That the recipients of tutorial discipline might find themselves resenting its pains, as the raw recruits to the army hated the sergeant, would be an understandable human response. The odd thing, however, is that in family life, the pressure to turn a tutorial association into an egalitarian one has come as much from the parents as from the children. Some of this is no doubt the familiar guilt of working parents who compensate for lacking time with their children by giving in to whatever they ask for. No less important is the appearance of a strange new moral doctrine that understands authority itself as a form of violence that ought to be replaced by negotiation and persuasion. In the past authority sustained its disciplines by an adroit use of sticks and carrots, and in the past the stick did not need to be used excessively; its background role sustained a whole structure of life. In this new atmosphere, sticks have been abandoned as being forms of aggression, and only carrots are left. Carrots without sticks are merely a form of bribery. In other words, the basic moral category is no long [sic] reward and punishment, but attitudinal manipulation. To punish, runs the doctrine, is to send the wrong message: that violence pays.

(Kenneth Minogue, “Conservatism & the Morality of Impulse,” The New Criterion 26 [January 2008]: 8-12, at 11)