The left wing: Why are so many feminists still bothering with them?

[RowlingsArmy]

I have been following these boards, and in particular the GC issue for a while now.

I live in a working-class Labour stronghold, but I consider myself to be politically homeless as no left wing parties support women, and I disagree with most of the policies of the right.

One thing I've noticed is that a lot of gender critical people are still holding onto Labour/ Lib Dems/ The Greens. I am really confused as to why this is?

These parties have made it crystal clear that they don't want us. All of these parties have expelled women that have expressed gender critical/ pro-women viewpoints.

Why would you stay somewhere where you're not welcome?

tinier
Can you give an example of a communist country that didn't not function as a dictatorship?

No, I can’t. But that doesn’t make it a necessary characteristic.

I’m not a fan of capitalism, but I imagine you’d all be up in arms if I said slavery was a key component of a capitalist society. It features widely through capitalism, but it’s probably not part of the core definition is it?

So the workers now own the means of production and benefit from it. Work becomes meaningful and valued. People contribute what they can and take what they need.

Firstly, this has never happened in any communist regime. Secondly, I think this is a great example of how leftists ignore or downplay the atrocities of communism. It's a 'no true Scotsman' fallacy - oh, that's not real communism. Real communism gives everyone what they need. Etc.

If fascists used this form of argument people would be (rightly) disgusted. "Oh that's not what fascism really means. That's an inaccurate and biased description of fascism. Fascism is about uplifting the ordinary person and allowing them to reach their full potential."

It's such a strange thing that people refuse to condemn communism. This is why it keeps coming back around I guess.

I imagine you’d all be up in arms if I said slavery was a key component of a capitalist society. It features widely through capitalism, but it’s probably not part of the core definition is it?

It wouldn't get me up in arms, but I would just note that capitalism has managed to function in many countries without slavery, so it's probably not a key component, and this is isn't a great analogy.

That’s a biased and inaccurate definition of communism.

Your link is to a philosophy primer on socialism. I was not trying to define communism in Marxist philosophy (which is impossible, see below) but to describe the real world political system that people who are 'communists' have historically adhered to.

Your link 'defines' communism as:

What would “full communism” be like? Marx never answered this question in detail.....In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but also life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-round development of the individual, and all the springs of cooperative wealth flow more abundantly

I would love it if we could all live in Star Trek- The Next Generation but I don't think that is a remotely accurate description of communism in the real world.

I’m not a fan of capitalism, but I imagine you’d all be up in arms if I said slavery was a key component of a capitalist society.

Capitalism had barely got going before slavery (which had been common to most previous systems) was eliminated. I don't think that's inherent to capitalism but you are mistaken to associate the two.

that doesn’t make it a necessary characteristic.

I did not suggest it does. I wasn't talking hypothetically. How was my description of communism in the real world biased please?

Communism, then, is the idea of a free society

Nope. Communism is incompatible with freedom. Its ideology is predicated upon state control. Property rights are not seen as the cornerstone of individual freedom, but a bourgeois irrelevance. It is particularly prone to killing its own citizens. Millions of them. Struggle sessions. Show trials. Slogans which are chanted yet contradicted by the grim experience of life under the boot of the state. Do you know what Stalin did to General Zhukov? The guy whose military expertise was pivotal in Stalingrad? Stalin's purge of the military in the 1930s had hobbled the army before Operation Barbarossa. Zhukov managed to overcome some of this serious, self inflicted damage. He went from military hero to banished. He was lucky to survive. Communism is an existential threat to individual freedom. You can't produce a single example of a communist state whose citizens are in anyway 'free.'

People might want to change something from within or maybe they are holding onto to something that doesn't really exist anymore. Plus what's the alternative, Conservatives are awful too.

I am left wing but never had a strong affinity to labour as I came to voting age around the Iraq war. I guess I don't have a party that represents me, but I do not understand the people who will jump to the right because some people on the left are ridiculous. I see that a lot in the US, people who claim to be left who suddenly go very right and are talking about voting for Trump. How can morals and beliefs just do a 180.

Firstly, this has never happened in any communist regime. Secondly, I think this is a great example of how leftists ignore or downplay the atrocities of communism. It's a 'no true Scotsman' fallacy - oh, that's not real communism. Real communism gives everyone what they need. Etc

queen
Absolutely true. Every single time.

Well, no, because the political/sociological/philosophical definition of fascism literally always includes dictatorship as a core characteristic. I think fascists just tend to deny they’re fascists don’t they?

Name one capitalist country where there’s been no slavery. Because I think you’ll find it’s pretty universal. Unless you don’t think modern slavery exists.

It is perfectly possible to be ideologically communist and also be repelled by the atrocities that have occurred under “communist” dictatorships. I imagine it’s the same for people who are ideologically capitalist- they believe it’s possible to have a fair and just capitalist society and would condemn what’s going on in the US right now, and the atrocities of colonialism, presumably.

I think fascists just tend to deny they’re fascists don’t they?

Yep. Especially if they are marching behind Antifa.

I’m going to step away now as I think either you’re not really open to a fair discussion or you’re actively arguing in bad faith.

I’m left wing, but I’m not party affiliated so to speak.

“ Yep. Especially if they are marching behind Antifa.”

Lolz I see. Yep, I will leave you to it!

Well, for women who are working class, class based oppression may be the more pressing issue than sex based oppression, and from that perspective I truly can't see how the Tories or Libdems or UKIP would do anything for them but sh*t on them. So...

It is perfectly possible to be ideologically communist and also be repelled by the atrocities that have occurred under “communist” dictatorships

I think at some point a wise person has to let go of an ideology that invariably leads to horror. It's been tried, time and time again, by people who were true believers of the ideology, and every single time it has led to unbelievable atrocities that humanity should be ashamed of. Why defend an ideology that we know leads to evil? Maybe the adage about things that seem too good to be true applies here. We should try to learn from the past.

Did anybody see last week's Frankie Boyle's New World Order? There was an economist on near the end proposing "radical democracy" as an alternative to capitalism. She seemed sensible to me.

@tinierclanger

I’m going to step away now as I think either you’re not really open to a fair discussion or you’re actively arguing in bad faith.

That's not really fair. People can disagree without being in bad faith. If your ideology is right then argue for it! If you have good arguments, you'll win people over. Give it a go.

I think at some point a wise person has to let go of an ideology that invariably leads to horror.

The same can be said about capitalism, actually.

Name one capitalist country where there’s been no slavery. Because I think you’ll find it’s pretty universal. Unless you don’t think modern slavery exists.
I'm not sure there's any country where there's never been slavery. But I can let you know that Britain abolished slavery and has continued to be a capitalist society.

@deepwatersolo

I think at some point a wise person has to let go of an ideology that invariably leads to horror.

The same can be said about capitalism, actually.

I'm not sure it's true that capitalism is an ideology, although perhaps it is treated as one by some people. I don't think the opposite of communism is capitalism. I'd say the opposite of communism is probably democracy.

Anyway it's looking pretty good for some forms of democratic capitalism being relatively horror-free. It's the best we've managed so far.

I'm not sure there's any country where there's never been slavery. But I can let you know that Britain abolished slavery and has continued to be a capitalist society.

Courtesy Britain's capitalism, Iranians were robbed of their Democracy back in the 50's... Not sure the de-facto colonialism the West currently revels in - spreading 'Democracy' and all - is so much different from slavery. At least it is hard to argue that the West sees Middle Easterners as humans, considering the way we set their lands aflame...

I'm not sure it's true that capitalism is an ideology, although perhaps it is treated as one by some people. I don't think the opposite of communism is capitalism. I'd say the opposite of communism is probably democracy.

You are mistaken. The opposite of communism is in fact capitalism. It is the mode in which property is treated. Insofar, many indigenous tribes are in fact communist.

@queenofknives dude, I really would, but I just don’t have the time tonight and clearly some people are more open to it than others. I will say though that it’s missing the point to say that “Britain abolished slavery ... “ - my point is that slavery thrives under capitalism whether it’s legal or not. If you want to say that all communist societies to date have been dictatorships, fair enough. I will counter to say that slavery exists in virtually every capitalist country. I think it’s a similar level of argument and probably not helpful.

Apologies, I don’t think you’re all in bad faith but I have to go anyway!

I'm not defending slavery, colonialism, or even capitalism here. It was Tinier who brought it up as an analogy to defend her communism, and I pointed out that it wasn't a good analogy.

I think capitalism is ideologically fairly neutral, or can be. There are capitalist countries that are very democratic, and others not so much.

What have you got against democracy? I'm a massive fan of it myself. I really appreciate my freedoms and rights. I'm aware I'm incredibly lucky to have been born in such a free country in a time of peace and I wish that everyone in every part of the world could have these freedoms and opportunities too.

In fact, looking at real life evidence, it very much looks like capitalism is the mortal enemy of feminism.

Just look at Iran: Iran wanted to COMMUNALIZE its oil. British petroleum saw its profits threatened and lobbied hard for Britain and the US to overthrow the democratically elected Iranian leader who wanted to COMMUNALIZE the IRANIAN oil. So he was removed by the CIA. Resulting in the regime of the hated Shah who was then overthrown... and the rest is history, theocratic oppression of women included.