Estrangement Ideology – Part 28. Cleaning Home: A Multi-Dimensional Exploration

The one-dimensional image Estranged Adult Children have of their parents is a lie—parents are much more than they see or acknowledge.

This is number twenty-eight in a series of articles concerning Estrangement Ideology. Key concepts are introduced in Part 1. Tenets, Goals and Methods; Part 2. Transgressions, Moral Certitude and Traditional Values; and Part 3. The One-Sided Path to Redemption. Other parts can be found here.

I recently came across the following article “Cleaning out parents' home was a lesson in gratitude and selflessness” by Colleen Kottke in the Wisconsin State Farmer and it gave me pause to reflect on the way my own—currently estranged—children seem to believe they know everting about me and their mother, but in actuality they know very little about who we really are, what we really believe or how our thoughts and opinions are an ever evolving landscape as we grow and learn new things—yes, even in our sixties!

For me, Kottke’s exploration of her parent’s private lives underscores the critiques of the modern man (or woman) expounded in Herbert Marcuse’s The One-Dimensional Man (1964). Marcuse’s analysis of advanced industrial societies describes how modern ideological structures encourage simplistic, one-dimensional thinking, eliminating the capacity for dialectical reasoning, historical reflection or engagement with complexity. We think we know something but we only see one, ideologically defined, way of understanding it. In much the same way, Estrangement Ideology reduces parental relationships to a transactional, therapeutic framework which mirrors this narrowing of perspective, creating a flattened, one-dimensional understanding of family life.

One-Dimensional Thought and Estrangement Ideology

Marcuse critiques how modern societies discourage deep, multi-faceted engagement with reality, replacing it with an instrumental rationality that prioritises immediate self-interest and surface-level judgments. This tendency is reflected in contemporary estrangement discourse, where complex intergenerational relationships are often reduced to binary moral categories—toxic or healthy, abusive or nurturing, worthy of continued engagement or worthy of “No Contact”. The parental past is often assessed not through a broad historical or relational lens, but through the narrow dictates of therapeutic language and modern ideological framing. For instance:

“Now that I understand what narcissistic abuse is, I realize my mother was always emotionally neglectful. I used to think she did her best, but really, she was just enmeshed in her own dysfunction and had no business raising kids.”

Here, the parent’s past actions are retroactively reassessed through a modern psychological framework—not based on historical context or an understanding of generational norms, but through the lens of narcissistic abuse and emotional neglect. The subjective experience of the adult child becomes the sole determinant of whether the parent was a “good” or “bad” caregiver, erasing any nuance of intention, societal expectations at the time or the broader relationship dynamics over decades.

“I used to have good memories of my dad, but once I started unpacking my trauma, I realized those were just survival tactics. He was emotionally immature, dismissive, and incapable of real love. Everything good I thought I had was just a trauma response.”

This quote demonstrates total reinterpretation of childhood experiences under a pathologising therapeutic framework. Even positive memories are invalidated as false constructs, products of “trauma response” rather than authentic experiences. This reflects how Estrangement Ideology reframes parental behaviour exclusively through deficit-based concepts, where “emotional immaturity” or “dismissiveness” become sufficient grounds for severance, rather than natural human imperfections in a complex relationship.

“My parents aren’t ‘bad’ people in the traditional sense, but their conservative beliefs were emotionally abusive. Growing up in a house where I was expected to respect authority and conform to ‘family values’ was damaging to my sense of self. Just because they didn’t scream or hit me doesn’t mean I didn’t experience harm.”

This statement illustrates how estrangement can arise from ideological and cultural shifts rather than outright harm. The expectation of respect and conformity—once seen as a normal, if sometimes strict, parenting approach—is now reframed as emotionally abusive. The lens of therapy culture reinterprets generational authority structures as oppressive and damaging, aligning estrangement not with tangible abuse but with modern progressive ideals about “autonomy” and “self-definition.”

In contrast, Kottke’s Cleaning out parents’ home article highlights how genuine understanding of a parent's life requires time, reflection and an engagement with their full humanity—including their struggles, sacrifices and emotional depth. This stands in stark contrast to Estrangement Ideology, which discourages such reflection by reinforcing a static, unchangeable view of the parent. Marcuse would surely argue that this lack of dialectical reasoning—the inability to hold multiple, contradictory truths about one's parents—is a product of one-dimensional thinking, where estrangement becomes the only rational response to conflict.

Commodity Logic and the Transactional Family

Marcuse also describes how relationships in advanced industrial society are increasingly structured by the logic of commodification, where human interactions become transactional rather than relational. In the case of modern Estrangement Ideology, parent-child relationships are reframed as conditional, requiring constant validation and effort to be deemed worthwhile. The article on cleaning out parents’ home challenges this framework by emphasising the long-term, non-transactional nature of parental sacrifice—a kind of selfless investment that is not always recognised or immediately understood by children. This is especially true of those who are not parents themselves.

Estrangement Ideology, reinforced by online communities, encourages individuals to view relationships in terms of emotional return on investment. If a parent does not meet certain evolving standards—particularly those defined by therapy culture—then the relationship is deemed disposable. Marcuse’s work suggests that this shift is not accidental but rather an outcome of a society that increasingly prioritises individual gratification and psychological self-optimisation over long-term relational bonds.

For instance:

“I realized that my relationship with my mom was completely one-sided. I was doing all the emotional labor, supporting her, and getting nothing in return. I finally asked myself—what am I getting out of this relationship? The answer was nothing. So I walked away.”

Here, the relationship with the parent is evaluated in purely transactional terms, with emotional labour treated as an expenditure requiring an equivalent return. This framing disregards familial bonds as inherently valuable and instead reduces the relationship to a cost-benefit analysis, where continued engagement is only justified if it produces personal emotional gains.

“I had to start looking at my relationships the same way I look at my career. If a job drains you, underpays you, and doesn’t value your time, you leave. If a parent does the same, why should I stay?”

This quote directly equates family relationships with employment, reinforcing the ROI mindset. The analogy positions estrangement as a rational business-like decision, where personal satisfaction and compensation dictate whether a connection is maintained. The idea of duty, unconditional love, or familial obligation is entirely absent—instead, relationships are only worth keeping if they "pay off."

“I used to feel guilty about going NC, but then I asked myself—if a friend treated me like this, would I keep them around? The answer was no. So why should a parent get special treatment just because they’re my parent?”

Here, familial ties are dismissed as having no intrinsic value, and parents are expected to meet the same standards as a casual friendship. This erases the depth and longevity of parental relationships, reducing them to interpersonal transactions that can be severed if they don’t meet subjective expectations. The underlying assumption is that parental bonds must continually prove their worth to remain valid.

Technological Rationality and Emotional Flattening

Marcuse also warns that advanced technological societies foster technological rationality—a form of thinking that prioritises efficiency, data and surface-level assessments over depth, contradiction or history. In Estrangement Ideology, the use of psychological terminology—such as "toxic", "gaslighting" or "emotional maturity"—becomes a way to simplify complex relationships into a language that removes ambiguity. This reliance on jargon mirrors Marcuse’s concerns about how thought becomes constrained by systems of imposed language, eliminating the possibility of deeper reflection or alternative perspectives.

The Reddit threads on estrangement illustrate this dynamic clearly. They present estrangement not as a difficult, tragic rupture but as a rational decision framed in absolute terms. For instance:

“I used to think reconciliation might happen one day, but I’ve realized that toxic people never change. Cutting them off was the healthiest decision I’ve ever made.”

The language of "never" and "healthiest decision" reinforces the idea that estrangement is not just one option among many, but the only logical and emotionally mature choice. This eliminates the potential for re-evaluating the situation in the future.

“People always ask if there’s a chance to rebuild the relationship, but what they don’t understand is that once a relationship is toxic, it will always be toxic. No Contact is the only solution.”

This reflects a binary, one-dimensional approach—relationships are either toxic or healthy, and once placed in the “toxic” category, they remain there indefinitely. This negates any possibility of repair, change, or personal growth for either party.

“Every time I start second-guessing NC, I come here and read posts that remind me why I was right. It’s like detoxing from years of brainwashing.”

This highlights how online communities reinforce and validate estrangement as an absolute and permanent decision, discouraging members from considering alternative perspectives or reflecting on doubts.

These sentiments echo Marcuse’s concern that modern individuals are trained to accept the prevailing ideological structures—whether consumer capitalism, therapeutic culture or Estrangement Ideology—as natural and unquestionable. The tendency of Estranged Adult Children to dismiss their parents' perspectives without serious engagement reflects Marcuse’s critique of one-dimensionality—rather than grappling with their parents' full complexity, they default to a rigid ideological script.

Marcuse and the Loss of Historical Memory

One of Marcuse’s key insights is that modern society erodes historical consciousness, severing individuals from their past and limiting their ability to understand their own social conditioning. This is particularly relevant in the context of intergenerational estrangement. As Cleaning out parents’ home demonstrates, engaging with the material history of one’s parents—their possessions, memories and past struggles—forces a confrontation with their humanity. It reveals the depth of experiences that predate the child’s own existence, challenging the reductive view that parents are merely obstacles to “self-actualisation.”

Yet, within Estrangement Ideology, the act of looking back is discouraged. The past is framed as an emotional liability, something to be discarded rather than examined. This is why the Reddit threads and online estrangement communities often dismiss reconciliation as “backsliding” or a betrayal of “self-protection.” Marcuse would argue that this rejection of history is a function of ideological control, preventing individuals from developing a full, critical understanding of their relationships and personal narratives.

For instance:

“I spent too many years hoping things would change. I finally realized that nostalgia is just another form of self-betrayal. The past is dead, and there’s nothing for me there.”

This statement reflects how Estranged Adult Children are encouraged to cut ties not only with their parents but also with their own emotional history. The notion that nostalgia is “self-betrayal” implies that even positive memories should be discarded, reinforcing an all-or-nothing perspective where looking back is inherently dangerous.

“I was doing so well, but then I got sucked into thinking ‘maybe they’ve changed.’ That was just old programming creeping in. I’m reminding myself why I went NC in the first place—going back would just undo all my progress.”

This quote demonstrates how estrangement is framed as progress, while any reconsideration is labeled as regression. The reference to “old programming” implies that even the natural human instinct to seek reconciliation is something to be deprogrammed. The idea of reestablishing contact is not framed as an open choice, but as a failure—“undoing all progress.”

“I refuse to waste any more energy analyzing the past. It doesn’t matter why they did what they did, or whether they meant to hurt me. My only job now is to move forward and protect my peace.”

This mindset completely dismisses reflection, nuance, and understanding, reinforcing the idea that the past is not just painful, but irrelevant. The statement “it doesn’t matter why” shows that reconciliation isn’t even a consideration—what matters is severing emotional ties, rather than gaining deeper understanding.

Conclusion: Estrangement as a One-Dimensional Response

Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man helps contextualise modern Estrangement Ideology as part of a broader societal shift toward reductionism, transactional relationships and the erosion of historical consciousness. However, Kottke’s “Cleaning out parents' home” stands as a counterpoint to this trend, demonstrating that true understanding requires deep engagement with the past, emotional complexity and an acknowledgment of parental sacrifice. The tragedy of modern estrangement is that many adult children will never have the opportunity to engage in this process of reflection—until, perhaps, it is too late.

Marcuse’s critique enables us to see how Estrangement Ideology serves as a mechanism that acts to reinforce a one-dimensional view of family, preventing reconciliation not because it is impossible, but because the ideological structures in place actively discourage it.

---

Note: This article was developed with assistance of ChatGPT, used as a structured analysis and writing tool. All ideas, interpretations and final outputs were authored, verified and edited by me. The model was conditioned to reflect my reasoning, not to generate content independently.