On the face of it, it is just rhetoric and normally would be no big deal. But given recent history and increasing pressure and practice of pushing unacceptable curriculum, imagery, entertainment on children that most of us see as tacit grooming, a statement of "They are all our children" is chilling.
And this was stated by one who has been perceived as improperly touching children, whose daughter writes that he was inappropriate with her, and who denies his own granddaughter as well as approving that granddaughter not receiving his and her father's last name. Does any of that factor into the issues cited in the preceding paragraph? Probably not at least directly, but who knows?
A statement of "They are all our children" is chilling because of a noticeable cultural shift to a left that:
--imposes and approves that unacceptable curriculum, imagery, entertainment for even young children.
--pushes and promotes content that indoctrinates children more than it educates.
--pushes for children to be able to get abortions, to transgender, etc. without the parents being notified.
--increasingly discourages parental involvement in the choices of their children or the content they are being taught.
--increasing demonization of parents who show up at school or school board meetings to protest what they consider unacceptable content even to the point the DOJ investigates or labels them as terrorists if they use strong language in their protest.
One of Lenin's major goals once he seized power in Russia was to indoctrinate the children in communist ideology. He famously said: “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”
From the 1920s onwards, the Nazi Party targeted German youth for its propaganda message.
“These boys and girls enter our organizations [at] ten years of age, and often for the first time get a little fresh air; after four years of the Young Folk they go on to the Hitler Youth, where we have them for another four years . . . And even if they are still not complete National Socialists, they go to Labor Service and are smoothed out there for another six, seven months . . . And whatever class consciousness or social status might still be left . . . the Wehrmacht [German armed forces] will take care of that.”
—Adolf Hitler (1938)
Mao targeted the children with a highly politicized curriculum to ensure they would continue the revolutionary zeal necessary to stop China from returning to capitalism.
Kim established a goal of “guiding ideology,” I.e. “to build a communist society where the ideals of the people will be completely realized.” And it began with indoctrination of the children.
All encouraged the children to report any heresies committed by their neighbors, friends, relatives, even siblings and parents. All suppressed any objections by parents.
That would never happen here you say? I'm pretty sure the Russian, Germans, Chinese, North Koreans etc. would have once said it couldn't happen there.
We each are responsible for our own children until they are emancipated though moral people do right by their children and care about all the children. So no, Uncle Joe, these are not your children to do with as you or anybody else wants. And the wise will make that message loud and clear. The state or anything associated with it should never have the power to take the place of the parent and nuclear family.
