Father's Day: A Reluctant Defense
by Jeffrey A.
Tucker
I know no father who cares a whit about
Father's Day. We are pleased to be doted on by our families of
course, but we have no longing to be "appreciated" for our special
role in the world. Fathers consider what they do to be carrying out
the normal duties and requirements of life itself, not some enormous
sacrifice for others that periodically needs to be recognized.
Anyone with a critical sense sees both Mother's Day and
Father's Day as oddly tainted, somehow inauthentic, trumped days
that are different in substance from Easter and Christmas. Why is
that?
Well, as purely secular occasions they bear all the earmarks
of the Progressive Era in which both of these days originated. They
seem to reflect a brow-beating demand on the part of national elites
who agitated for these days because somehow our culture was
deficient in recognizing the merit of Mom and Dad, and so these days
of appreciation seem to mask a school-marmish demand that we shape
up and stop taking things for granted.
Sure, fathers and mothers are gravely essential. No question.
But must we have a holiday for all gravely essential institutions in
society? Do we need a national toothbrush day? Actually, all of
February is set aside as National Children's
Dental Month, probably codified by some president along the way,
and shame on you if you forgot to celebrate it.
Somehow, dads were able to psychologically manage before 1966
when Lyndon Johnson proclaimed the 3rd Sunday of June as
Father's Day, to be codified further by Nixon six years later. All
these proclamations work to displace the traditional and
historically organic liturgical calendar that celebrates every
conceivable emotion and institution, and has the merit of having
deep roots in the history of civilization.
US
culture is particularly vulnerable to this kind of manipulation
because of its non-liturgical, Puritan origins. Given the degree to
which the Puritans hated religious holidays, we should be thankful
we have Christmas at all. If the current secular culture wants to
take "Christ out of Christmas," the New England Puritans were first
in wanting to take Christmas out of Christ. It wasn't the postwar
atheists who cleared the path for the hegemony of the secular
calendar; it was the 17th century Massachusetts Bay
Colony and its war on all "superstitious" festivals.
In
modern times, it is particularly pathetic that Christian churches
have had to reconfigure their own celebrations to accord with these
secular occasions. Mother's Day was actually the Seventh Sunday of
Easter on the Christian religious calendar, but Marian songs
dominated all Catholic liturgies. Even though this Sunday is Holy
Trinity, I'm willing to bet that "Faith of Our Fathers" will be sung
in churches across the land.
But
its secularity isn't the only reason to be skeptical of Father's
Day. Its codification by the office of the presidency is extremely
annoying. This is the office that starts wars, drafts kids and sends
them to their death, raises taxes, nationalizes schools, spies on
everyone, tells you what you can ingest or not, purports to replace
the role of dads in society and culture, and otherwise creates
social and economic havoc in every way possible – oh, and, by the
way, also reminds you to have a high regard for mom and dad. Well,
anyone with a contrarian streak is naturally going to say: no
thanks, hypocrites!
And
yet these are not the usual reasons people question Father's Day.
Most skepticism concerns its commercial impact. As Richard Stengel
wrote in Time (June 15, 2001), the day isn't really about the
"sentiment about the enduring role of fathers in our lives, but the
pervasive tickle of modern capitalism, where in order to enhance the
desire for more and more objects, we have to create more and more
holidays that are occasions for consuming them."
Now,
in the thousands of online histories
of Father's Day (most of which plagiarize each other), I've come
across nothing that would indicate that greeting card companies or
necktie makers had anything to do with inventing this day. Do the
capitalists love it? Of course! Those who profit from the day make
money only because they are offering cards and ties that people want
to buy for Dad, which is to say that they are providing a service
that can be embraced or rejected by the consumer himself.
But
let's say that the holiday had really been invented by a commercial
outfit. What if an entrepreneur had the idea of manufacturing a
holiday in order to sell products? If this person succeeds in doing
so, it can only be because he or she anticipated an unmet need in
the marketplace, which is to say, he or she was first in filling a
niche.
Let's say the CEO of Dunkin' Donuts proclaimed National Donut
Day and said it can only be celebrated by eating gobs of donuts
bought from DD. This wouldn't make the holiday less legitimate or
inauthentic than government-invented days like Memorial Day or
Veterans Day. Why defer to government-created days because those who
proclaimed them are selfless public servants but reject commercial
days on grounds of the profiteering motivations of the capitalist
class?
It
is common for people to dismiss Father's Day on grounds of its
commercial nature. There's nothing at all wrong with that, just as
there is nothing wrong with dismissing an ad for dishwashing soap as
silly. Anyone living in a commercial society develops a sense of
skepticism that is essential for navigating economic life. At the
same time, one never hears someone say: "I don't celebrate Veterans
Day; it is a phony holiday invented by the state to trick us into
celebrating the government's wars." Someone who did say that should
be a friend for life!
The
beauty of a hypothetical holiday of purely commercial origins
(National Microsoft Appreciation Day) is precisely that we can see
straight through them. That is why they are unlikely to catch on. In
fact, if there is a nationally recognized holiday of purely
commercial origin, I would like to know about it.
Government holidays, on the other hand, do take hold, because
the government claims to speak for the entire nation. It can
subsidize the holiday by shutting all government offices (while
still paying employees out of public funds). It can spread posters
all throughout its monopoly postal service. It can distribute
propaganda through public schools and "public service ads." This is
real manipulation at public expense.
In
the history of our forebears, the calendar that determined what we
celebrated and why was neither of government nor commercial origin.
It grew up around the life of the Christian Church, telling the
story of Jesus's life and the saints and martyrs who lived and died
for the faith. It was the product of many centuries of organic
development. There was no Father's Day but rather St. Joseph's Day.
The
liturgical calendar and commercially viable days like Father's Day
do have this in common, however: the energy behind them is supported
by the voluntary outpouring of sentiment and/or money from people
who are free to choose. Skepticism of today's holidays is indeed
essential, but it should start with commercially unviable days that
were invented by the public sector for the public sector (Veterans
and Labor). Father's Day is a minor annoyance by comparison. I'll
take t-shirts and ties over wars and body bags.
June 14, 2003
Jeffrey Tucker [send him mail] is
editorial vice president of http://www.mises.org/.
Copyright © 2003 LewRockwell.com
Jeffrey
Tucker Archives
|