Is the nuclear family a social model geared for maximum consumption?
Nuclear families existed in India since millenia. “Domestic Unit. The nuclear family is the norm among Franco-Mauritians, Creoles, and Mulattoes and is an increasingly common form among all urbanites. The average couple countrywide has two children; the number is slightly higher in rural areas and among Muslims. The largest extended families are rural Hindu and Creole families, where the nuclear family forms the core. The former may include the head of household’s mother, unmarried siblings, and cousins. The latter may include relatives on both the husband’s and the wife’s side. Joint families are rarer but they do occur, particularly among Hindus. Nearly all heads of households are men. http://www.everyculture.com/South-Asia/Mauritian-Marriage-and-Family.html Throughout rural Bengal (India) the patrilineally extended family homestead is subdivided into its natural segments, called paribar, consisting of men, their wives, their children, and other dependents, who form the basic subsist
No, it’s a social model geared to get people away from their in-laws! People are already geared for maximum consumption through laziness (of all things!) and a desire for social standing – i.e. to not look too much poorer than everyone else, to be able to entertain a crowd etc. (Also just recogize that most of the trappings of wealth actually are a damn great lot of fun.) Actually, I reckon business has geared them for maximum slavery and minimum consumption. If I gotta work then I want a few nice things to show for it! Think about this: Some people work 80 hours per week just so they can earn a grand. But some other people work 80 hours per week so they can earn a hundred grand. But do you ever meet people who work 8 hours per week for ten grand? Why not?
