LGBT political activism in the Third World

[Queercommie Girl]

While in the West the LGBT movement is largely associated with the left-wing, including both reformists and revolutionaries, this is not the case in the Third World. In socialist articles written in the Chinese language for example (I'm an ethnic Chinese living in the UK), most are not pro-LGBT. Some LGBT activists in mainland China today are actually economically right-wing (e.g. Ms Li Yinhe), and the Western left-wing LGBT movement has largely been discredited in Third World countries like China.

I am a democratic Marxist-socialist influenced significantly by both Trotskyism and Maoism. (But I do not call myself either a Trotskyist or a Maoist) I am also serious about struggling for LGBT rights around the world. I am a queer and bi-sexual myself. My question here is how can we spread the left-wing LGBT movement to the Third World, where many socialists and leftists do not support LGBT rights?

One idea is that we should focus less on identity and lifestyle politics and more on the struggle for basic human rights itself, linking together with the most oppressed layers of the LGBT community. The Western LGBT scene is getting too commercialised, which further taints the image of the LGBT movement in the eyes of Third World socialists, who see LGBT political activism as nothing but an excuse for decadent youths to justify their corrupt sex-centric lifestyles around gay bars etc.

Any suggestions?

Plus. I think even in the West itself, we should not assume that most socialists and leftists are already genuinely pro-LGBT. There is still a lot of work to be done within our own political camps.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

It seems to me that many portions of the left we're viewed as numbers and statistics in a demographic that they can pick their tokens out of. I feel the anti-authoritarian left appeals to me more anyhow.

[scarletghoul]

To solve this the Third World comrades must be aware of 2 things -
1. that homosexuality is not a western/bourgeois decadence (for this we must make effort to seperate gayness from the liberal consumerist 'gay culture') and
2. that the LGBT movement is a potential allie of the struggling workers, and that gay liberation is a part of the long march towards global human freedom. Huey Newton wrote a good piece on how the Black movement should view the gay movement from this perspective http://globalwire.blogspot.com/2008/07/huey-newton-on-homosexuality-sexism.html

[counterblast]

In my country of birth (Azerbaijan); there are a lot of similar attitudes towards homosexuality. Its often seen as a west European or American epidemic.

I always point out that the commercialization and white supremacy that is now associated with gay culture is a recent phenomenon, and that the modern gay rights movement was started by poor people of color like Sylvia Rivera, who helped form the Gay Liberation Front. The GLF linked the oppression of gay people with the oppression of all Third World people, working people, and women. Supporting communist uprisings, anti-racist campaigns (notably the Free Huey campaign), and the inclusion of womyn/trans people.

It wasn't until later, that many of the more moderate middle-class white men left the GLF to form the reformist group Gay Activists Alliance, because they felt like the GLF was focusing too much on Vietnam and the concerns of Black people. They wanted to focus "only on gay issues" (that is, only the issues that affected white middle class gays), because they felt that focusing on Black struggle was too much work, and that including trans people and drag queens, was too "alienating".

And with that split, the notion of gay liberation became the notion of gay rights.




Here is an amazing video featuring Sylvia talking about this divide, and calling out all the middle class white people of the GAA:

http://www.motionbox.com/videos/7c9dd7b91e1de3f4

[thomasludd]

What third world country are you specifically asking about?

On our side of the world, i believe we have fared very well in the LGBT movement (compared to Africa or our SE Asian neighbors). The movement is definitely left in orientation, focused more in the political sphere. The fiscal/economic is not that highlighted, but based on my assessment of activists, most of them are "left" enough (ranging from left liberal and socialist to communist).

The Maoist CPP has a strong LGBT component, and the other left groupings have sizable LGBT advocates as well. Those not with the left groupings express radical left sentiments as well, either they identify themselves with anarchist/anti-authoritarian politics or just remain non-aligned with any established group.

What constitutes as a real problem here, is not really the absence of LGBTs working with the left, but the hegemony of the Roman Catholic Church. No matter what the liberation theologians here would say, the RCC is a reactionary institution and has been an obstacle in attaining women's rights, LGBT rights, sexual freedom, and access to reproductive health. I would assume it's also a problem with other 3rd world countries with a large number of religious people.

[Revy]

While in the West the LGBT movement is largely associated with the left-wing, including both reformists and revolutionaries, this is not the case in the Third World. In socialist articles written in the Chinese language for example (I'm an ethnic Chinese living in the UK), most are not pro-LGBT. Some LGBT activists in mainland China today are actually economically right-wing (e.g. Ms Li Yinhe), and the Western left-wing LGBT movement has largely been discredited in Third World countries like China.

I am a democratic Marxist-socialist influenced significantly by both Trotskyism and Maoism. (But I do not call myself either a Trotskyist or a Maoist) I am also serious about struggling for LGBT rights around the world. I am a queer and bi-sexual myself. My question here is how can we spread the left-wing LGBT movement to the Third World, where many socialists and leftists do not support LGBT rights?

One idea is that we should focus less on identity and lifestyle politics and more on the struggle for basic human rights itself, linking together with the most oppressed layers of the LGBT community. The Western LGBT scene is getting too commercialised, which further taints the image of the LGBT movement in the eyes of Third World socialists, who see LGBT political activism as nothing but an excuse for decadent youths to justify their corrupt sex-centric lifestyles around gay bars etc.

Any suggestions?

Plus. I think even in the West itself, we should not assume that most socialists and leftists are already genuinely pro-LGBT. There is still a lot of work to be done within our own political camps.

All minority communities in countries like the US have been "commercialized", including ethnic minorities, there are civil rights groups that tout business interests and are sponsored by companies. Yet the cause is just, and it carries social weight, because of the discrimination these groups receive. The same is true with the gay rights movement. To talk of "commercialization" is irrelevant, everything carries with it some commercial element wherever we go, it is not surprising to see it reflected amongst social minorities, but of course, it is not uncommon for some chauvinists in the movement to have different kinds of standards that reflect an inner need to justify prejudices.

Corrupt sex-centric lifestyles? Such puritanical bullshit is reactionary, and those peddling it are conservatives, not socialists. Moreover, it is offensive when the sexual or otherwise lifestyle habits of gays are focused on rather than heterosexuals, as if all heterosexuals were serious thinkers who never partied or had lots of sex.:rolleyes:

I have read about Maoists in the Philippines and Nepal supporting LGBT rights. Those are Third World countries, the trend is similar in many other countries, regardless of tendency. Russia had third world conditions compared to Europe, yet they legalized homosexuality after the Revolution in 1917. Most revolutionaries at that time were throwing away ideas of Orthodox Christian "tradition" promoted by the far-right.

Because of European colonialism and the adoption of Western "values" (which rather than signify democracy and secularism, always represented an evangelistic Christianity), homophobia in the Third World is obscenely common, revolutionaries there must consider the struggle for gay liberation very important, and just as importantly, have no tolerance for those promoting prejudices that harm and alienate gays from the movement.

In the case of Asia, revolutionaries who reject the importance of family ties on the individual, a hereditary line, etc, could easily make the connection that homophobia, while seen as part of "tradition", is merely a social arm of the oppression of the dominant order. Being a communist could also be a violation of some Confucian idea of respect. I would think human rights and liberation would matter to people who should be acquainted with those concepts. Maybe their families see them as a rowdy disgrace who needs to just focus on being successful in life. If someone like that could possibly hold prejudices against gays, then they are just a hypocrite.

Despite the hubbub about "identity politics", the class reductionism of the left has always been representative of a lack of grounding in the realities of social oppression, which leads to such groups not being involved in progressive struggles. How different is this "identity politics" debate from other issues, like war and the environment? Should we focus less on the fight against the wars and pollution because to do so would somehow validate a "kinder, gentler" capitalism? obviously not. That would mean we are masochists and want everything to be bad for everyone just so we can yell about it. Relevant issues to the working class exist beyond economics, the struggle will take place in those arenas as well. I have heard of many socialists raise the idea of fighting against capitalism in their signs at gay rights demonstrations. Ideas like "Gay liberation through socialist revolution". Four words, but descriptive enough! We are socialists first and foremost, and we must not forget our goal is to liberate everyone that suffers under the heel of oppression, not in spite of our socialism, but because of it.

[Queercommie Girl]

It's not so much "identity politics" itself that is the problem, but the commercialised trappings around it, for the simple reason that most people in poor countries simply CANNOT AFFORD such "expressions of identity".

Let's see, how much does therapy cost for transgendered people? $10,000 minimum? How much does it cost to get a full-body wax for a gay person? (Unlike some people on the left I don't see anything wrong with a man wanting to get a full body wax, whether he is gay or not, it is not a sign of "bourgeois decadence" or "unmanliness" - I feel some socialists are even less gender-equalist than bourgeois gender-equalists, but I do see a lot of things wrong in the fact that it costs more than 100 pounds in a shop in central London)

There is nothing wrong with expressing a LGBT gender/sexual identity, but it is a problem that it is beyond the reach of the majority of working class people.

I don't preach puritanism, but I also reject sex-centrism. Like it or not, some people are asexual (I have a friend who is), and they have every right to stay away from sex all of their lives without receiving any ridicule from anyone, let alone those who label themselves "progressive socialists". Puritanism is wrong, but so is its direct opposite. Human life does not revolve around "sex" like some people think. As Engels said, it is not sex but production that is at the centre of human existence. Production is more central than reproduction and may one day override reproduction altogether.

I am a feminist who rejects much of third-wave feminism (except for the idea that feminine sexuality is not intrinsically negative) precisely because of its sex-centric and commercialised nature.

[thomasludd]

It's not so much "identity politics" itself that is the problem, but the commercialised trappings around it, for the simple reason that most people in poor countries simply CANNOT AFFORD such "expressions of identity".

Let's see, how much does therapy cost for transgendered people? $10,000 minimum? How much does it cost to get a full-body wax for a gay person? (Unlike some people on the left I don't see anything wrong with a man wanting to get a full body wax, whether he is gay or not, it is not a sign of "bourgeois decadence" or "unmanliness" - I feel some socialists are even less gender-equalist than bourgeois gender-equalists, but I do see a lot of things wrong in the fact that it costs more than 100 pounds in a shop in central London)

There is nothing wrong with expressing a LGBT gender/sexual identity, but it is a problem that it is beyond the reach of the majority of working class people.

It would be interesting to point out to bourgeois gender-equalists that the Cuban state has sexual reassignment surgery for free. I don't know if they'll sponsor full body wax though.

[Revy]

It's not so much "identity politics" itself that is the problem, but the commercialised trappings around it, for the simple reason that most people in poor countries simply CANNOT AFFORD such "expressions of identity".

Again, oppressed groups do not exist ready made for revolution, to treat them this way is chauvinistic. To complain about "commercialized trappings" as if this was unique to one group rather than an omnipresent feature of society, is ridiculous.



Let's see, how much does therapy cost for transgendered people? $10,000 minimum?
Newsflash: not all transgendered people get therapy or surgery. Transgendered people existed before hormone prescriptions and scalpels. And how much does any medical procedure cost? The Third World has many transgender cultural traditions, ideas of more than two genders.



How much does it cost to get a full-body wax for a gay person? (Unlike some people on the left I don't see anything wrong with a man wanting to get a full body wax, whether he is gay or not, it is not a sign of "bourgeois decadence" or "unmanliness" - I feel some socialists are even less gender-equalist than bourgeois gender-equalists, but I do see a lot of things wrong in the fact that it costs more than 100 pounds in a shop in central London)
You're kidding, right? A full-body wax? Cool stereotypes, bro. Many women get waxed so should half the world be criticized for full body waxes? I am gay, I have no interest in getting waxed, in fact, I rarely shave. And many gay men are like that. Hairy. But I guess I'm lying....I'm typing this on the wax table right now.:rolleyes:



There is nothing wrong with expressing a LGBT gender/sexual identity, but it is a problem that it is beyond the reach of the majority of working class people.

Most gays are working class. Don't even go there with that bullshit. But then again, you brought out the "full body wax" play. I shouldn't be surprised.



I don't preach puritanism, but I also reject sex-centrism. Like it or not, some people are asexual (I have a friend who is), and they have every right to stay away from sex all of their lives without receiving any ridicule from anyone, let alone those who label themselves "progressive socialists".
Um, being asexual is clearly different from being puritanical. Asexuals have no sexuality. But they do not necessarily have judgments about people who engage in sex.


Puritanism is wrong, but so is its direct opposite. Human life does not revolve around "sex" like some people think. As Engels said, it is not sex but production that is at the centre of human existence. Production is more central than reproduction and may one day override reproduction altogether.
What is your point with this? I don't think human life revolves around sex. I certainly don't care about praising "reproduction", which clearly isn't the same thing as sex.



I am a feminist who rejects much of third-wave feminism (except for the idea that feminine sexuality is not intrinsically negative) precisely because of its sex-centric and commercialised nature.
There we go again with commercialized and sex-centric. Except it's aimed at women now.

[Queercommie Girl]

Again, oppressed groups do not exist ready made for revolution, to treat them this way is chauvinistic. To complain about "commercialized trappings" as if this was unique to one group rather than an omnipresent feature of society, is ridiculous.


I never said the problem of commercialisation is unique to LGBT people, but within the LGBT community, it is a factor to be noted as well. It is a problem across the board, but here in this thread I'm only talking about LGBT issues.

Especially since commercialised gay activist groups like Stonewall also tend to ignore the most oppressed layers of the LGBT community, and some are actually openly transphobic.



Newsflash: not all transgendered people get therapy or surgery. Transgendered people existed before hormone prescriptions and scalpels. And how much does any medical procedure cost? The Third World has many transgender cultural traditions, ideas of more than two genders.


It does not change the fact that many transgendered people do wish to go for a full conversion. In ancient times many people did too, but the technology was not available. Marx said productivity underpins the social system at the fundamental level. In the future there will probably be genetic technology which can completely change an individual's biological sex (and many other features) at the most fundamental genetic level.

Nor am I ignoring the fact that medical treatment is expensive across the board. But that's not what I'm focusing on here.



You're kidding, right? A full-body wax? Cool stereotypes, bro. Many women get waxed so should half the world be criticized for full body waxes? I am gay, I have no interest in getting waxed, in fact, I rarely shave. And many gay men are like that. Hairy. But I guess I'm lying....I'm typing this on the wax table right now.:rolleyes:


I think you are misunderstanding my point. I don't think there is anything wrong with getting waxed at all. It is male-chauvinistic to think that "feminine" sexuality is itself intrinsically negative and that gay men should strive to be "manly". In fact, it seems that in deliberately emphasising that many gay men have no interest in getting waxed, you seem to think that the desire to get waxed is somehow intrinsically wrong for males.

My only criticism is that it is too expensive. I wanted to get a full-body wax a while ago, but I can't afford it.



Most gays are working class. Don't even go there with that bullshit. But then again, you brought out the "full body wax" play. I shouldn't be surprised.


What's your point about "full body wax"? As I said, I support men to wish to get full-body waxes, I just criticise it from an economic angle, not from a cultural angle. Or are you suggesting that working class gays are too "manly" for that kind of thing?



Um, being asexual is clearly different from being puritanical. Asexuals have no sexuality. But they do not necessarily have judgments about people who engage in sex.


Most asexuals don't care about other people's sexualities, they just wish to be left alone.



There we go again with commercialized and sex-centric. Except it's aimed at women now.

Sex is a positive thing, I'm not attacking sex. But you are right, I always criticise commercialisation wherever it arises, whether it's with LGBT people or with women. I am a Marxist and I'm on the side of the poor. In fact, I have suspicions about a person's leftist credentials if he/she does not criticise commercialisation.

[Queercommie Girl]

Let me tell you why I have an issue with sex-centrism and commercialisation. It is not because I'm anti-sex, nor is it because I'm against LGBT identity politics intrinsically. Hell, I actually think in the future the bi-genderal division of humanity would become completely obsolete.

What I am against is the gross economic inequality that exists in our world today. Sexual politics has been severely tainted by this. In China today for example rich men can sleep with any women they like simply because they have money while poor men cannot find a wife. I am against the prostitution industry as it exists now under capitalism not because I am intrinsically anti-sex, but because the sex industry as it exists now solely serves the interests of the capitalists at the expense of working class men. Plus the sex industry today is pretty much hetero-normative and sexist, based on a very narrow interpretation of human sexuality.

[h0m0revolutionary]

In China today for example rich men can sleep with any women they like simply because they have money while poor men cannot find a wife.

Is there any proof poor people in China find it substantially harder to find a partner? This point is a bit redundant if not, this could be the case for anywhere. Although even if it were unique to China that isn't reason enough to oppose prostitution.


I am against the prostitution industry as it exists now under capitalism not because I am intrinsically anti-sex, but because the sex industry as it exists now solely serves the interests of the capitalists at the expense of working class men.

At the expence of working class men?
Prostitution is not unique in stripping people of their bodily autonomy, in forcing them into a negotated contract to sell their labour in order to survive. This is the case with other jobs too, wage labour is the lifeblood of capitalism, and prostitutes should be considered workers every bit as much as any other section fo the workforce.

Your opposituion to prostitution is all well and good, but what do you propose? Such a blunt opposition plays into those radical feminists and sexual/social-conservatives who want to see prostitutes removed from the movement which can better their working conditions, fight for their liberation and offer them much needed solidairty - the workers movement.



Plus the sex industry today is pretty much hetero-normative and sexist, based on a very narrow interpretation of human sexuality.

This is not true, the sex industry is one of the more advanced sections of the economy in terms of successfully marketing directly towards LGBTQ men, women and otherwise. Escorting sections are fitted into many of the main gay-dating sites for a reason (see gaydar, fitlads, dudesnudes, adultcompanion...).

But you're very right to suggest all these sites, the sex industry and wider society in general, is based on a very narrow interpretation of sexuality. That's a consequence of a myriad of factors, including religion, conservative morality, but also our own movement.

If we see a repressive and heteronormative society why don't we seek to change it?
And if we do attempt to change it, as we should, how does marginalising sex-workers, denying them the solidairty of the workers movement (the most progressive and capable movement in history), help in that aim?

[Devrim]

Is there any proof poor people in China find it substantially harder to find a partner?

I would imagine that it is more difficult for men of any social class to find a female partner in China due to the one child policy:


The sex ratio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio) at birth (between male and female births) in mainland China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainland_China) reached 117:100 in the year 2000, substantially higher than the natural baseline, which ranges between 103:100 and 107:100. It had risen from 108:100 in 1981—at the boundary of the natural baseline—to 111:100 in 1990.[63] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_child_policy#cite_note-62) According to a report by the State Population and Family Planning Commission, there will be 30 million more men than women in 2020, potentially leading to social instability.[64] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_child_policy#cite_note-63) The correlation between the increase of sex ratio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_ratio) disparity on birth and the deployment of one child policy would appear to have been caused by the one-child policy.

Devrim

[Queercommie Girl]

I would imagine that it is more difficult for men of any social class to find a female partner in China due to the one child policy:



Devrim

You are missing the point, since actually the one-child policy isn't so statistically significant compared with polygamy among the rich.

But of course, internationally speaking, China isn't on the bottom of the world economic ladder, so poor Chinese men can transfer the problem to even poorer countries. Now every year around 2 million North Korean women cross the border into China, mainly working as prostitutes or as wives/second wives for Chinese men.

[Queercommie Girl]

Is there any proof poor people in China find it substantially harder to find a partner? This point is a bit redundant if not, this could be the case for anywhere. Although even if it were unique to China that isn't reason enough to oppose prostitution.


In China it is more significant because firstly the income gap in China is among the worst in the world, even more so than in the US, and secondly the rate of polygamy (even though it is unofficial mostly) among the Chinese rich is significantly higher than among Western rich men.



At the expence of working class men?
Prostitution is not unique in stripping people of their bodily autonomy, in forcing them into a negotated contract to sell their labour in order to survive. This is the case with other jobs too, wage labour is the lifeblood of capitalism, and prostitutes should be considered workers every bit as much as any other section fo the workforce.


Prostitution not only alienates workers, it also makes it more difficult for working class men to find wives. Other jobs don't have the secondary effect.



Your opposituion to prostitution is all well and good, but what do you propose? Such a blunt opposition plays into those radical feminists and sexual/social-conservatives who want to see prostitutes removed from the movement which can better their working conditions, fight for their liberation and offer them much needed solidairty - the workers movement.


Socialist strategy would suggest that one should focus on sections of the working class with the most "industrial muscle", and sex workers come near the bottom of this list.

Sorry, but socialism isn't just about grand principles of social justice, it is also about actual strategy that works.



If we see a repressive and heteronormative society why don't we seek to change it?


Maybe we should focus on challenging hetero-normativity within the socialist and anarchist movement first. Even here on Revleft hetero-normativism abounds, such as this social darwinist drivel from another thread in this sub-forum: "Male-female courtship advantages". (Sorry I can't post links yet here) If you largely agree with me there, perhaps you could help me in the argument.

I'm not intrinsically against sex-work, but strategically sex work comes near to the bottom of my priorities list.

As far as I'm concerned LGBT activism should primarily focus on:

1. Fighting for basic human rights for the most oppressed layers of the global LGBT community. e.g. in African countries where being gay is still a death sentence.

2. Challenging homophobia and transphobia within socialist/communist parties and anarchist organisations themselves.

[Queercommie Girl]

What third world country are you specifically asking about?

On our side of the world, i believe we have fared very well in the LGBT movement (compared to Africa or our SE Asian neighbors). The movement is definitely left in orientation, focused more in the political sphere. The fiscal/economic is not that highlighted, but based on my assessment of activists, most of them are "left" enough (ranging from left liberal and socialist to communist).

The Maoist CPP has a strong LGBT component, and the other left groupings have sizable LGBT advocates as well. Those not with the left groupings express radical left sentiments as well, either they identify themselves with anarchist/anti-authoritarian politics or just remain non-aligned with any established group.

What constitutes as a real problem here, is not really the absence of LGBTs working with the left, but the hegemony of the Roman Catholic Church. No matter what the liberation theologians here would say, the RCC is a reactionary institution and has been an obstacle in attaining women's rights, LGBT rights, sexual freedom, and access to reproductive health. I would assume it's also a problem with other 3rd world countries with a large number of religious people.

As far as I know regarding Maoism, I am unaware of even a single Maoist from mainland China who is pro-LGBT rights.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

It's not so much "identity politics" itself that is the problem, but the commercialised trappings around it, for the simple reason that most people in poor countries simply CANNOT AFFORD such "expressions of identity".

Let's see, how much does therapy cost for transgendered people? $10,000 minimum? How much does it cost to get a full-body wax for a gay person? (Unlike some people on the left I don't see anything wrong with a man wanting to get a full body wax, whether he is gay or not, it is not a sign of "bourgeois decadence" or "unmanliness" - I feel some socialists are even less gender-equalist than bourgeois gender-equalists, but I do see a lot of things wrong in the fact that it costs more than 100 pounds in a shop in central London)

Gender therapy is free or near free at certain clinics in the United States especially for trans youth. My city has no such clinic but Chicago has one. And many therapists have a sliding scale. Similar case for the doctors who prescribe the hormones (which in some countries, you can get over the counter if you know what you're looking for. coughthesearecountriesthatincludemexicocough)

[thomasludd]

As far as I know regarding Maoism, I am unaware of even a single Maoist from mainland China who is pro-LGBT rights.

I haven't met anyone from mainland China who's a Maoist so i have no way to confirm as well. I only met businessmen since firms i worked for have relationships with Chinese companies, especially those in need of cheap labor (they have lower labor costs compared to us i believe).

Anyway, the Maoist-influenced activists i met are pro-LGBT, as much as a lot of lefties. But this was only recent. It's a struggle from within the movement/s itself/themselves. There was a time that LGBT people were openly discriminated as well without being consciously challenged by fellow activists because of the macho culture - probably similar to how Castro saw it in the early years of Cuba.

[Queercommie Girl]

I haven't met anyone from mainland China who's a Maoist so i have no way to confirm as well. I only met businessmen since firms i worked for have relationships with Chinese companies, especially those in need of cheap labor (they have lower labor costs compared to us i believe).

Anyway, the Maoist-influenced activists i met are pro-LGBT, as much as a lot of lefties. But this was only recent. It's a struggle from within the movement/s itself/themselves. There was a time that LGBT people were openly discriminated as well without being consciously challenged by fellow activists because of the macho culture - probably similar to how Castro saw it in the early years of Cuba.

How do you feel that your work is directly contributing to the oppression of the Chinese working class?

The inequality in mainland China today is really out of order. I'm sure you've heard about the 13 Foxconn workers who committed suicide. Now this is a bit of "inside knowledge", but it appears that those were not actually "suicides" at all.

With regard to the situation in China, I support an "internal revolution", in the sense that I don't want to see China breaking up like the USSR and Yugoslavia did in the past. As long as the People's Republic remains, I would support a violent revolution to overthrow the bureaucratic capitalists even if it meant a large number of deaths. This is one reason why I'm partly a Maoist - revolutionary Maoists in China today are calling for a second revolution, but without splitting up the PRC.

Personally, I refuse to work in a job that is too close to the interests of the big capitalists. I refuse to become their direct servant. Mao used to say "if the political line is incorrect, the more knowledge one has, the more reactionary one becomes". I will say "if the political line is incorrect, the more diligent one becomes, the more reactionary one is".

[thomasludd]

How do you feel that your work is directly contributing to the oppression of the Chinese working class?

maybe INdirectly, but whatever excuse i give personally i feel bad of course. I'm also a worker. but i try to counter that by doing other things that contribute to the struggle against capital.


The inequality in mainland China today is really out of order. I'm sure you've heard about the 13 Foxconn workers who committed suicide. Now this is a bit of "inside knowledge", but it appears that those were not actually "suicides" at all.

that is bad. what i heard about is the honda strike. care to give a link on this that you find credible so i can re-post on other sites?


With regard to the situation in China, I support an "internal revolution", in the sense that I don't want to see China breaking up like the USSR and Yugoslavia did in the past. As long as the People's Republic remains, I would support a violent revolution to overthrow the bureaucratic capitalists even if it meant a large number of deaths. This is one reason why I'm partly a Maoist - revolutionary Maoists in China today are calling for a second revolution, but without splitting up the PRC.

are there other revolutionary tendencies in china? like non-maoists? what is their relationship with the maoists?


Personally, I refuse to work in a job that is too close to the interests of the big capitalists. I refuse to become their direct servant. Mao used to say "if the political line is incorrect, the more knowledge one has, the more reactionary one becomes". I will say "if the political line is incorrect, the more diligent one becomes, the more reactionary one is".

you are right, that's why i don't work for them anymore. :)
i have lower remuneration compared to before but less guilt (if you can call it that). Though i don't think that choice is possible for everyone when a lot of people aren't even capable of having enough meals a day.

[Devrim]

I would imagine that it is more difficult for men of any social class to find a female partner in China due to the one child policy:You are missing the point, since actually the one-child policy isn't so statistically significant compared with polygamy among the rich.

I have never heard of mass polygamy in China. Is it really so widespread. It would have to be pretty huge to make a similar impact to a difference in the sex ratio of 30,000,000 men.

Devrim

[Queercommie Girl]

I have never heard of mass polygamy in China. Is it really so widespread. It would have to be pretty huge to make a similar impact to a difference in the sex ratio of 30,000,000 men.

Devrim

Yes, it is very widespread.

While it may not make a "decisive" impact, it is more significant than the difference in sex ratio, and certainly compounds the problem of that. Do the arithmetic.