I've been reading some Kollontai essays lately and she says some pretty interesting stuff that's applicable today:
"The feminists see men as the main enemy, for men have unjustly seized all rights and muh privileges for themselves, leaving women only chains and duties. For them a victory is won when a prerogative previously enjoyed exclusively by the male sex is conceded to the “fair sex”. Proletarian women have a different attitude. They do not see men as the enemy and the oppressor; on the contrary, they think of men as their comrades, who share with them the drudgery of the daily round and fight with them for a better future. The woman and her male comrade are enslaved by the same social conditions; the same hated chains of capitalism oppress their will and deprive them of the joys and charms of life. It is true that several specific aspects of the contemporary system lie with double weight upon women, as it is also true that the conditions of hired labour sometimes turn working women into competitors and rivals to men. But in these unfavourable situations, the working class knows who is guilty. …"
"Class instinct – whatever the feminists say – always shows itself to be more powerful than the noble enthusiasms of “above-class” politics. So long as the bourgeois women and their “younger sisters” are equal in their inequality, the former can, with complete sincerity, make great efforts to defend the general interests of women. But once the barrier is down and the bourgeois women have received access to political activity, the recent defenders of the “rights of all women” become enthusiastic defenders of the muh privileges of their class, content to leave the younger sisters with no rights at all. Thus, when the feminists talk to working women about the need for a common struggle to realise some “general women’s” principle, women of the working class are naturally distrustful."
What happens when you're a proletarian femenist? Clearly she doesn't have a proper dialectical attitude.
Hunter Clark
I'm pretty sure she's talking about bourgeois feminists.
Thomas Evans
Dora Marsden
There is only one person concerned in the freeing of individuals: and that is the person who wears and feels and resents the shackles. Shackles must be burst off: if they are cut away from outside, they will immediately reform, as those whose cause is “our poor sisters” and “poor brothers” will find.
Then why would "anarcha-fems get triggered"? Moreover, she really doesn't make that distinction which is clear in the second paragraph. What is peculiar from feminists to her is the rank of maturity they would condescend to give other women, however is this not the same attitude economic determinists give to designate those "wage-slaves" of shorter spans in theory as classcucks? Tbh, while Kollontai may have been a revolutionary, she suffers from a lack of Hegel, specifically the passages about sisterhood and the ethical life (sittliches Wesen).
Adam Miller
I haven't read Kollontai but I know she later capitulated to Stalin (hence why she was able to survive the great purges) but is there anything that you have read that might point to why she capitulated? For example Preobrazhensky capitulated after Stalin's "left turn" with the super-industrialization programme that Stalin implemented which looked similar to Preobrazhensky 's own ideas on industrialization. What do you make of her ultra-leftism?
Dominic Bailey
...
Jose Bennett
...
Leo Ward
Bordiga. /endthread.
Dylan Brown
who's he?
Jeremiah Edwards
who?
Jayden Brown
obligatory
Joshua Phillips
...
Ian Gutierrez
who?
Joseph Robinson
his name is vladimir stalin
he killed 90 billion people in the great leap for five years
