Why am I a Proponent of Child Labor? Because it’s Good for the Children.
This began as a reply to a reddit comment; I was telling the story of how the West has steadily and reliably abandoned morality, as response to the argument that “Since the once demonized and hated gays have now become tolerated, eventually pedophiles will be tolerated in the same right.” The first part is how and why morality is steadily abandoned. This part is about the children in society.
As an advocate of child labor, the Western stance on pedophilia is a bit confusing. Even a royal multi-millionaire having sex with a 17 year old volunteer prostitute is seen as a child abusing pedophile. I wouldn’t consider a 17 year old a child in the slightest. Childhood ends when the person can begin working. A child has no capacity to work reliably, while an adult does. Even the crippling child labor laws in America argue this 17 year old should still legally be allowed to work.
This odd predisposition is the general reluctance of the society to view their kids as adults. When given the choice of seeing a person either as an adult or a child, Westerners tend to choose to see the person as a child, perhaps due to some form of nostalgia, attempting to hold onto the past when their children actually were small children. People historically began to start working as early as possible, 6 or 8, doing whatever they can to help, especially in rural areas where they were needed to do farm work.
People understood that education was not as valuable as having that child working; especially when the labor that child would be doing instead would likely define the entirety of their working lives. Though a 6 year old cannot do very much work, cannot work reliably for any considerable length of time, the work it does manage to do is more beneficial to its life and family than a general education which it will never use over the course of its life. The small amount of money or value the child may create by doing odd jobs is more valuable to his family and thus himself than the inapplicable knowledge he would attain in school. If the child needed to learn something, he would be taught that knowledge by his parents because his parents use that knowledge to perpetuate their work.
It’s for this reason that many people failed to get any general education in the past, simply because it wasn’t beneficial to them and they could learn everything they needed on the job. People used to be married at 12–14, and start reproducing, and this is still common in Africa. This may seem unsettling to the west due to their reluctance to see children as adults, this is just natural reproduction and why it is still prevalent in areas of the world that practice natural reproduction such as Africa.
Though women ideally should not become pregnant before they are fully grown as this poses potentially fatal health risks such as being unable to naturally birth the baby due to underdeveloped hips, once a woman is fully grown then pregnancy is not a threat to the woman, as clearly many teenagers have produced healthy births, even in America.
People say that psychological development is an argument here, but in reality most people fail to develop proper logical capacity or decision making skills at any point in their adult life. They will always have the reasoning, foresight, and logical capacity that a teenager or even a child does, often failing to understand reality beyond the context of their own lives, seeing arguments as sound only when they personally benefit or get what they want, regardless of any objective legitimacy or illegitimacy of the argument.
This is starkly apparent if you ever attempt to have an argument with somebody, as they will fail miserably to argue adequately and instead resort to childish reasoning. Sadly, when childish reasoning is the functional plateau of logical capacity in a democracy, politics, which represents the people, is in turn defined by this same childlike reasoning that functions with respect to personal appeal rather than objective, logical legitimacy.
There’s really no functional reason that kids this age of 12–14 shouldn’t be working, especially if they show now interest or capacity for school. If a student has traditionally done poorly in school or does not succeed, at the end of 5th grade, 8th grade at the latest, they should be taken out of school and taught to work instead. Keeping them in school is not benefiting them in any way, because for whatever reason they are not learning.
Rather than waste the time of the child, and waste the time, effort, and money of the state, we need to understand that these children are more than capable of doing work, regardless of their failure in school, as much of the work needed to substantiate society requires no more than a 5th grade education, as any additional knowledge can be readily attained on the job. If the child shows modest capacity, but is not exceptional, they should be directed towards a trade or other profession, as knowing they are likely not attending college, high-school becomes inapplicable in their life and any knowledge needed for trade work can be taught through specialized schools and apprentice ships rather than teach them inapplicable general education.
People say “This will warp their bones”, and that’s true to some extent, more so in men than women. Women are fully grown by 14, so work at that age won’t warp their bones and they’ll be fine, but women don’t tend to do work that warps your bones like heavy physical labor. Men are fully grown at around 18, but despite this they are still fairly strong at earlier ages, more than strong enough to work. You can’t expect the same degree of physical labor from them as a fully grown adult, as this might warp their bones if they lift too heavily, but they can still do 90% of the tasks, just not the heaviest lifting.
5th grade is a sound finish-line for school, because a lot of menial work doesn’t require much lifting at all. These kids have enough mental capacity to do simple clerical work, and they have enough fine motor control to do many aspects of manufacturing or other menial labor. This would teach these kids valuable skills, applicable knowledge, and above this work ethic, things that they will actually use in their lives. This will also give them valuable work experience in the process, as a lack of work ethic is something that often tends to cause children to struggle in school, essentially making the process of schooling fruitless without having these experiences to instill work-ethic. In reality, middle-school isn’t particularly valuable to most people either.
For most of history, even in the last century, most of the world was able to work, and is still able to work just fine without algebra, history, basic science or other things like that. Most people, even in many high paying fields, especially in simpler fields, never use a significant amount of the things they are taught in general education simply because they’re not relevant to their jobs. You’re spending years of time giving every lumberjack a canoe paddle, just in case he later decides to row a boat, when this is essentially needless and unproductive because his life is spent as a lumberjack and he never has any use for that canoe paddle in his life.
General education is largely unproductive in that it is extremely inefficient. You train every scientist in history, you train every historian in math, when these skills are seldom used by these people. It’s not that 5th grade would be the end of education; it’s that it would be the end of general education. After that people would receive specialized education related the field they intend to work in. If people personally seek general education, they could pursue education in fields they are interested in as a hobby, in free time, rather than be forced to learn things many of them will never use in their lives.
Putting children to work, rather than sending them to school, is valuable because they would actually learn a skill that they would use in their life, rather than waste their time, especially in high-school, which teaches people things most of them will never use. High-school is just pre-college, and if you’re not going to college, high school is pretty much worthless in your daily life. Most people don’t use geometry, chemistry, calculus, or biology in their daily life, and when this is true, high school produces little value for the children who don’t intend to go to college. Despite this, it still wastes 4 years of their life in being unproductive, and not only that keeps them largely unemployed, making them much more prone to typical reckless behaviors of the unemployed like crime and drug abuse.
This being said, one may argue there are benefits attained through general education at higher grades, and I would argue otherwise. Despite having some capacity to parrot inapplicable knowledge, the children are seldom taught things that actually empower them in any way. Most people I interact with on the internet, most of which I presume have completed secondary school, or at least middle school have very little capacity to actually apply what they were supposed to have learned.
I write on a high-school level, but despite this, most people have trouble reading what I write. Most people have little capacity to read any substantial length of text at all, the majority of the remainder has only the capacity to skim text and provide rebuttal that consistently fails to address the points that are made. They produce rebuttal which almost always consists of nothing but personal attacks or ad hominem arguments that once again fail to make any meaningful point whatsoever. According to the hierarchy of argument, this is the most basal form of argument possible, yet this form of basal argument has become the standard even in American politics, in which elections are won by mudslinging rather than having any legitimate, logically sound, and empirically justifiable arguments with respect to policy.
The most substantial arguments are shameless false logic, the most common of which is the appeal to desire or instinct, which tempts people to agree with you because they personally want something, not because the points you make are actually sound. This is little more than being deemed the winner of a debate just because you’ve given the heroin addicted judges the most free heroin.
The validity of your points doesn’t matter because the only metric that the judges use to determine legitimacy is whether or not they are given heroin. People are instinctively self-serving, and they will always choose the satiation of their own instinctive cravings or desires over any logically sound argument that does not satiate these desires and instincts.
This becomes especially true when people have little if any respect for sound logic and proper argument, because at this point sound arguments become worthless in debate, as the only arguments that are deemed legitimate are the ones that provide the most physical and psychological gratification to the people in the manner that requires them exert the least amount of effort in order to attain these things.
The futility of educating people is visible in that the principle golden goose of debate used in the West is starkly contrary to the physical reality we live in, as the epitome of a ‘good idea’ by the standard of popular appeal is “getting something for nothing”, getting a reward for 0 personal effort, despite the fact that the universe is a closed system which informs us that in reality “there is no such thing as a free lunch”.
The irrational protection of children from labor is starkly contrasted by the Western failure to protect these children, even small children, from sexual abuse, most prevalent in the non-physical exposure and conditioning that is readily apparent within society. Clearly sexually abusing children is problematic and induces trauma, but when you look at the situation, the West is incredibly hypocritical about this concern. Sexual abuse is known to cause mental issues like mental instability, poor mood, poor decision making, and a predisposition to risky sexual behaviors. The issue is that the West is so overtly sexual that these children are essentially being sexually abused just by existing within the culture. Sex is everywhere, and even this non-physical exposure to sex as a child, through the internet or television, will induce much of the same negative consequences as physical abuse.
The issue is that the West understands that the sexual abuse of children is bad, but they fail to do anything to address the ways their children are being sexually abused by the media and the general culture of the West. This sort of overt sexuality is damaging to all people, including adults, and they will in turn exhibit the same problems resulting from sexual abuse that the children experience. This is easily a significant factor as to why these traits of mental instability, poor mood, poor decision making, and a predisposition to risky sexual behaviors are so prevalent in adults. The West does the bare minimum of protecting people from being traumatized in a way that induces general social, mental, and sexual dysfunction, only intent upon protecting children from physical trauma, while the abuse from media exposure to these things is unchecked entirely.
Seeing how the “progress” of the West over the past century has been defined by chipping away at classical morality to the extent that nearly every moral axiom has been flipped upon its head, and seeing how they are extremely tolerant society is to the already prevalent abuse of their children through the media and the culture of society, it’s likely that you are right in that the West will grow tolerant or indifferent to pedophilia.
The original poster of the threat argues that pedophiles are “born that way” and this is a very questionable phrase here. People’s sexuality tends to be a product of the way they have been conditioned and indoctrinated by society. If you take a child, let’s say, the 8th male child from a woman, knowing that testosterone tolerance in women leads the latter male children to have a greater predisposition to being homosexual. Rear that child in a room with two females and a 1st born male that is not predisposed to homosexuality. You put him in a room, in isolation from culture, until the children attain sexual maturity. If the child does naturally develop homosexual tendencies, despite having no exposure to Western culture and the psychological abuse it entails, then this could indicate being “born gay” is a real phenomenon.
The issue with pedophilia is that like every other fetish in the world, it isn’t natural. It’s non reproductive intercourse, and this indicates that there’s no reason for it to be taken in the same respect. Homosexuality could indicate predictable brain deviation, in that a man’s mind might function like an adult woman enough to perceive men as sexually attractive. Men, biologically, are just women with extra steps. The woman is the basic model, ever since asexual reproduction, so the reproductive model, the one that physically produces offspring, is always the basic form. The men are the offshoot that exists for certain reasons such as the advantage of sexual reproduction as well as through the advantage provided by a specialized workforce, having a worker specialized in something beyond reproduction.
The issue is that attraction to children is like an attraction to dogs, or feeling aroused by seeing things crushed, other sorts of nonsense like that indicates some sort of psychological dysfunction that deviates incredibly far from natural man plus woman reproduction. Being gay is sort of like having a male body, but the basic male program of heterosexuality was never initiated. Other factors could be a retained childlike state, failing to fully mature psychologically during puberty, as in childhood boys tend to be friends with boys, girls with girls, at least before puberty.
Other factors could be extreme group adherence, in that people are always wary, discomforted, and distrusting of people who look different than them. “Birds of a feather flock together” is a common axiom because people naturally dislike and don’t trust people who are different than them in any way. This is why bigotry and racism are so common, just because it’s natural to never trust anyone or anything, not one thing at all can be trusted save for yourself, but the closer a person looks identical to yourself, the more you can trust them, just because you instinctively trust yourself. You see a high % resemblance of yourself in these people, and this makes you trust these identical people to that % of resemblance, because you trust yourself 100% for being 100% yourself.
It is easy to find natural reasons, simple deviations from standard instinct, that explain homosexuality, while often there aren’t many natural reasons for other fetishes, like the people who enjoy having their penises trampled on, which really isn’t naturally explainable. It’s not anything close to natural reproduction, and this is an example of sexual deviance. This is a very high degree of deviation from the norm. I would argue this result from either psychological tolerance, becoming tolerant to sexual norms, needing a new extreme to get your fix, in the same respect as the aforementioned things like heroin or quality of life. That or it is an example of mental illness, or otherwise induced by past trauma that causes a person to have made faulty connections within the brain related to sex or social interaction, predisposing them to this dysfunctional behavior.
The issue is that it is hard to distinguish between natural homosexuality, caused by something like being born with tolerance to testosterone, and dysfunctional homosexuality that is induced by trauma, induced by exposure to things that causes a person to create incorrect connections in the brain regarding sex, or otherwise to associate certain behaviors with sexuality and arousal.
Here is an example of how overtly sexual cartoons targeted at children can cause people to attain the incorrect wiring. This cartoon is Totally Spies! from the mid-2000s. Children going through puberty may be aroused by these cartoons of full-bodied girls (I think they were in college) in form-fitting bodysuits.
This creates issues when their generic arousal of seeing the silhouettes of a woman’s body become associated with a certain act the person is doing. The people watching the show like the girls, then due to a general interest become aroused or interested when they do other more particular things. Then, when they become bored with women or sex in the most basic form, they still have these memories of seeing the girls do these fetishistic behaviors, connect that thought to sexual arousal, and then turn to this fetish as something different. It’s tolerance in that no longer is sex enough, but you need sex accentuated with something else, you’ve grown tolerant to simple sex, and need something on top of that.
Essentially the West is in a peculiar state where they have become so confused about sex and childhood that they boldly claim to seek the protection of their children while turning a blind eye to the endless abuse of their own children by the overt sexuality of their culture. They cite psychological maturity being a reason to protect these able bodied child laborers, despite the majority of adults in the country having no more logical capacity or foresight than a teenager, often failing to understand reality beyond the context of their own lives.
They condone this abuse of their children all while condemning things that are actually beneficial to the children such as child labor. The schools waste the time of countless children who will be unable to make use of the majority of what they are taught, if they manage to learn these things in the first place, all in the name of protecting children from labor that would benefit them to a much greater extent than largely inapplicable general education.