Wages for housework - it is bourgeoisie logic, not Socialism!

[Dictator]

'Wages for housework' - a liberal feminist idea that has no place in the Marxist movement.

Marriage itself is an uttterly bourgeoisie concept, but to encourage it even more by paying 'housewives' (that's actually rather a sexist term) is beyond the pale.

So, how is this system supposed to work - who will pay?

How is it any different to welfare or the unworkable basic income idea?

[o well this is ok I guess]

Shouldn't you be referring to this shit in the past tense?

[Dictator]

Yes, perhaps you are right.

However, another poster has suggested that this idea should be introduced, hence present tense.

[#FF0000]

You should probably read up on a thing before writing it off. Also it's "bourgeois" not "bourgeoisie".

EDIT: you should also make arguments instead of statements.

i'll be back when there's some content/you have an inkling of what you're talking about. (http://caringlabor.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/silvia-federici-wages-against-housework/)

EDIT: added a link <3

[Dictator]

And how about just answering the questions.........;)

[#FF0000]

Dictator is amused by your rather uneducated 'correction' of his spelling.

Bourgeoisie is a noun. Bourgeois is an adjective.


And how about just answering the questions.........;)

Nah I'm not going to feed you information like a baby bird, especially when you've made your mind up about an idea that you're totally unfamiliar with, beyond pointing you towards something to read.

[synthesis]

"Bourgeois" is the adjective, you idiot.

I'm kind of trying to figure out who you're a sockpuppet for. Kaoxic, maybe?

edit: god damn it, ninja'd

also wages for housework is sexist because housewife is a sexist term, lol

[o well this is ok I guess]

dude are you like an mra troll or something
it's cool you can be honest

[Dictator]

ok, I'll read the article, and let you know my thoughts later;)

and what is it with this place, calling people trolls, sockpuppets etc...just for having different views - basically I'm an old school Marxist-Lenininst (one n or two?), with some allegiance to Stalin and Mao as well.

So, I'm not PC in the slightest - because Political Correctness is the uber tool of the liberal elite, and you know it........

[Kingfish]

Well we do live under a system where unless an object or service has exchange /monetary value it is worthless and less important, so I think this is a natural conclusion for a feminist who is only beginning to develop their class and societal consciousness to reach.

The only way it could be put into practice (assuming it doesn't receive cultural support) would be:

Authoritarian Approach: Raise taxes and then pay the person who does the housework with that money

Slightly Less Authoritarian Approach: Make a contract detailing such payments a legal requirement for marriage.

Both unappealing options for a flawed position however at least it demonstrates some growing awareness even if it is limited by the capitalist framework.

[#FF0000]

Well we do live under a system where unless an object or service has exchange /monetary value it is worthless and less important, so I think this is a natural conclusion for a feminist who is only beginning to develop their class and societal consciousness to reach.

Huh. I don't think you could be more incorrect in describing someone like Silvia Federici.

[synthesis]

and what is it with this place, calling people trolls, sockpuppets etc

Huh, well, maybe it's because


You literally just joined yesterday
Every post you've made has been trolling
You have the same spelling mistakes and ignorant thought processes as the user I mentioned.

Well... that's actually all I need, I think. Maybe take a little more time building up to the action with your inevitable next account, as well as a few basic courses in not being useless at your local community college. I wish someone sincere had started a thread like this, because it's an interesting topic, and I really have no idea how to contribute productively to this shining example of a shit thread with a shitty OP.

[Kingfish]

Huh. I don't think you could be more incorrect in describing someone like Silvia Federici.

In this case the last part of the sentence is particularly important


so I think this is a natural conclusion for a feminist who is only beginning to develop their class and societal consciousness to reach.

Beyond that stage I don't think it is a progressive idea. So when I speak positively of it I do so in that context alone.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

So, I'm not PC in the slightest - because Political Correctness is the uber tool of the liberal elite, and you know it........
Now you're spouting off about "PC" and the "liberal elite"? You sound like a conservative to me.

[Dictator]

The only way it could be put into practice (assuming it doesn't receive cultural support) would be:

Authoritarian Approach: Raise taxes and then pay the person who does the housework with that money

Slightly Less Authoritarian Approach: Make a contract detailing such payments a legal requirement for marriage.

Both unappealing options for a flawed position however at least it demonstrates some growing awareness even if it is limited by the capitalist framework.

Sounds very Conservative in nature to me.

because under this 'wages' system society has to subsidise state sanctioned marriage.


It's basically bourgeois marriage which Marx railed against, yet some people here seem to want it subsidised by the taxpayer. That only adds up if you are a Conservative.

[Dictator]

Huh, well, maybe it's because


You literally just joined yesterday
Every post you've made has been trolling
You have the same spelling mistakes and ignorant thought processes as the user I mentioned.

Well... that's actually all I need, I think. Maybe take a little more time building up to the action with your inevitable next account, as well as a few basic courses in not being useless at your local community college. I wish someone sincere had started a thread like this, because it's an interesting topic, and I really have no idea how to contribute productively to this shining example of a shit thread with a shitty OP.

Most forums would consider your this kind of post as trolling itself.

So, you don't believe a woman should be allowed to do as she chooses with her own body - that's odd.

[Quail]

I don't think you have any idea of what you're talking about. Do some reading, ffs. Silvia Federici would be a good start.

[Dictator]

Just read the link from post 4 - but where is this 'wage' coming from?

Who's gonna pay - the taxpayer?

In that case, it's Conservative logic.

[#FF0000]

you should read the thing

[Dictator]

:confused: just said 'I read it' - so that means, yes - I have read the thing.

but Sylvia does not tell us WHO is going to pay this 'wage' - will you volunteer?

[Dr Doom]

:confused: just said 'I read it' - so that means, yes - I have read the thing.

but Sylvia does not tell us WHO is going to pay this 'wage' - will you volunteer?

wages for housework was always more of a rhetorical idea than anything i think, a way to shift the debate more than anything else. I think that's the best way to look at it anyway. although it's similar to the dumb trot idea of 'transitional demands' and there's certainly a lot to criticise about the wages for housework movement, i personally think it's a good way to open up debate.

i mean Federici emphasised the importance of not reducing the movement 'to a thing, a lump of money, instead of viewing it as a political perspective.'

and emphasised the benefits of the struggle itself
To say that we want money for housework is the first step towards refusing to do it, because the demand for a wage makes our work visible, which is the most indispensable condition to begin to struggle against it, both in its immediate aspect as housework and its more insidious character as femininity.

so it was basically an attempt to overcome the isolation of housewives by explicitly recognising them as a vital part of the working class. because reproductive labour is one of the ways the boss class steals from us.