- cross-posted to:
- marxism
- cross-posted to:
- marxism
I've just finished reading "How Marxism Works" by Chris Harman, as part of Prolewiki's Absolute Beginner Reading List, and I wanted people's thoughts on its section about Marxism and Feminism. This edition is from the year 2000, and this section feels like the weakest section in the entire pamphlet.
It feels like a very surface-level dive into the topic, and I'm wondering if I'm simply picking up on a lack of familiarity by the author. I will admit, as well, that this is a weak topic for myself. I know that there were Bolshevik women who had to advocate for their inclusion in the state after the October Revolution. Their admission led to huge social progress and amenities for working-class women, but there is no mention of them by name in this section. There is no mention of intersectionality, either, from the 'Feminist' side of the section, but lots of focus on the "separatist ideas" of Feminism. No mention of works such as Angela Davis's Women, Race, & Class (which is on my reading list).
Queer Marxism, Feminist Marxism, often feel like an under discussed subsection of Marxist thought (to me anyway, as a cishet man, who could probably do better about seeking this information out). I have to imagine that, being a woman, being queer, being non-white, and looking at Marxism and its focus on class can feel like an alienating experience to some. To have your struggles collapsed and folded together into the "Class Struggle" with no real mention or notion of what life will look like for you and your intersection with society at large after the elimination of the class society must feel like someone telling you to "take it on faith" that things will improve for you. That somehow, in a post capitalist state, the biases and prejudices are simply washed away from the minds of the masses. You would need to take a step further, to study the history of places like the Soviet Union and its efforts in decolonization to get an idea of what that looks like. This could also be my own shallowness showing regarding theory, however.
So, what are your thoughts? What are some historical perspectives I should be seeking out that flesh out this section? What are some works of Theory within the realms of Women's Liberation, Black Liberation, and Queer Liberation I should consume to expand the foundation for my world view?
Thanks!
You must log in or register to comment.
This isn't helpful and I'm sorry. But UK Trots, specifically the UK Socialist Workers Party, don't exactly have the best perspective on women. In fairness, Harman certainly knows better than I do and Harman's perspective is mostly fine. I know that I personally need to read more feminist theory. But I imagine that there's gotta be a better voice.
Could you add "Communism and the Family" or "The Social Basis of the Woman Question" maybe?
Yeah, the Beginner list acknowledges up front the limitations of the author's perspective, and Prolwiki offers notes and clarifications within the text. They basically say the same thing, which is that Harman's perspective is mostly fine. It works as a pretty good explainer for Marxist thinking, is my immediate impression. This coming from someone who is about 50% of the way through Capital Vol.1 and almost done with The Worldview and Philosophical Methodology of Marxism-Leninism as translated by Luna Nguyen (Luna oui!). That would explain, however, the lack of depth from the section. I'll add your suggestions to my list.
I'm finally reading Harman's text.
There are two different approaches to women’s liberation – feminism and revolutionary socialism.
This means rejecting the feminist idea of women’s separate organisations.
Ya this is the bullshit that Tony Cliff advocated. Feminism and Marxism aren't aren't in competition.
I have to imagine that the idea is that what is worthwhile about feminism (since feminism as-received today is liberal feminism) must be entirely incorporated into revolutionary socialism rather than treated as its own special interest group, making "feminism" as its own movement worse than redundant, but I didn't read it so idk. Luxemburg talks about it here when she defends being a socialist in general and not a special interest group member. I do think the liberal way of handling identity, by not viewing it as the intersection of class oppression, has some potential for fracturing people into different camps that aren't adequately interested in broad solidarity.
CC @RedWizard ig
Yeah I agree with that. The care taken in the section of pretty lacking. The section isn't long, give it a read. You'll find it lacks even a mention of Luxemburg or her ideas. Before reading it I was aware of her contributions to the socialist movement, so I was surprised to not see her mentioned in this section.
Feminism and Marxism aren't aren't in competition.
Haha, yeah, this was my gut reaction as well. Very compatible viewpoints, and they don't really stand in contradiction with each other from what I understand.
