Multi-facets of anti-capitalism

[Entrails Konfetti]

First, I don't know whether this post belongs in theory, learning or discrimination.

Second, I'm a straight white male, there isn't a very big activist community where I am, and I havent met any Communist Feminists or Communist queeractivists. The only ones I know are around here. So I have a few questions, do female and genderqueer Communists decide to take up these other theories such as feminist or queer activism-- are all "queer" and female Communists also queeractivists and feminists?
The ones I see around here, Communism isn't on the back burner for them, neither is feminism or queer activism-- it all seems to incorporate.

I remember a conversation with Black Dagger when I said how the division of labour resulted in class-society and from it came racism, sexism an homophobia.
He said that even if you abolish class you can't make sure you have abolished discrimination.
That is true.
However, not all feminists, race activists, and genderqueer activists are Communists. I don't mean to homogenize anyone, but I don't understand how all these different types of activists will figure out that it's capitalism that enforces these barriers, and they'll want Communism. Thats not to say working-class people will all of a sudden figure out the barriers and one day desire Communism.

I probably lack in sexual orientation, gender and racial consciousness, and don't understand what you're doing-- could you explain it to me?

[LoneRed]

There are Many "feminists" and "queer activists" who do not know a damn lick about society or its functionings. Many so called feminists carry this outlook, why has this liberal feminism taken over? because it breeds on College campuses, the kids are taught petty-bourgeoisie ideology, from Afro-centrism to this warped feminism

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 12:07 AM
There are Many "feminists" and "queer activists" who do not know a damn lick about society or its functionings. Many so called feminists carry this outlook, why has this liberal feminism taken over? because it breeds on College campuses, the kids are taught petty-bourgeoisie ideology, from Afro-centrism to this warped feminism
I don't believe the Communist femininists or queer actvists are on the same page as the liberals, nor do all them believe that everyone should be subordinate to gays/bis, non-whites, or females.

[LoneRed]

I know Im just saying that the liberal feminists far outweigh the communist ones, most ones you meet will be from the liberal branch, the false hope.

[Mujer Libre]

EK, from my experience lots of people are radicalised by their involvement in queer and feminist activism; they make a good entry point into broader politics.

Of course not everyone who gets involved in those struggles will become a communist but, at least in my experience, issues of class (and other forms of discrimination for that matter) do come up in feminist and queer circles and are pretty unavoidable.


are all "queer" and female Communists also queeractivists and feminists?
Well, to be a communist and queer/female you should have queer/feminist politics, and it's pretty likely that you'd be active in those struggles and it's definitely a good thing.

Not everyone is though- and while that's not ideal I think it's ok. It's a little like me not getting involved in much enviro activism. Although it isn't quite because I don't identify as an "environment," but yeah, there are some similarities! :P

I'm going to ignore LoneRed for the sake of my sanity.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by EK
However, not all feminists, race activists, and genderqueer activists are Communists. I don't mean to homogenize anyone, but I don't understand how all these different types of activists will figure out that it's capitalism that enforces these barriers, and they'll want Communism.

Well as Mujer Libre has already stated, feminist, race and queer politics is often (though not always) a radicalising experience for (particularly) young people, an entry point into a what has the potential to grow into a communist outlook. Really this applies not just to young people, but to any person who is just starting to develop a political (and class) consciousness.

As to the second part, i think a large section of the modern feminist movement (thanks in large part to the work of first socialist/anarchist feminists, and more recently post-colonial feminists) incorporates a basic, if not always coherent (or even emphasised unfortunately) anti-capitalism, ditto for the modern queer movement.

Although this 'basic' anti-capitalism does not entail that everyone exposed to these movements will move on to a more advanced form of anti-capitalism, i.e. anarchism/communism, it nevertheless creates favourable ideological conditions for the elaboration of more rigourous communist analysis, by communists (such as myself) who participate in these movements.

(It should also be noted that the cross-class nature of these movements places an interest in communism squarely at odds with some feminists, queers etc)

As an anarcho-communist queer i participate in the queer movement from a distinctly anarcho-communist POV, others like me (and there are plenty of communists involved in queer/race/fem politics/organising) work to create not only overtly communist groups within these movements, but work and agitate within non-communist groups for a communist POV.

I.E. one that stresses the paramount role of class struggle and revolution, the overthrow of capitalism and the bourgeois state, in the struggle against racism, sexism, heterosexism etc. That these are not struggles that can be 'won' as concessions within a capitalist system, or within a statist system or any system of oppressive hiearchies, any system or power-structure in which people can exploit or dominate others.

Does that answer your question? (i was a bit confused as to what you were asking, sorry).

[LoneRed]

from my experience "queer" activism, and feminist politics do not lead to more radical beliefs, in fact Most if not all of the homosexual people including lesbians are democrats, they don't put the different things together, they take one issue at a time. We even have homosexuals who are in the GOP club.

[Black Dagger]

You have experience in queer and feminist organising? Forgive me for not believing you, but what 'experience' do you have?


Originally posted by LR+--> (LR)"queer" activism, and feminist politics do not lead to more radical beliefs,[/b]

As i said in my last post, participation in such movements does not entail a progression to a communist outlook, but in my experience, which is thankfully different, many people who get involved with queer organising, and from what i have heard from comrades (such as Mujer Libre), feminist organising, as their first forray into 'politics', do go on to develop more radical outlooks, most become socialists, some marxists, and some anarchists.


LR
Most if not all of the homosexual people including lesbians are democrats, they don't put the different things together, they take one issue at a time. We even have homosexuals who are in the GOP club.

Most working class people oppose revolution, they're not class conscious, and they don't think communism will make their lives better, most working class people in the US probably vote Republican etc. etc.

And please do not make such silly a generalisation 'most IF NOT ALL' homosexual people including lesbians' are democrats, 'if not all'? :wacko:

Though yes, a lot of LGB people are democrats, but many are also working class democrats, or just plain working class, but we should try to turn everyone on to a communist outlook. The point is to establish the link between their class position, their exploitation as workers, and their oppression as queers.

Of course middle and ruling class queers are less inclined to develop a communist outlook (the same can be said for middle class heteros, women etc), that doesn't negate the fact that queer liberation and communism can be complimentary goals, that queer lib, women's lib, Black lib etc. are essential to the creation of a meaningful communist society.

My point is that, well my point was my entire last post, if you disagree, please address what i have said instead of talking around it.

[LoneRed]

the "if not all", im still referring to my school, as thats a place a know a good amount about. Im living in a house with 6 other people, 2 are bisexual (currently in same sex relationship) and one homosexual, in a relationship as well. We talk quite a bit, and the grasping onto their liberal populism, is what gets me. I meant to say those people at my school not in the entire world. But the state of affairs at this school is dispicable.

People might go more radical from your own experience but from mine, that of one surrounded by middle class snobby students it doesn't happen here

Most are from the upper classes(petty-bourgeois, if not bourgeois family) but there are working class folks, hard to find but they are there.

[KC]

Originally posted by Black Dagger
...queer lib, women's lib, Black lib etc. are essential to the creation of a meaningful communist society.

The creation of a meaningful communist society results in "queer lib, women's lib, Black lib etc.".

Not until class is eliminated will oppressed minorities be freed. It isn't the other way around like you claim.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by KC+--> (KC)The creation of a meaningful communist society results in "queer lib, women's lib, Black lib etc.".[/b]

Not really, well kind of. Rather, a meaningful communist society is one in which queer lib, women's lib, Black lib are no longer necessary terms or struggles.

However, the abolition of capitalism in and of itself will not 'create' queer lib, women's lib etc. (as you seem to be suggesting), although it does entail that all people, queers, women, etc. are liberated as workers from capitalist exploitation.

Nevertheless the abolition of capitalism does not mean the magical disappearance of racism, sexism and heterosexism, although doubtless a successful revolution is something like pulling the rug from beneath them, as it removes the material basis for these prejudices. However, these are struggles that will still need to be fought, that will need to continue perhaps for quite some time, they will not magically be resolved once the capitalists are in graves. To suggest to the contrary is incredibly naive.



Originally posted by [email protected]

Not until class is eliminated will oppressed minorities be freed. It isn't the other way around like you claim.

I've never claimed anything of the sort.

You've created a caricature of my politics in your head and you keep puking it all over the board in some misguied attempt to make me look 'bad', or something i dunno.

How many times do i have to correct your drivel? Seriously.

The abolition of capitalism and the state is necessary to achieve REAL, meaningful liberation for queers, women, Black people etc.

Because as i said in second-last post in this thread:


me
That these are not struggles that can be 'won' as concessions within a capitalist system, or within a statist system or any system of oppressive hiearchies, any system or power-structure in which people can exploit or dominate others.

Try again Lazaaaaaaaaar.

[LoneRed]

Where did this queer oppression, black oppression etc.. come from? from the very instution our country was founded on, capitalism. Capitalism didnt come after them, capitalism Invented them. These specific groups that have been oppressed have come out of the workings of the capitalist system, in that To further the aim of the ruling class it must (in order to survive) find ways to further limit the bargaining power of the working class and further increase their control over the means of production. Racism is a tool of the ruling class to divide even further the working class, same goes with sexism (all sexism), and what we see currently especially oppression based on sexual orientation. Once the conditions for such oppression are gone so is the oppression itself. What seems would still be a concern is the mindset of oppression, The actual oppression will be gone, but it is possible that some may still carry bigoted beliefs, I find that without the base to back up those personal opinions, that those will be gone quite quickly as well.

IF there is NO base to something, it has NO support, It has no chance of continuing

[YSR]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 07:44 PM
Where did this queer oppression, black oppression etc.. come from? from the very instution our country was founded on, capitalism.
Actually, I think it could be persuasively argued that heirarchy/elitism, not neccesarily capitalism, is what creates racism. During what the we call the "feudal period," there certainly was homophobia and racism, but there was not capitalism.

There seem to be two schools about this. BD is talking about the idea of antiracist/queer organizing as a way to unify the working class and prepare us for revolution, whereas KC is talking about the working class revolution as a precursor to legitimate queer/racial/women's liberation.

All the traditionalist Marxists I've met seem to buy KC's argument and the anarchists I know all seem to believe BD's. Is there something in Marx's writing that I don't know about which posits this?

To me, obviously, it seems like thinly-veiled racism and just bad politics. Until working people stop allowing themselves to be divided into competing groups, they won't stop being exploited. Working class anger can and has been redirected by the elites at foreigners, queers, other races, etc. throughout the human history.

Why is this time going to be any different? What's so special about Marxism versus any other model of liberation that makes the races wake up one day and suddenly realize that they are equal?

Until white privilege and heterosexism are challenged and we begin to defeat them, until that happens, successful working class revolution is a pipe dream. That's the modern revolutionary paradigm, baby. Unity cannot be acheived if we're still on different levels. True, equality between groups will never be seen until we dismantle capitalism. But with the deeply-rooted racism and heterosexism in Western society, you're missing the point if you think that the end of capitalism will suddenly bring about some racially-harmonius utopia.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Out of interest, could someone explain to me what "Afro-centrism" is? Never heard that one before....and I don't even want to start speculating about what it could mean.

On the topic at hand, off the top of my head, I, like EL KABLAMO, have not met another communist or anarchist who seems to devote the same amount of their time to the feminist, queer and so on struggles as Black Dagger, Mujer Libre, rioters bloc and so on do. But, personally, I suspect that this is because, firstly, these issues aren't at the forefront of everything at this point in time; and, secondly, because big cities, usually with large Universities, tend to be places where these struggles take place.

But that's neither here nor there, because the topic of the thread, as far as I can see, concerns the validity of people involving themselves in these struggles -- unless I'm missing something. And, on that, I think both Black Dagger and Mujer Libre, who obviously have a fair bit of experience in this regard, hit the nail right on the head....communists and anarchists involve themselves in these struggles to try to radicalise the individuals participating in these struggles.

There are historic examples of this, of course. Sylvia Pankhurst, the left-communist who was one of the 1920's most theoretically advanced communists, in my opinion, spent many years participating in both the feminist movement and the labour movement....as did many others. And, as with all things, the people involved made some gains, helped promote a communist outlook and so on. Indeed, unless I'm mistaken, it was the direct result of the communist participation in the feminist movement that led to the formation of Workers Socialist Federation.

Indeed, I suppose that example could be held up as a kind of prototype of what political work within these movements aims to achieve -- the orientation of the movement towards communist politics. That, of course, is not easy to do....and, for me anyway, finding out what methods work best would be far more useful than discussing whether it is useful in the first place. But maybe that's just me....


Originally posted by LoneRed
People might go more radical from your own experience but from mine, that of one surrounded by middle class snobby students it doesn't happen here

If you wanna' smell sweet, don't swim in the sewers.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 4 2006, 01:29 PM
I.E. one that stresses the paramount role of class struggle and revolution, the overthrow of capitalism and the bourgeois state, in the struggle against racism, sexism, heterosexism etc. That these are not struggles that can be 'won' as concessions within a capitalist system, or within a statist system or any system of oppressive hiearchies, any system or power-structure in which people can exploit or dominate others.
So you're trying to show that class-struggle for Communism is also the struggle against racism, homophobia, and sexism?

Well I hate to say it, but theres some bigotry among the working-class, how else can you explain that alot of Nazi's or Whitepower people are workers, because Nazism feeds on that bigotry.

Do you also try to show awarness of these multiple forms of discrimination to the working-class?


Does that answer your question? (i was a bit confused as to what you were asking, sorry).

Yeah pretty much.

[LoneRed]

As, I cant really help them, Yes i could have changed schools, but whats to say that the next one is any better?

Also Afro-centrism, Is a regionalist (sp). ideology, that basically argues for the superiority of black culture, customs, inventions etc... It basically says that Africa is the cradle of humanity.

[SPK]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 2 2006, 10:29 AM
(I) don't understand what you're doing-- could you explain it to me?
I'll mostly discuss the queer movements, since I've been directly involved with that in the past. Your question is very broad, so I’ll hit just a few points and not in any detail.

Most identity-based political movements understand a particular oppression as arising out of a set of (incorrect) ideas. Homophobia, for instance, is viewed as a set of prejudices, biases, hatreds, or bigotries that people have in their head. The conventional solution proposed by the queer movements has been to challenge those ideas, to raise people’s consciousness, and to change their subjective understanding, i.e. to encourage respect and tolerance. This, it has been proposed, can be done by coming out the closet – tell your friends, family, neighbors, coworkers, church members, etc. Coming out would demonstrate that queers are everywhere, that we are just like everyone else, that people have nothing to fear, and so on. Once that happens, the thinking goes, homophobia will disappear and politicians will give us our rights. Everything will be great. This approach – one-on-one exchanges or personal transformation that is supposed to have an aggregate political effect -- has really been the central, strategic vision of the queer struggles virtually since their inception in the late sixties.

Of course, things did not quite go as planned. In the usa, the vast majority of states now have constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage, efforts are strengthening to roll back the other legal gains, such as domestic partnerships, and there is a resurgence of the crudest homophobia among people generally. These defeats have intensified markedly since Bush came into office and the latest wave of imperialist wars began. (I’m not going to discuss why the basic strategy of the LGBTIQ struggles, and the way that they applied it, failed to do what those movements wanted it to do, because that question is too big for one post.)

Marxism differs from other revolutionary currents, I think, it that it provides the tools to understand the concrete, practical, material elements of an oppression – the relation of an oppression to capitalism and the economic mode of production, and the ways in which the transition to communism will help ameliorate or eliminate a particular oppression and its effects. This is an important perspective that needs to be taken up by the identity-based political movements, since the traditional strategy of changing people’s minds has been proven to be inadequate. Other strategies are needed as well – ones that create broad institutional or structural effects that are more, if this is the right term, “impersonal” and not wholly dependent upon convincing people that homos are OK.

I don’t think it is likely that homophobia will magically disappear, once capitalism is overthrown. That would require a protracted ideological struggle, over a long period of time. Even in that case, homophobia, because it has been so embedded in the culture here, may never be entirely eliminated. However, communism will have replaced capitalism, and we will be living under an entirely different economic system – one that guarantees the basic necessities of life and has eliminated want and misery. Today, homophobia intersects in many cases with the economic sphere and produces discriminatory effects against LGBTIQ people. This won’t be seen under communism, not because homophobia won’t exist in a revolutionary society – it probably will -- but because those certain economic phenomena won’t exist under communism.

For example: In the usa, one of the reasons that many in the queer communities are fighting for same-sex marriage rights is so that a person could add their partner to their health insurance plan. Medical care is almost wholly privatized here, and there is no universal program which guarantees access to it – insurance usually comes through a person’s employer and only members of your immediate family, legally defined, are eligible for it. This obviously won’t be the case under communism, which should ensure access to healthcare for all, irrespective of ability to work. Another example: the state here systematically pushes responsibility for the care of seniors to the family – the government periodically attempts to privatize the (already inadequate) social security system, which provides a pension to retirees, and the medical care program for senior citizens is underfunded as it is. This puts elder queers – who may have made the perfectly valid ethical choice during their lifetime not to have children, or who may not have even been legally permitted to adopt or keep their children – in a bind during their later years. Under communism, such senior care would be guaranteed by society. Another example: young queer people can be severely impacted if their families are homophobic and reject them. Being thrown of the house is not uncommon: anywhere from 20%-50% of homeless youth on the street are LGBTIQ, which is way out of proportion to queer people among the population in general (5%-10%). Such homelessness, once someone is out on the street, is obviously influenced by many factors, such as the high cost of housing in big cities, the low earning power of young people who probably haven’t even completed high school, and so on. Under communism, housing and all other needs will be guaranteed, irrespective of your employment status or your tenure / position in the workplace.

This is a perspective on why the queer movements, which aren’t particularly active at this point, should take up a Marxist understanding whenever they do rejuvenate themselves. I didn’t really speak to the necessity of an anti-homophobic / anti-heterosexist politics for the revolutionary currents, i.e. for anyone on RevLeft. That is crucial, given that the central power base for the capitalist state comes today from the most reactionary religious institutions, at least in the usa, and that those reactionaries have built their power to no small degree on the mobilization of homophobia. We’re not going to even have a revolution, if we can correctly grasp these questions around so-called “special oppressions”.

But I’ll save that for later.