively impact the individual.

There is a significant distinction between moderate spanking and abusive corporal punishment that is being ignored. By lumping them together we have lost out on an essential tool in gaining the child’s attention to adhere to parental decisions. Physical abuse does not work while moderate spanking does. The lack of establishing limits with a child does have potentially negative implications to the child’s development. Children without parental parameters and a moral compass are not prepared to face reality as they age. This vacuum of predictable consequences for behavior leaves the person a dysfunctional being.

Once you frighten parents from meeting their honorable obligations under the threat of breaking the state’s arbitrary and capricious laws you have undermined parent’s power. They lose the ability to do the crucial and most difficult duty of their lives: raise good, healthy citizens.  The family is the most important social unit of any society. Without parents taking responsibility for their children, the children suffer and so does the nation.

The governments of numerous nations have proven that they cannot be good substitutes for a healthy family. Their social engineering intervention has been a dismal failure.

Domenick Maglio, PhD. is a columnist carried by various newspapers, an author of several books and owner/director of Wider Horizons School, a college prep program. Dr. Maglio is an author of weekly newspaper articles, INVASION WITHIN and a new just published book, entitled, IN CHARGE PARENTING In a PC World. You can visit Dr. Maglio at www.drmaglio.blogspot.com.

THE ELECTORAL PROCESS IS BEST FOR OUR GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM

THE ELECTORAL PROCESS IS BEST FOR OUR GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM

By Domenick J. Maglio PhD. Traditional Realist

The USA is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. The founders of our nation definitely understood that past democracies, dating back to The Golden Age of Greece, were unstable and prone to radical changes in the direction of the nation. It is for this and other practical reasons they chose a representative, federalist form of governance. Our founders were intellectual, rational people who studied the history of civilization learning that a representative republic was the most efficient form of government.

These wise men realized that there were many competing regional interests in a geographically vast nation and everyone needs to have skin in the game. They understood it was beneficial to recognize that all these factions should have the ability to be heard as well as possess power to influence the direction of the nation. Through individual state representatives in the Electoral College every part of the nation knew it possibly could have sufficient voting power to determine the outcome of a presidential election. It was a brilliant formula to maintain unity and accountability in the election of the president of the United States.

Often the party that loses the election calls for change in the rules for electing a president through a straight popular vote. This happens especially if the election was close especially when the candidate won the popular vote but lost the election. Some even call for the reversal of the election results based on the candidate receiving a greater plurality of the votes. The establishment’s rules influence the strategy a candidate uses to win the election based on the rules given to them. If the rules called for the winner of the popular vote to become president then it would be unwise to spend time in less populated rural areas. The best strategy would be to concentrate on urban centers where the candidate’s exposure would be maximized.

This is similar to fans in a best-of-seven-game championship series saying their team scored more total runs in the series than the team that won four games and should be awarded the championship. The games won, not the run total, was established beforehand and accepted by everyone in the process. Changing the rules of the game after the contest is over would encourage many teams to use a shrewd adviser to apply creative formulas to attempt to alter the results after the game was already played.

The abolishment of the Electoral College would lead to candidates for president visiting only highly populated city areas making promises to these people and ignoring the rural areas where it is difficult to reach sufficient numbers of voters. These smaller population segments’ interests would be ignored. This would create resentment and division since their votes and concerns would not be taken into consideration.

By giving each state the power to run and certify its own presidential election lessens the chance of fraud. The local community has a greater opportunity to identify people who are not legally registered members of the local area. Nationalizing the election process would make it almost impossible to accurately certify this process in particular states.

Nationalizing the election would definitely tilt the process from covering specific small states, concerns and issues to a simple popularity contest based on looks, personality, celebrity and promises.  The biggest vote getter would be like a high school popularity contest -election. This type of election based on personality would diminish the seriousness and power of the office of the presidency in the eyes of citizens.

America is a Representative Republic. It should be based on a thoughtful, educated and wise electorate voting on principle and important issues. This process would more fairly determine the direction of the nation for four significant years by not excluding the interests of smaller, less populous states.

Our republic system with the removal of the Electoral College would significantly increase the chances of us becoming a “banana republic.” It could be more easily stolen by fraudulent manipulation through a central government based on who can rig and steal the most popular votes.

The electoral process has worked incredibly well for our entire existence as a nation. It has been a process that helped the USA to remain unified and stable.

The electoral process has proven over many years to be best suited for our republic form of government.

Domenick Maglio, PhD. is a columnist carried by various newspapers, an author of several books and owner/director of Wider Horizons School, a college prep program. Dr. Maglio is an author of weekly newspaper articles, INVASION WITHIN  and a new just published book, entitled, IN CHARGE PARENTING In a PC World. You can visit Dr. Maglio at www.drmaglio.blogspot.com.

STATE RUN MEDIA IN PANIC MODE

STATE RUN MEDIA IN PANIC MODE

By Domenick J. Maglio PhD. Traditional Realist                                         1/4/17

It is dawning on the “elite media” that they have lost the power and influence to control the future implementation of the progressive agenda.  President elect Trump bypassed them through his rallies in front of large crowds and his direct tweets. He has even gone as far as to suggest that there will be a change in the sacred White House daily briefings. Not maintaining the present seating arrangement for the elite press members seems to be an intolerable affront to their egos. This treatment of the media by Trump’s use of social media is the same as Obama’s used to get around the media but then it was not an issue. They are having a conniption in full view of the American people.

The election results were so devastating to these entitled intellectuals that they had become the latest and greatest victims of our modern age. These “smuggers” of the 4^th Estate are becoming hysterical and frightened humans. Most are scattering in every direction to attack anyone and everything that may have caused this “catastrophe.”

Most progressive pundits still cannot even accept the fact that Trump won the election. Hypothetical, nonfactual propositions that Putin, the FBI and Wikileaks were the unconvincing arguments given for Hillary’s loss.  When they realized this was not working they turned instead towards a frontal attack on the Electoral College. They were under the illusion that somehow they hoped it could flip a sufficient number of elector’s votes in order to deny Trump his victory.  This “Trumped Up” non-story was just another pipe dream to alter the people’s voice.

The next attempt to delegitimize Trump’s election was the story that Putin directed his intelligence agencies to hack into the Democrat Party and influence a Trump victory. The elite media incessantly repeated all the national intelligence agencies agreed Russia was behind the hacking. This allegation was presented as an unassailable fact, which has started to fall apart, again showing the elite media as a shill of the Democrats.

These irrational leftist pundits are the same ones who adamantly insisted that Mr. Trump had no feasible pathway to the White House. These “supposed seekers of the truth “ failed to mention that the polls were significantly and favorably skewed towards the Democrats. They failed to report the massive enthusiasm for Trump’s, “Make America Great Again” campaign, which was a factor not taken into the election equation. As advocates for the progressive movement they were shielding and singing the praises of a flawed and most pathetic Democrat presidential candidate ever. The “in-your-face” bias of the state media was front and center for all citizens to view.

The elite media’s response for being outright shills for the Democrats was their direct assault on the alternate media and anything Mr. Trump would do and propose. They even went so far as to arrogantly dictate what the President Elect should do to meet their status quo “good practices.” The demeaning, mocking and ridiculing of the Conservative opposition are the latest losing strategy to regain their power and credibility. They are dividing the country when they constantly say they want to unite it. Although they are the creators and crusaders for “fake news,” they decided to try to brand the alternative media as the culprits of made-up news.

The fake media doubling down on annihilating any alternative viewpoint is offensive and obnoxious to any thinking person. Now they have the audacity to suggest that certain progressive sites should be the arbitrators of false or true news. These “paragons of virtue” who claim they want to preserve our “Democracy” (it is a Republic) failed to mention these “fact checking” sites would merely rubber stamp everything the establishment media says is the truth and anything the opposition states as false. “Fact checks” are not about black and white issues; instead they are subjective speculations on the manner the event unfolded and its implications.

This pathetic ruse of assigning their own brethren, to be “gatekeepers of truth or falsehood” shows the disrespect they have for US citizens. They named established progressive media sites such as Politifact of the St. Pete Times, an ultra liberal newspaper, Snopes, ABC News where the head of investigative news, Brian Ross is infamously known for exposing only Republican members and giving the Democrats a pass in the DC Madame scandal. CBS News conglomerate president, David Rhodes, whose brother, Ben Rhodes is a Deputy White House National Security Advisor in the Obama administration again demonstrates the incestuous relationship between the Obama administration and the progressive media. 

The “fake news” label cannot be easily switched from the elite progressive news providers since their modus operandi for decades has been confirmed by their hysterical accusations, Wikileaks and actions after the election. The cat is out of the bag. The state media has been wrong and inaccurate in the presentation of their narrative on so many issues that many citizens can no longer be counted on as simply “sheeple.” The silent American people have shouted they want to be heard.

 The progressive elite media has many reasons to be distressed. The people voted them out after turning to the alternative media news. For the first time in decades there are multiple interpretations of events. The elites have new eyes looking over their shoulders to give another perspective and cogent point of view. The days of the state media monopoly is over. The fact-check gimmick is too late. It is not going to work. The public has seen the deception and will not easily be deceived again. The genie is out of the bottle and cannot be squeezed back in no matter what method they use.

Lying has historically gone on forever in the political arena. Fact checking should happen but not by the media elites. As President Thomas Jefferson noted in his political experience, false statements cannot be stopped by a decree limiting free speech and a free press. The ultimate fact checking is the duty of the citizenry. The truth is determined by the people’s judgment. The hardworking people of America as a large group are smarter than a small group of Washington, DC elites. The elites frantically continue to repeat their failed strategies and agenda. The state run media has every reason to be in a panic. American people have won the election. The progressive establishment lost.

Domenick Maglio, PhD. is a columnist carried by various newspapers, an author of several books and owner/director of Wider Horizons School, a college prep program. Dr. Maglio is an author of weekly newspaper articles, INVASION WITHIN  and a new just published book, entitled, IN CHARGE PARENTING In a PC World. You can visit Dr. Maglio at www.drmaglio.blogspot.com.