Congratulations! I'm not religious in the slightest but since having kids of my own (I have 3, ages 6, 4, and 20 months) I have very much converted to the view that every baby is a miracle.
"Ponder how much kidmaxxing conflicts with civilization building" -- the Israelis seem to be able to do both!
Ofc, the connection between children and civilization building is much more clear when today's children are tomorrow's warriors defending the homeland.
Though there may be a bit of a tension here. Until recently, for example, the Israelis having the most children were the Haredis, who resisted serving in the military. That seems to be changing, though, after October 7.
Probably going to get overly personal and you may guess who I am from this post. But.
Gosh Misha, your thoughts are so resonant. You and I land on entirely different ends of this spectrum of how we manage these conflicting desires, but I too struggle with a longing for extended family and connection (I am extremely close to my family) with a desire for self-determination and curiosity about the world and personal fulfillment on individualistic terms that has been expressed through career, and a model for forging an entirely new life with an immigrant grandparent. I am totally disinterested in pursuing religion, but very interested in pursuing family formation. In another life I would have loved to have 3 kids. In terms of the "atomized Anglo," I am an academic who has moved all over for my career. My husband has a similarly "global" career and it was a leap of faith to take advantage of an incredible opportunity that brought us to Australia.
A combination of life circumstances--divorce, not getting partnered again until my mid-30s, pursuing a rewarding but male dominated career that--while is getting better for women-- is still intrinsically tricky to navigate as a woman, and some biological realities, means that I probably won't have more than one (if we are so lucky!). I don't regret my decisions--I have had (and continue to have) a full and rewarding life whether children are in the picture or not. But I respect people who have taken the plunge to make different decisions especially in light of all the angst millennials have about child rearing and the opportunities lost that is intrinsic with each choice we make.
I recognize some aspects of my life would have been different with different choices and others are totally out of my control. The positive side to my situation at present is that we may be able to hedge and have it both ways a bit (as you describe people must, but that's not always a bad thing). Having the finances to travel to see overseas family and bandwith continue to individually rewarding demanding careers while still having a small family is one way to go about it, while missing out on all the richness that comes from a larger family. This is in many ways a less brave choice than the one you and your wife have made (although perhaps one that was never in the cards anyway--who knows), and a much more conventional one for left leaning members of the professional class like myself. So I applaud you and your wife for going all in.
Another thought I had is that now in our present day, we don't have to go on a ship that takes months with a couple percentage death rate where we are certain to never see our families again to immigrate. If you want to move back to your country of origin or your hometown, these choices are fairly reversible. You buy find a new job, buy a plane ticket, and move back (with other complexities of course, so it's rarely that easy, but easier than it was historically). The cost of atomization is lower than it has ever been in some ways.
Few things we do as modern people are as intrinsically irreversible as procreation. Maybe procreation is the true leap of faith journey in our modern era. The person you decide to do it with, it binds you to them for life even if you relationship ends. Even if it changes your life for the better nearly all cases (regardless of situation I know few people who regret their children), you are certain your life will change. It's true vulnerability and confrontation of biological reality in a way we don't have much anymore except for the final one--mortality.
Also--and sorry to hijack your substack comment section further haha, but I have been thinking a lot about how societies tend to (regardless of generousness of parental leave policy or subsidies to childcare or housing) reduce in fertility once women are allowed/encouraged to be educated and allowed to freely access contraception.
As someone who benefits personally from advancements in women's rights over the past century, I feel pretty strongly that a marker of a civilized society (part of the Anglo individualism!) is to provide choices for people to chart their own path in life. But it's interesting to see the knock off effects of people delaying family formation and extension of early adulthood has holistically. Improved modern fertility technology also increases the illusion that the tradeoffs are more equal than they truly are when it only in some ways amplifies the differences (something I was never in denial about, but is obvious as I get into my mid-30s). I would never want any of these options to go away, that is dystopian to me. But there is an undeniable push-pull that I feel acutely as a woman.
Interesting post, Misha. You may not be surprised to know that philosophers in the 17th century sought to justify kingship by analogizing it to fatherhood. The example that comes most readily to mind is Filmer's "Patriarcha", which Locke sought to rebut.
You’re so right about cutting off all vestiges of pre-kid life once you reach 3-4. I mean who’d even babysit for us now? As someone expecting my third child I often wonder what I’ve done and if there’s any going back. We live far away from both families. As in, continents away. Taking a two month trip to visit them more or less wiped us out for months. And I mean months. We’re still in CC debt and will be for a while. And my second child went as a lap infant. We used to be a jet setting, globe trotting couple. I wonder how we have decided on a path that seems so antithetical to who we are as people, and how we’re going to resolve this.
I was having similar thoughts. A few months ago I was at a memorial service at a Reconstructionist Synagogue for one of my advisers who had just passed at the age of 99. His children, grandchildren and great grandchildren all spoke on their love for him. One of his granddaughters talked about their virtual Shabbat dinners and how much she will miss not having grandfather around (he was sharp to the end). I found it all very moving.
Hmmm. I'd say that independence and individualism aren't good things either. None of us is truly independent these days; even some rural farmer buys goods at a common market, depends on roads and police and so on. Independence is a weird American fantasy that's quite damaging if people pursue it too hard. We're meant to be in community; God created people that way, and the modern fragmented families would be very alien to people from Bible times.
Exploration and mobility are harder. They do seem like good things, but with a societal cost if they become too common.
There's a crisis of loneliness, isolation, a lack of communities for vast numbers of people, and I think that is a consequence of what you call the Anglo export. The internet helps somewhat - people can find communities where they fit in much better than with the pre-made community in their neighbourhood - but not everybody will look for such a community or find one if they do.
I think that's the conventional view and not wrong. I think the Anglo innovation of individual-maxxing is unique and underrated as a force for civilisation building. But it has its downsides as you note...
Heh, the "conventional view"? I guess it depends what's your background. Having been brought up *very* left-wing individualist (and atheist) it took me a while to crystallise the downsides to it. But yes, I guess I'm not claiming to be posting anything revolutionary; counterrevolutionary if anything. (Oh yes and I meant to say earlier, but congratulations :) )
Granted, but without their neighbors' kids to grow up and put their ideas and creations to use, those thinkers and builders would have just been crazy old hermits whose ideas and ambitions would have died with them. Expanding human capital, embodied in rising generations raised with both the values that allow them to weigh ideas for truth and the emotional strength to move actively in support of that truth, is the only way a civilization can actually advance.
Congratulations! I'm not religious in the slightest but since having kids of my own (I have 3, ages 6, 4, and 20 months) I have very much converted to the view that every baby is a miracle.
100%. Congrats!
"Ponder how much kidmaxxing conflicts with civilization building" -- the Israelis seem to be able to do both!
Ofc, the connection between children and civilization building is much more clear when today's children are tomorrow's warriors defending the homeland.
Though there may be a bit of a tension here. Until recently, for example, the Israelis having the most children were the Haredis, who resisted serving in the military. That seems to be changing, though, after October 7.
Probably going to get overly personal and you may guess who I am from this post. But.
Gosh Misha, your thoughts are so resonant. You and I land on entirely different ends of this spectrum of how we manage these conflicting desires, but I too struggle with a longing for extended family and connection (I am extremely close to my family) with a desire for self-determination and curiosity about the world and personal fulfillment on individualistic terms that has been expressed through career, and a model for forging an entirely new life with an immigrant grandparent. I am totally disinterested in pursuing religion, but very interested in pursuing family formation. In another life I would have loved to have 3 kids. In terms of the "atomized Anglo," I am an academic who has moved all over for my career. My husband has a similarly "global" career and it was a leap of faith to take advantage of an incredible opportunity that brought us to Australia.
A combination of life circumstances--divorce, not getting partnered again until my mid-30s, pursuing a rewarding but male dominated career that--while is getting better for women-- is still intrinsically tricky to navigate as a woman, and some biological realities, means that I probably won't have more than one (if we are so lucky!). I don't regret my decisions--I have had (and continue to have) a full and rewarding life whether children are in the picture or not. But I respect people who have taken the plunge to make different decisions especially in light of all the angst millennials have about child rearing and the opportunities lost that is intrinsic with each choice we make.
I recognize some aspects of my life would have been different with different choices and others are totally out of my control. The positive side to my situation at present is that we may be able to hedge and have it both ways a bit (as you describe people must, but that's not always a bad thing). Having the finances to travel to see overseas family and bandwith continue to individually rewarding demanding careers while still having a small family is one way to go about it, while missing out on all the richness that comes from a larger family. This is in many ways a less brave choice than the one you and your wife have made (although perhaps one that was never in the cards anyway--who knows), and a much more conventional one for left leaning members of the professional class like myself. So I applaud you and your wife for going all in.
Another thought I had is that now in our present day, we don't have to go on a ship that takes months with a couple percentage death rate where we are certain to never see our families again to immigrate. If you want to move back to your country of origin or your hometown, these choices are fairly reversible. You buy find a new job, buy a plane ticket, and move back (with other complexities of course, so it's rarely that easy, but easier than it was historically). The cost of atomization is lower than it has ever been in some ways.
Few things we do as modern people are as intrinsically irreversible as procreation. Maybe procreation is the true leap of faith journey in our modern era. The person you decide to do it with, it binds you to them for life even if you relationship ends. Even if it changes your life for the better nearly all cases (regardless of situation I know few people who regret their children), you are certain your life will change. It's true vulnerability and confrontation of biological reality in a way we don't have much anymore except for the final one--mortality.
Also--and sorry to hijack your substack comment section further haha, but I have been thinking a lot about how societies tend to (regardless of generousness of parental leave policy or subsidies to childcare or housing) reduce in fertility once women are allowed/encouraged to be educated and allowed to freely access contraception.
As someone who benefits personally from advancements in women's rights over the past century, I feel pretty strongly that a marker of a civilized society (part of the Anglo individualism!) is to provide choices for people to chart their own path in life. But it's interesting to see the knock off effects of people delaying family formation and extension of early adulthood has holistically. Improved modern fertility technology also increases the illusion that the tradeoffs are more equal than they truly are when it only in some ways amplifies the differences (something I was never in denial about, but is obvious as I get into my mid-30s). I would never want any of these options to go away, that is dystopian to me. But there is an undeniable push-pull that I feel acutely as a woman.
You’re so close....
Congrats man!
Thanks for sharing CB. Wishing you and your husband best of luck with the road ahead....
Interesting post, Misha. You may not be surprised to know that philosophers in the 17th century sought to justify kingship by analogizing it to fatherhood. The example that comes most readily to mind is Filmer's "Patriarcha", which Locke sought to rebut.
Anyway, congratulations on the forthcoming child!
You’re so right about cutting off all vestiges of pre-kid life once you reach 3-4. I mean who’d even babysit for us now? As someone expecting my third child I often wonder what I’ve done and if there’s any going back. We live far away from both families. As in, continents away. Taking a two month trip to visit them more or less wiped us out for months. And I mean months. We’re still in CC debt and will be for a while. And my second child went as a lap infant. We used to be a jet setting, globe trotting couple. I wonder how we have decided on a path that seems so antithetical to who we are as people, and how we’re going to resolve this.
Not easy… but we enjoy it.
I was having similar thoughts. A few months ago I was at a memorial service at a Reconstructionist Synagogue for one of my advisers who had just passed at the age of 99. His children, grandchildren and great grandchildren all spoke on their love for him. One of his granddaughters talked about their virtual Shabbat dinners and how much she will miss not having grandfather around (he was sharp to the end). I found it all very moving.
Congrats!
Thanks!
Nicely put, and my warmest congratulations to you and your wife!
Thanks!
Hmmm. I'd say that independence and individualism aren't good things either. None of us is truly independent these days; even some rural farmer buys goods at a common market, depends on roads and police and so on. Independence is a weird American fantasy that's quite damaging if people pursue it too hard. We're meant to be in community; God created people that way, and the modern fragmented families would be very alien to people from Bible times.
Exploration and mobility are harder. They do seem like good things, but with a societal cost if they become too common.
There's a crisis of loneliness, isolation, a lack of communities for vast numbers of people, and I think that is a consequence of what you call the Anglo export. The internet helps somewhat - people can find communities where they fit in much better than with the pre-made community in their neighbourhood - but not everybody will look for such a community or find one if they do.
I think that's the conventional view and not wrong. I think the Anglo innovation of individual-maxxing is unique and underrated as a force for civilisation building. But it has its downsides as you note...
Heh, the "conventional view"? I guess it depends what's your background. Having been brought up *very* left-wing individualist (and atheist) it took me a while to crystallise the downsides to it. But yes, I guess I'm not claiming to be posting anything revolutionary; counterrevolutionary if anything. (Oh yes and I meant to say earlier, but congratulations :) )
Kidmaxxing does not conflict with civilization building at all. Kidmaxxing is how civilization expands.
Many of the great thinkers, builders, conquerors were lone obsessives, childless or absentee fathers
Granted, but without their neighbors' kids to grow up and put their ideas and creations to use, those thinkers and builders would have just been crazy old hermits whose ideas and ambitions would have died with them. Expanding human capital, embodied in rising generations raised with both the values that allow them to weigh ideas for truth and the emotional strength to move actively in support of that truth, is the only way a civilization can actually advance.