I recommend reading Engels, the origin of family, private property and the state. If anything I would say that the nuclear family in its current form is more superstrucutural, created by the existence of property relations and propagation of ownership as the only real value in procreation. It was also driven by the high baseline misogyny - as wage labor rose in prominence for men, it also both devalued and suborned the wives into domestic servitude for the husbands wage.

This has created an environment that is incredibly prone to abuse and should not be encouraged, but you can’t change it from the top down, it has to come from a change in material relations.

The stuff Cuba just added to their constitution is a good modern take on it. The radical creches that were common in the early Soviet Union were also an interesting system, although they did evolve into more conventional (albeit world class) kindergartens as the country industrialized. Overall I think the “bourgeois family” is mostly about property relations and inheritance, which communists of any stripe should have a problem with, and abolishing it and replacing it with a living system of relations which includes not only adding more people to your “family”, but also giving everyone the ability to leave their “family” for any reason. A socialist family shouldn’t just be your blood relatives, but also the people in your village, on your street, or in your apartment block. Admittedly this is hard to comprehend from our position within a capitalist structure which not only levers every household apart from its neighbors but drives a constant wedge in between individual household members as well in its drive to atomize every one of us, but in a society that is organized around building solidarity instead of driving competition I think it would come much more naturally to include a wider selection of people in your family.

Restore the Gemeinwesen

Endnotes - To Abolish the Family

Violence and mutual love are interwoven throughout family forms. All people rely for their survival on relationships of care, love, affection, sex and material sharing of resources. Class society forces these relationships into a variety of specific historical forms. Capitalism’s logic of market dependency and generalized proletarianization forces these loving relationships into a particular structure of semi-coerced, semi-chosen interpersonal dependency. Workers subject to insecure employment depend on their family members and kin ties to get through periodic unemployment; similarly children and those no longer able to work are often reliant on their personal connection to a wage worker. Further, free wage workers often access work through kin-based social networks that provide information and support to locate and secure available employment. These relationships can be sources of genuine care, but the necessary ties of dependency leave them constantly open to violence, abuse and domination. For all forms of gendered violence, the threat may be implicit in the structure of a social institution that facilitates the exercise of violence. Families need not be actually or frequently violent for the family as a widespread institution to systematically enable and permit violence and abuse. The combination of care and violent domination is the dual character of any family structure in class society.

we should all be feral. return to communo-primitivism :monke-return:

alternatively, have a literal nanny state. Every position is staffed by a nanny and everyone is coddled like a baby