China's gonna be a phenomenal world leader.
I mean it's a better plan than invading the country, killing a million people and putting a bunch of pedophiles in charge, that's for certain.
Are you sure? Just because it didnt work the last 20 times doesnt mean we couldnt try again to see if it works
Saw a video of a drunk dude fight a bee hive and then the aftermath and I was like "wow imperialism bees edition!"
I get the point. Now, all my aprons come from Pakistan, how are women's rights doing there? Or India? Or Bangladesh?
"Better than before women were employed in factories", OK fine. But this comment should be indistinguishable from r/neoliberal if that place weren't nazis in denial
Its good to be sceptical, but just because one person tells a lie, doesn't make that statement universally a lie.
Nazi neolibs are not speaking in good faith.
Women rights are still better in India compared to Pakistan or Bangladesh. Pretty much due to the country aligning with Socialist principles post independence.
Pretty much due to the country aligning with Socialist principles post independence.
Which the BJP have been working to erode in a race backwards to beat out Bangladesh and Pakistan as the most reactionary country on the subcontinent.
Yes but India is still better than Pakistan at least. It's more akin to the Russian decline regarding social issues post Soviet collapse.
Women rights are still better in India compared to Pakistan or Bangladesh.
Heavily dependent on class, region, and ethnicity. Brahman women are better off. Muslim untouchables are still fucked.
It's far more about Indian culture than laws. The laws drafted by Ambedkar were very Socialist in nature and guaranteed equality to all. Indian culture is very backwards and the BJP has taken the country back several decades since 2014 when it comes to social issues.
Idk the CPC ruling China has made China the best its ever been
India still has trouble updating basic infrastructure because the BJP spends so much time complaining about pakistan and funneling cash to elites
But china's a one party system, i dont see how its tbe same case?
One party systems are not the same all across the board lol, if thats what you mean. What do you mean by this?
women were involved in the industrial workforce in the west from the beginning, and three waves of feminism were still needed - the work not even over after that. So I don't really know if i agree with this take.
Did a single women's liberatory movement succeed before development of the industrial capacity and the incentive capital provides to the national bourgeoisie to see things change?
We must prioritise the prerequisites. Certain material conditions are a necessity to meet before those movements can see success.
EDIT: The phrasing is a bit racist in this part of the manifesto but still relevant:
The rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilisation.
Did a single women's liberatory movement succeed before development of the industrial capacity and the incentive capital provides to the national bourgeoisie to see things change?
I finished Graeber's "History of Everything" not too long ago, and want to say this gets touched on, and the answer is 'yes.'
That said, I gave my copy to my dad and would need to go page through it to cite that, so I very well may be wrong. Plus, it would have been centuries ago anyways, so not sure it's really relevant to your initial question.
Second this. The situation of Women in the 19th century is very deeply tied to the whole "global European empire of terror" and doesn't necessarily reflect conditions in other cultures at other times.
There seems to be a lot of active socialists in my part of the country and historic support for women's and queer rights, I wonder if it has to do with knowledge of indigenous cultures from my region? Several tribes active here had a matriarchal governance structure, they would have rotating councils of women meet to discuss issues and distribution of resources in what could be described as a socialist system. Nearly all political knowledge in the west is rooted in white imperialist ideologies, my heart aches thinking where we could be today if egalitarian or socialist tribes were allowed to flourish.
That said, I gave my copy to my dad and would need to go page through it to cite that, so I very well may be wrong. Plus, it would have been centuries ago anyways, so not sure it's really relevant to your initial question.
I'd be quite interested in what existing power these women had in order to force whatever concessions they achieved. I am betting on it being a quite different scenario, but relying on certain conditions that these women today do not have.
I'm convinced that a major aspect of the property relationship under capital here is that it almost entirely traps women with no means of helping themselves. Getting them more means will drastically alter their ability to pursue their own movements.
property relationship under capital
Yeah, I'm thinking of societies that became matriarchal through some means long long before any sort of European-centric (probably not the right way to but it, but my words are failing me here, apologies) resemblance to economic systems came about. I'm thinking of areas like Mexico, Central America, and South America maybe about 1500 years ago.
Anyways, it's a really good book, and I'd absolutely recommend it! It's just....a LOT. Hard to really remember specific things from it off the top of my head, especially when I'm sleep deprived, but it is well cited if you download an ebook version.
Feels like I'm rambling now
even the most barbarian, nations into civilisation.
counterpoint: its not racist if you call the imperialist nations the barbaric ones
I think this is a legitimate take - industrial capitalism emerged in England for a reason (well several but all barbaric)
I'm not arguing against what the poster in the image is suggesting doing, I just think they're too hopeful. I'm making the point that the process they describe will not in and of itself result in "women's liberation" in Afghanistan.
Fair. There are several steps that follow but some must occur before others out of necessity.
The development of capitalism coincided with a massive decrease in status of women in the west, and as pointed out waves if feminism have been required to recover that status and then some. The original take is economistic claptrap, we aren't victims of material circumstance we are agents shaped by it.
That feels like saying "yeah, but unions existed in 1920, so I don't think I agree that unions were able to win any labor rights." The poster is proposing a process that will initiate gains in womens rights that can't be as easily reversed as gains from an external military imposition, not automatic guarantee of immediate equality.
unions are involved with actively fighting for workers' rights so I don't really think that's a fair comparison. A more apt comparison would be saying a labor shortage will result in increased workers' rights. The labor shortage in and of itself is not what will give the workers permanent gains, but it puts the workers and unions on the footing necessary to force those concessions from the capitalists.
Similar here, the process the poster is describing will only result in more women in the workforce, but not in and of itself result in "women's liberation" in Afghanistan - that involves a political struggle.
The point of women joining the workforce is so they can then withhold their labor. This is what I understood to be the point of the Chinese comments. Just because they didn't explicitly spell it out doesn't mean that's not what they had in mind. But the basic message is correct. Women have to be part of the workforce in order to even have political leverage.
that's what I'm arguing.
although I disagree that that is what the Chinese comments have in mind. Although, granted, I can't actually read Chinese, so I need to go off of what the English translation says. But the English translation seems naive and passive, as if all women's liberation requires is for women to be a part of the workforce. While it's likely just an offhand comment, language like "There's really no need to worry...", "All it takes...", "They'll soon realize...", "no one can stop..." does not make me think they had some deeper idea that they didn't spell out but that they have a simplified idea about how political change occurs and the necessity of political struggle. The "basic message" you note is nowhere present in what's written, it's just your own takeaway because you understand political struggle. But in terms of what's actually written there's no language in there that hints at something deeper. Maybe the Chinese is different.
I much prefer the western strategy where we bomb the shit out of them until they realize how superior our western valuestm are.
MY favorite western strategy to instill Western Values™ is to intentionally seek out the most right-wing weirdos in the country, go out of our way to convince them that women's rights is a Communist plot to lead them to Satan, and supply them with stinger missiles
Women's computer camp in the wealthiest corner of the capital.
Western armed warlords across the rural bulk of the nation.
Wagging my finger at the Taliban for hating women because my warlords are losing.
For a sec I thought you were just talking about the US with the first two lines lol.
I don't consider it a coincidence in the slightest that women's liberation kicked into high gear with women's employment and education opportunities. Anything else strikes me as cart before the horse.
"Cart before the horse", Christ English is so stupidly polite. I need more vulgarity in phrases, how about "od dupy strony"? "From the ass' side". There you go! Seriously Polish needs to spread it's flexible vulgarity all over the world for a better change.
in finnish we say: "Perse edellä puuhun." which translates to "Climbing a tree ass first." i do enjoy the vulgarity too, fucking english is too puritan for it's own good smdh
Oh there we go, that could do. Maybe English is not that bad.
Now that's some proper fucking slang right there, I'm definitely incorporating seppo in my daily English use.
Southern American dialects have the more fun phrases such as the above
Ass backwards is such a silly phrase. Surely ass backwards is the desirable state of affairs? I would certainly not want my ass to be forwards!
Education, social/economic independence, and industrial labor demands definitely produced the conditions for a feminist movement.
But mass media, mass surveillance, and the industrialization of policing also inhibited and restrained women's movements.
So...
I don’t know about that. The short-lived communist government of Afghanistan already gave women the rights to enroll in formal education and hold professional jobs, until it was couped by US-backed conservative forces in the name of anti-Soviet communism.
This kind of argument actually sounds more like what a capitalist would say lol. See we are letting women into the workforce to double the labor force and double our profit! That’s progress!
I don’t know about that. The short-lived communist government of Afghanistan already gave women the rights to enroll in formal education and hold professional jobs, until it was couped by US-backed conservative forces in the name of anti-Soviet communism.
Yeah but... That failed.
Not entirely because of women's liberation obviously.. But what do you think will happen if China goes and militarily props up some communists to run Afghanistan? Exactly the same thing that happened with the USSR. Afghanistan doesn't exist in a vacuum and exterior forces will use all of these things as weapons to overthrow the communists. They would absolutely prop up right wing extremists to kick out communists if that is what China installed. It's how we got to where we are today in fact. The method needs to be more durable.
I don't think doing what failed previously will produce different results. The US would back the fucking Taliban if it meant fucking with China via proxy war.
Chinese-backed Taliban vs US-backed Afghan Maoists let's gooooooooo!
Lmao I think we'd need some extraordinary circumstances to get that to happen. I doubt various capitalists were unaware of the danger of what they were doing when they secretly backed russian communists because they were competing with tsarist russia. They were pushed to it.
Not impossible though.
I was 100% joking. Pretty sure if civil war flared up China would simply withdraw and tell whoever wins to call up for some trade deals.
See the thing is the communist govt of Afghanistan did an idealism by saying "the women are free now"
This is doing a materialism because it is first changing the economic conditions underlying society so that the influential bourgeoisie who need more workers are incentivized to push for the ability of women to work. Women being able to work means women having income independent of men or their families.
It's
time
Idk if Bangladeshi women are very liberated. (obviously better than Afghanistan but still)
there still needs to be a transition from capitalism.
He put it very vulgarly but that's more or less a point I've read from other marxists, that proletarianization MAY bring about mass politics
Yes, that's what China did. They also used media control to blanket the nation in antisexist messages from the moment the PRC was established, but chattel marriage customs only really began to break down in areas where factory work was available - the wage work allowed women to be financially independent from their clans for the first time. Even establishing dictatorship of the proletariat doesn't mean immediate freedom from the harsh contradictions of being a developing country.
no that's not what China did. simply putting women in textile mills is what the british did, and it took a fucking century to get the vote.
Nah, unlike the two, Deng was vastly better at playing the geopolitical game while those two didn't come close. It was through Deng that the West lost their manufacturing power, lost their real chance at a successful color revolution in China, and that peaceful reunification with Hong Kong and Taiwan became viable. No amount of whining about Deng being a rightist or capitalist roader will ever change this.
What
How is “Dengism” “basically just” “Bernsteinism” (or do you just mean adherents are similar?)
It was somewhat sarcasm. Both are basically rightwing deviations of marxism that rely on economic determinism to drive the change toward socialism. That being said dengism actually has a line of cogent praxis toward that goal while Bernstein was basically just "vote labor" until socialism.
basically rightwing deviations of marxism that rely on economic determinism to drive the change toward socialism
Marxism does involve “economic ‘determinism’ to drive the change towards socialism”:
“the productive forces, practice and the economic base generally play the principal and decisive role; whoever denies this is not a materialist. But it must also be admitted that in certain conditions, such aspects as the relations of production, theory and the superstructure in turn manifest themselves in the principal and decisive role. When it is impossible for the productive forces to develop without a change in the relations of production, then the change in the relations of production plays the principal and decisive role.” — Mao Zedong, On Contradiction
“Socialism is inconceivable without large-scale capitalist engineering based on the latest discoveries of modern science. It is inconceivable without planned state organization which keeps tens of millions of people to the strictest observance of a unified standard in production and distribution. We Marxists have always spoken of this, and it is not worth while wasting two seconds talking to people who do not understand even this (anarchists and a good half of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries)” — V.I. Lenin, The Tax in Kind
“…in consequence of the growth of productive forces, out of one system of social life another and higher system develops” — V.I. Lenin, The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism
At the same time the vanguard party (CPC) still rules, there is still worker’s organization, and, most telling, the Mass Line remains. I fail to see where this “right deviation” comes into play.
If this is the tone of a struggle session to come, I will be so confused
If Dengists were Bernsteinists that'd be an improvement. In this thread they're indistinguishable from Neoliberal commentators from the Cato Institute writing articles about "the Feminist side of sweatshops" only instead of "basic economics" being the reason why we have to support states that are in direct opposition to working class interests, here its "material conditions" and "contradictions."
Mixed feelings on foreign capital investment. I'd want to see the economic proposals laid out first before coming to any conclusions.
So much better than that whole
The cowardly Afghanithing from that thread in the dunk tankI bet that same goober smugly calls it the graveyard of empires the next day without an ounce of self-reflection.
