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 www.Mises.org.
Copyright
© 2003 LewRockwell.com
Jeffrey
Tucker Archives
|