Pinko Central is right! Marx's personal life was a mess! He spoke out against the family--saying "the bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education . . .becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry . . ."
Can you believe that chickenshit Marx? And anybody who knows anything knows that his family lived in dire poverty. In London, no less, which was the hub of commerce in the 19th century.
Why, that's almost as bad as having a lap-top computer today and not pulling down a million a year!
In my opinion, any man who can't take care of his family is worthless. In the nuclear family, the man is the breadwinner and the woman is the nurturer. This is the natural order of things, but feminism and liberalism have destroyed this sacred bond which men have had over women for 200 years now. In America, the nuclear family was at its peak in late 1950's with what should be considered the Holy Trinity of Television Entertainment: "Father Knows Best", "The Donna Reed Show" and "Leave It to Beaver". These shows accurately portrayed life as it should be, not as liberals want it to be.
These shows depicted the nuclear family, the only natural unit of social organization. Forget society! As Margaret Thatcher said, "There's no such thing as 'society.' There's only individuals and families. That's it."
It's no coincidence, therefore, that advertising revenues jumped significantly with the advent of these shows. By 1957, American television was completely circumspect to the profit motive, but certain early sitcoms--most notably "The Honeymooners" and "Amos 'n Andy"--displayed a class consciousness which (in the case of the latter, race was involved as well) we were never to see again.
The point is, though, that Marx was against the nuclear family, and he didn't even take care of his own. In contrast, we in America take care of our families. And we have tv shows to show us how. Is it any wonder, then, why we won the Cold War?