tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post7653906342592247428..comments2024-01-02T17:38:32.872+00:00Comments on Economics of Imperialism: Women and SocietyTony Norfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03896437404164741498noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-15231211728249845872015-10-24T03:50:16.126+01:002015-10-24T03:50:16.126+01:00I should have added, of course, that the needs of ...I should have added, of course, that the needs of capital coincided with the existence of new social movements. And many of the leading lights of those movements were easily incorporated into the new mechanisms of social control.<br /><br />Phil<br />Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00890189263552116129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-26229048721613133982015-10-24T03:50:12.513+01:002015-10-24T03:50:12.513+01:00I should have added, of course, that the needs of ...I should have added, of course, that the needs of capital coincided with the existence of new social movements. And many of the leading lights of those movements were easily incorporated into the new mechanisms of social control.<br /><br />Phil<br />Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00890189263552116129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-73333039196651670692015-10-24T03:48:53.117+01:002015-10-24T03:48:53.117+01:00I think it's surprising the extent to which ca...I think it's surprising the extent to which capitalism has been able to modify the position of women. At one point in NZ, about a decade ago, all the top positions in NZ just about were held by women. The prime minister, the governor-general and formal head of the military forces, the chief justice, the head of the biggest company, the head of the biggest government department and a couple of others. Today the three key people atop the 'security' agencies here are female, including an ex-Marxist (she's now a bourgeois liberal). This is more than tokenism.<br /><br />I see that in Britain women under 30 earn more than men under 30 these days. And it's the same in the United States.<br /><br />It's hard to see any impediments in the path of middle and upper class women at all now.<br /><br />Working class women, however, remain at the bottom.<br /><br />Back in the 1970s, when I first got involved in politics, I never would have imagined that capitalism could concede so much in the way of rights for women, homosexuals and oppressed ethnic minorities.<br /><br />However, I think it fits quite neatly with the needs of capital today. What the shift to more-market economics in the 80s did was tend to remove non-market forms of discrimination. The capitalist class now wants female capitalists and female managers, black capitalists and black managers, gay capitalists and gay managers. And they want a gay consumer market, a female consumer market, a black consumer market.<br /><br />I think a lot of us never really appreciated that crucial point in the Communist Manifesto that under capitalism everything that was solid melts into air. We thought it was stuff like the rigid hierarchies of feudalism, the institutional power of religion and so on. But actually old, outmoded forms of discrimination also melted into air.<br /><br />PhilUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00890189263552116129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-79646861461767391712015-10-24T03:47:21.761+01:002015-10-24T03:47:21.761+01:00I think it's surprising the extent to which ca...I think it's surprising the extent to which capitalism has been able to modify the position of women. At one point in NZ, about a decade ago, all the top positions in NZ just about were held by women. The prime minister, the governor-general and formal head of the military forces, the chief justice, the head of the biggest company, the head of the biggest government department and a couple of others. Today the three key people atop the 'security' agencies here are female, including an ex-Marxist (she's now a bourgeois liberal). This is more than tokenism.<br /><br />I see that in Britain women under 30 earn more than men under 30 these days. And it's the same in the United States.<br /><br />It's hard to see any impediments in the path of middle and upper class women at all now.<br /><br />Working class women, however, remain at the bottom.<br /><br />Back in the 1970s, when I first got involved in politics, I never would have imagined that capitalism could concede so much in the way of rights for women, homosexuals and oppressed ethnic minorities.<br /><br />However, I think it fits quite neatly with the needs of capital today. What the shift to more-market economics in the 80s did was tend to remove non-market forms of discrimination. The capitalist class now wants female capitalists and female managers, black capitalists and black managers, gay capitalists and gay managers. And they want a gay consumer market, a female consumer market, a black consumer market.<br /><br />I think a lot of us never really appreciated that crucial point in the Communist Manifesto that under capitalism everything that was solid melts into air. We thought it was stuff like the rigid hierarchies of feudalism, the institutional power of religion and so on. But actually old, outmoded forms of discrimination also melted into air.<br /><br />PhilUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00890189263552116129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-1627551980794735882015-09-07T19:11:01.799+01:002015-09-07T19:11:01.799+01:00Dear Tony,
I take your note in consideration, I ...Dear Tony, <br /><br />I take your note in consideration, I apologise for using such an impolite word for our first exchange of idea. Anyway, the main reason I went against Marx&Engels on the personal level is : If a man intends to make a better society, he must be able to make himself a man of a better character first and foremost. Of course, you may totally disagree with me on this simple and important principle; then I can not see we have a mutual premise to further discuss this topic further, we may move on to another subbject ...<br /><br />Cheers<br />Jamesquotesnoteshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14392430873097058442noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-60716884990790970242015-09-07T18:57:31.542+01:002015-09-07T18:57:31.542+01:00Men, invented sciences, advanced technology; scien...Men, invented sciences, advanced technology; science and techonology created automation and eliminated toil of labour, which liberated women from domestic works. Men, themselves laid the ground from which women of oppression would launch their never -edning bitter vengeance against men. quotesnoteshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14392430873097058442noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-33390160999269503492015-09-07T14:43:38.672+01:002015-09-07T14:43:38.672+01:00Quotesnotes: From what I have read, it was more li...Quotesnotes: From what I have read, it was more likely that Engels agreed to do this cover up on Marx's behalf, rather than being coerced by Marx. They did not want the scandal to be used by their political opponents. I do not feel 'embarrassed' to quote from Engels in the least. Your point is irrelevant and ad hominem, with no relationship to the arguments Engels made.Tony Norfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03896437404164741498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-62858936273562639542015-09-07T10:45:21.775+01:002015-09-07T10:45:21.775+01:00Engels, was coerced by Marx in admmiting he was th...Engels, was coerced by Marx in admmiting he was the father of a boy born out of wedlock in Marx's household; Marx was the real father. Do you feel embarassed to quote from a man of such pity ? <br /><br />www.quotesnotespress.wordpress.com <br />http://qnpress.blogspot.com.au/quotesnoteshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14392430873097058442noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-77788709575683296102015-09-06T11:06:23.382+01:002015-09-06T11:06:23.382+01:00"SteveH, the modern fight for gender equality..."SteveH, the modern fight for gender equality, which the author is talking about here, is not necessarily about ignoring one gender over the other."<br /><br />It certainly doesn't feel like that. If the intention is not about ignoring one gender over another then I respectfully advise you to change your way of communicating, because it is very much found wanting.<br /><br />"It simply requires recognition that our perception of gender is, for lack of a better term, screwed up."<br /><br />It would be more correct to say our perceptions of gender are socially conditioned rather than screwed up. The argument in this article is that our gender perceptions perfectly fit the system we live under and to change those perceptions we need to change society. <br /><br />"And what the author is saying here is not that bringing up children is inherently a burden, but more that the EXPECTATION that it must be women to do it, as opposed to men, that is the burden. "<br /><br />No, he is saying it is a burden. In many pre capitalist societies the role of child rearing was largely a female role, but it wasn’t seen as a burden just because it was left to women to do. The issue of whether men or women or both should bring up the child is a different question. I think when both parents go out to work and the length of the working day is continually a political battle and the economy is guided by the laws of competition then I can see why child rearing is seen as a burden!<br /><br />“Women are still oppressed in this century and country, just as a man (which I'm assuming you are, do correct me if I'm wrong) you are lucky enough to not see it or experience it”<br /><br />As a man I can assure you I feel a great deal of oppression, you do not have the monopoly on that thanks very much. But being a woman, I guess you just don’t see it do you.<br />SteveHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-87034316768504893802015-09-05T16:39:16.149+01:002015-09-05T16:39:16.149+01:00SteveH, the modern fight for gender equality, whic...SteveH, the modern fight for gender equality, which the author is talking about here, is not necessarily about ignoring one gender over the other. It simply requires recognition that our perception of gender is, for lack of a better term, screwed up. The same systems and expectations that oppress women also oppress men. As in your example, this oppression can manifest itself in discouraging men from expressing their feelings in the same way that women are. Subsequently, this can result in higher levels of depression and suicide. <br /><br />And what the author is saying here is not that bringing up children is inherently a burden, but more that the EXPECTATION that it must be women to do it, as opposed to men, that is the burden. <br /><br />Women are still oppressed in this century and country, just as a man (which I'm assuming you are, do correct me if I'm wrong) you are lucky enough to not see it or experience it. So no, I'm not surprised it 'doesn't ring true' to you. Sexism didn't end when women got the vote, much like racism didn't end when slavery was abolished.Alicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16885343427308391653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591186784456519139.post-49439715146051828202015-08-31T12:32:33.678+01:002015-08-31T12:32:33.678+01:00Local authorities were required to 'equalise&#...Local authorities were required to 'equalise' pay, they did this by reducing the pay of some work to the level of others. So refuse collectors had the same pay scales as cleaners. How do you view the strikes that were a response to this attack on the pay of certain groups of workers?<br /><br />I also don't see the narrative in 21st century Britain as one of being oppressed women. Male suicides are way higher than female for example. Inconvenient facts tend to be put to one side when this issue is being discussed. The left seem to endlessly portray women as victims. It just doesn't ring true to my mind. Not in this country, right here and right now.<br /><br />The problem with capitalism isn't that women have the 'burden' of bringing up children but the fact that bringing up children is seen as a burden!<br /><br /><br /><br />SteveHnoreply@blogger.com