Who is Daniel Makler and what does he have to do with FDR

Moly is hopelessly unqualified in the area of psychology. Yet his gig demands that everyone relentlessly investigate their inner selves for meaning (even though he has a podcast on the "meaninglessness of life"). Moly has said on more than one occasion that his wife is the cofounder of FDR and provides the psychological foundations for the anti-family premise of FDR (i.e we have to 'get to the kiddies' and 'it all starts with the family' as it relates to the inability of people to accept the idea of true freedom).   I received this comment.  It is a good one on Daniel Makler and the relationship to Molyneux and FDR.   I decided to make it a full up post (with permission of the commenter).   I suppose that he can't use his wife's credentials any more.  This poster noticed that he now refers to a guy named Daniel Makler.  The commenter is noticing that Mackler has his own 'issues.'  Here goes:

Firstly I would like to say what a great resource I found your site to be! I became confused by some of the messages from Stefan Molyneux and finding a different perspective was very helpful. I found it impossible to discuss any of my concerns with the members of the FDR as anybody who disagrees seems to be attacked, ridiculed or branded evil or a ‘troll’

The Guardian started the talk of Molyneux being a cult leader. Here is one quote: Molyneux "says on the website: 'Deep down I do not believe that there are any really good parents out there – the same way that I do not believe there were any really good doctors in the 10th century.'http://stifflerkehoe.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/the-real-life-story-of-tom-weeds/  

Both Stefan Molyneux and Daniel Mackler seem to send out the same dogmatic anti parent message.

I first became aware of Daniel Mackler  through an FDR member who posted a link to his 11 situations in which it is not appropriate for you to have children. http://www.iraresoul.com/nokids.html The message seems to be that if you are a parent you are a child abuser by default and if you protest against this it’s because you cannot take the truth.

Point no 1 apparently goes against developmental psychology research. I started researching and found that this was written as a part of the Alice Miller critique. http://www.iraresoul.com/alicemiller_short.html

Daniel Mackler cleverly adopts the technique described in a book by Deborah Tannen The argument culture. Mackler failed to come up with ideas of his own so to gain publicity he attacked another already well established academic. http://www.amazon.com/Argument-Culture-Stopping-Americas-Words/dp/0345407512

Through further research I found out that Mackler in fact appeared on SM’s shows and even contributed to the psychology book club podcast. http://psychologybookclub.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html

A lot of DM’s friends are also fans of the voluntary human extinction movement. http://www.vhemt.org/

Viewing a child as a burden to the planet surely must have it's origins in some sort of repressed trauma - not sure what I'm not a psychologist.

Thank you for this comment.  Don't feel bad about making psychological judgements without being qualified.  Moly does it all the time.