ok i'll bite and here's my take: i think this weird undercurrent of "socially conservative communism" is mostly coming from the so-called "MAGA communists" and "patriotic socialists" who think that communism can only be for strong manlymen workers that spend all day sweating at the smoke and sparks factory and need to appeal to them. they keep pushing this to separate their reactionary "communism" from standard social progressivism to contrast against your average left liberal and show the MAGA types that "SEE, WE AREN"T LIKE THOSE WOKES".
so in my opinion this is mostly an artificial construct being pushed by some weirdos with outsized influence because they are being funded by the coffers of Larouchites, or as a way to disrupt the increasing radicalization of the younger generations who are finding communism and socialism increasingly appealing (at least as polls seem to suggest). it's a tactic to make them associate communism with social conservatism and drive them back to the center, either being done deliberately or as a byproduct of a different agenda.
Would you mind pointing me toward someone prominent who's making a cogent argument for linking social conservatism along with communism (or socialism)?
To be clear, this is me admitting that I hang out in a comfy echo chamber, not me trying to discredit your post
While there are communists who are anti sex work because of ‘morality,’ I think many just conclude that because sex work has historically been reserved for the most desperate and exploited women, a proper communist society would have minimal or no sex work because they have other preferable choices
As for the AES that are socially conservative, that’s just how they’ve been. Look at what happened in Afghanistan when communists tried to become more progressive when no one else wanted it (however, the US played a major role in muddying the waters by colluding with oligarchs to spread the message that communism hates Islam).
However, it’s not permanent. Look at Cuba. Once very homophobic, but Castro not only apologized and took responsibility, but the country started to take action to guarantee more freedoms for LGBT people. The president was pro LGBT long before he was relevant and LGBT citizens are officially included in the constitution. And the NPA in the Philippines officially supports LGBT people. It’s a matter of having good people in power and limiting the reactionary influences that once led your society. I can’t really say how you do this. Either work very hard in many areas to the point where reactionary constituents overlook your progressive stances as long as you keep your other promises, or be endorsed by others more influential.
“Western leftists” just have a lot of free time and want to play philosopher while global south movements and countries are finding new paths.
maoists who oppose drug use
I hate to tell you this, but many people in the global south oppose drugs. It doesn’t make it right, but you need to understand where they come from. These societies don’t get to enjoy a casual coke fueled clubbing session every week. They are beaten, enslaved, decapitated, dismembered, and raped on the streets for cheap drugs in the states. It is natural to become hateful of the immediate source of your misery. The Zapatistas prohibit drugs because they must survive in between the cartels and the governments that collude with the cartels. AMLO can legalize fentanyl tomorrow but I don’t think he wants Mexico to officially become the fentanyl capital. Being pro drug and pro legalization are different things in my opinion.
You can be pro legalization because it’s pragmatic and reduce crime and addiction, but you can also still look down on the drugs and users themselves. It’s not black and white. People in the global south don’t need lectures on becoming “pro drug”; westerners also suffer and do drugs and see the suffering, but the governments and military aren’t systemically colluding with Bloods and Crips to distribute crack (unless you’re the CIA). In drug making countries, there’s no one to turn to and many become apathetic because they don’t believe anything will ever change.
Asian countries have a dire problem with sexpats and sex tourists exploiting women. I agree that sex workers deserve more protection, and perhaps legalization is one path, but I dont think that they should cater to rich westerners who want to abuse women in poorer countries
It really just sounds like what you're saying is people who live in areas with socially conservative values have socially conservative values
Tailism, you know, when some small socialist or communist group things, "Hey, if we pal around with the racists, homophobes, transphobes, biggots a.k.a fascists (which will wind up with those groups thrown under the bus) we'll have a large enough section of the population to achieve Socialism or Communism." Failing to realize that all that would happen is that their movement would either be absorbed into the larger fascist movement or as soon as they finished killing off the blacks/browns, LGBTQIA+, actual communists and socialists, their own people would be cut out and destroyed with as much compassion as a doctor deals with a cancerous tumor.
