From CIF’s Khaled Diab I read this piece describing plans by a Dutch political party to force compulsory contraception on those deemed unfit mothers, and to punish those who disobey by removing the child when it is born.
The comment section is filled with comment on Diab’s words: “I must admit that it shocked me that this law was the brainchild of a socialist”, including one of mine.
To me control over the children by the state, subverting or even aiming to remove the role of parents, is typical socialist thinking. Seeing the state as the be all and end all, that what is good for the state is good for everyone, whether they recognise it or not.
There may be some argument for removing children from violent parents, but given the horrors faced by children in care, it must be a last resort. This legislation goes even further. How do they choose who can have kids? Some might want to sterilise Scallies who will probably become teenage mums and go on to produce more teenage mums and criminal sons. The Greens might just want to reduce the numbers of rich, as the biggest consumers. Racists might want to sterilise ethnic minorities (it has happened before). And maybe those with genetic diseases could be put down for the health of the population, and their unborn children. I am sure the so-called socialists would object to those criteria. But they’d want the same powers, exercised by social workers to stop first child beaters, but maybe later smokers or racists or some other group they dislike reproducing.
I don’t want those powers, I don’t want anyone else to have them. When will people see that governments are not always good, and cannot always plane everything. In fact, with their legal monopoly on violence we must be more wary of government abuses than any other.
It really scares me that people think like this.