It has been clear for some time that children today are soft.

Lazy, flabby and devoid of moral fibre, the modern juvenile is a pale shadow of youngsters of past generations, who loved nothing more than doing an honest day's work down the mine or lying about their age in order to fight on the Western Front.

Today's child would much rather stay in bed playing Call of Duty under a thick coating of Cheezel dust than join the army; surveys show almost no Australians under the age of 14 are even looking for a job, let alone in gainful employment.

The fault, of course, is not with the children themselves, but their parents.

Parents nowadays coddle children. They are lenient when kids misbehave, and too quickly heap on praise when kids do anything even remotely noteworthy.

We have created a world of low expectations, sending our offspring out wrapped in cotton wool in order to cushion them from the constant barrage of trophies we hurl at them regardless of whether they've earned them.

When I was a child, my parents wouldn't even speak to me unless I'd topped my class that week — or at least beaten up the child who had.

Yet these days, parents lavish compliments on their unambitious spawn every time they go to the toilet without setting the house on fire.

Pauline Hanson understands what's at stake

As a parent myself, I know how hard it is to raise tough, resilient children, because society itself militates against that aim — and teachers are no exception.

Senator Pauline Hanson, so often the Voice of Reason in our body politic, put it well this week when she pointed out that teachers today are "do-gooders" who refuse to make children compete, to everyone's detriment.

"The kids are not competing in the classrooms, and they're not competing when they get out of the classrooms either," Senator Hanson said, before proceeding to argue that children with autism and disabilities should be removed from mainstream classrooms.

But how else will children deal with competitive adult life if they're not coached to compete?

Imagine if Cathy Freeman had been told it's not how fast you run, it's the friends you make along the way. Imagine if Albert Jacka had been told it doesn't matter how many Turks you kill, as long as everyone has fun.

Senator Hanson quite perspicaciously observed that our modern teachers are too focused on making students "feel good".

But this country did not become great as a result of confident, happy kids. A child who feels good about itself is a child that won't bother to bury its insecurities under a blanket of tangible accomplishment and material possessions.

It is, therefore, imperative that children be made to feel as bad as possible about themselves — the future of humankind depends on it.

'Realistic' new Ken dolls only make things worse

Of course, teachers are not the only ones fighting to boost their pupils' "self-esteem" — this sickness has regrettably spread throughout society.

Only this week Mattel announced a "diverse" new line of Ken dolls intended to better represent today's average bloke, including one with a man-bun, and one dubbed "Broad Ken": a thicker, weightier version of the doll we all know and don't care much about.

How hard can we expect our kids to work when toy corporations are telling them they should aspire to be a chunky guy with a man-bun? ( Supplied: Mattel )

It follows the launch of "curvy" Barbie — again, an attempt to make dolls more realistic and representative of the population.

Think how much harder this will make it to push children to aspire to greatness; what hope is there when even the toys they play with send the insidious message that "you're fine the way you are"?

In the old days, Barbie and Ken could at least be relied upon to set a standard of physical beauty unrealistic enough to spur a child on: your kid might have no chance of emulating Barbie's spectacular dimensions, or Ken's chiselled form, but by God they'd work like Trojans trying to.

How hard can we expect our kids to work when toy corporations are telling them they should aspire to be a chunky guy with a man-bun?

We're not even encouraging children to seek decent haircuts anymore, let alone nudging them towards the gym.

Teachers and toys should be fostering self-loathing, not self-esteem

And what's next? My Special Needs Little Pony? Optimus Prime with irritable bowel syndrome?

How unexceptional do toys need to get before the recreational-industrial complex is satisfied that our kids are disappointing enough?

Everything is going in the wrong direction.

Instead of trying to boost students' self-esteem, teachers should be fostering every child's natural self-loathing, to the point of total emotional breakdown, so that the kids are willing to do just about anything to gain even a minor temporary sensation of self-worth.

Rather than toys that teach their owners that everyone is beautiful in their own way, we should be making even less realistic dolls that set even more ludicrously unattainable benchmarks.

In addition to having perfect bodies and fulfilling careers, Barbie and Ken should have lucrative real estate portfolios, no fear of public speaking, and both be athletic and generous in the bedroom.

Other toys could get with the program too: when we can manufacture a fidget spinner that can induce guilt, we'll know we're winning the war.

What I'm calling for is an end to the touchy-feely pandering that has made life so easy and unproductive for our children. No more making them feel good. No more giving them realistic expectations.

It's time to build a strong, self-sufficient, productive future by ensuring that our most precious resource hates itself enough to make itself useful.