Eight Ways the State Goes to War Against the Family

The least acknowledged conflict in any society is the subtle but persistent struggle between the state and the family. The main way a government expands its own power is by encroaching on the family’s traditional roles and responsibilities, weakening its foundation.

The stronger the state, the weaker the family.

This power shift occurs when the state assumes responsibilities once held by families, often under the guise of compassion or necessity. What begins as a limited program for those in need in one generation becomes a universal entitlement in the next, permanently entrenching a stronger state and a diminished family. The rhetoric behind these policies may sound benevolent, but their outcomes reveal a consistent pattern of eroding the realm of family responsibility.

Here are eight policies that, while seeming well-intentioned, transfer power from families to the state, collectively reducing the family to a shadow of its former strength.

1. Social Security vs. Honoring Parents: Historically, raising children well was a practical necessity—children cared for their aging parents. Social Security shifted this responsibility to the state, reducing the incentive to have and nurture children. While intended to protect the elderly, it has inadvertently placed a burden on younger generations, weakening the intergenerational bond that once motivated family formation and care.

2. Subsidized College Loans vs. Early Marriage and Children: Before widespread government involvement in college loans, students could often cover tuition with part-time and summer jobs. As the state poured money into loan programs, colleges raised tuition at triple the rate of inflation, plunging young adults into debt. This financial burden delays marriage and parenthood by a decade or more, contributing to declining birth rates and rising rates of unplanned childlessness.

3. 401(k) Programs vs. Family-Owned Businesses: Government-designed tax incentives, like 401(k) plans, have funneled retirement savings into public markets, giving large corporations access to vastly more capital than family-owned businesses. This has fueled private equity firms that acquire small, family-run companies, consolidating them into large conglomerates traded on public markets. Even when value is lost in these transitions, the shift from family to corporate ownership enriches private equity at the expense of millions of families.

4. Government Welfare vs. Family and Community Support: Traditionally, care for the poor began with parents, extended family, churches, neighbors, and communities, with the state as a last resort. Government welfare programs invert this model, incentivizing reliance on state aid over family and community bonds. This shift undermines the family’s role as a primary support network, fostering dependency on the state.

5. Public Sex Education vs. Faith-Based Values: Public sex education often emphasizes the physical aspects of sex over its emotional or spiritual significance. This framing can normalize casual attitudes toward sex, reducing the incentive for young men to commit to marriage and family life. Historically, the prospect of building a family motivated men toward long-term commitment, but now they see the normalization of premarital sex causing an increasing number of men to give up on marriage altogether.

6. Abortion Rights vs. Honoring Motherhood: The abortion debate, often framed as a matter of women’s rights, has diminished the cultural reverence for motherhood. By prioritizing individual autonomy over the value of nurturing life, society has shifted feminine aspirations away from motherhood toward advocacy for freedom from it. This reframing pits personal liberation against family creation, eroding the family’s societal priority.

7. Fiat Currency vs. Sound Money: Government-controlled fiat currency and inflation punish savers and reward borrowers, discouraging long-term financial planning. Families once built wealth through disciplined saving, but inflation erodes purchasing power, forcing parents to become savvy investors or watch their savings diminish. This uncertainty undermines the hope that hard work and sacrifice will secure a better future for their children.

8. Two-Income Home Loans vs. Single-Income Affordability: Homes were once affordable on a single income, allowing one parent—often the mother—to prioritize family over career. When the government allowed banks to begin considering dual incomes for mortgages, housing prices surged, pricing many single-income families out of the market. This forced more mothers into the workforce, creating a cycle where dual incomes became a necessity, further straining family life.

The state’s encroachment on family responsibilities, though often cloaked in compassion, systematically weakens the family unit by transferring its traditional roles to government control. To restore the family’s vital role in society, we must critically examine these policies, prioritize family-centric solutions, and reclaim the responsibilities that foster strong, self-reliant households. Only then can we reverse the tide and rebuild a culture that values the family as the cornerstone of a thriving society.