(Jan 21 2026, 11:57 PM)Clover

(Jan 16 2026, 11:34 PM)Impress Polly

Quote:I think the reason men's approach to socialism being "rigid, inflexible, authoritarian" is ultimately because they don't actually want to give up patriarchal control, even when they claim they want to create systems that aim to bring equity to all people. Therefore, the "socialist" systems men create are awkward and unfeasible, bound to fail. They are doing the "no take, only throw" with socialist systems -- "let's have equitable systems, NO DON'T TOUCH MY PATRIARCHAL SYSTEMS!!!"

But why? It's not that Marxist regimes fail to pay lip service to the idea of liberating women from patriarchal social relations, so it must be something else. Let me throw something at you. (Don't dodge.) Consider the Soviet experience. The Soviet Union integrated women into its regular workforce decades before the U.S. or other Western countries would properly do so. Prairie Fire actually wrote up a pretty decent article on the trajectory of Soviet women over the course of the Lenin and Stalin years some time after I left the LLCO. The article's pretty good mostly because it draws heavily on analyses by actual women on the subject. I recommend giving it a read. It's especially valuable in that it almost unwittingly highlights the underlying problem: that women's interests and those of labor movements are NOT in fact synonymous. The article highlights the fundamental antagonism between the demands of the trade unions and those of the women's organizations, with the deciding factor being Stalin's choice of sides to take in the national interest at this or that moment. These are interests that would no longer conflict in an all-female society, by contrast.

Marxists can never and will never solve the natural conflicts of interest that exist between working class men and women as a whole. Only by removing men from the equation can you bring labor interests into consistent alignment with those of women. 

Okies I really want to reply to this because I've been having this tab open for so long lol. Unfortunately I guess my brain is in some semi-permanent mushy state; the longer I waited the more I hoped it would be not mushy enough to fully read that article you linked and comprehend it well enough to be able to respond thoughtfully but alas it's been a while and my brain never has been fully demushed so far. ANYWAY this blah of text is all to say that I do think that looks like an interesting article and I did try to read it and I would like to come back to it again some time in the future when I can fully read it and not be so spacey. 😭

I have no good answer to your "but why?" well besides my obvious one of men are corrupted by patriarchy, addicted to holding power over people, especially all of woman kind. In that sense the "why" seems pretty obvious to me lol. Greedy corrupt people (who happen to be men). Why happen to be men? Because the strength disparity gives/gave them an advantage to oppress women.

BUT one thing I did want to comment on because you brought up the Soviet Union, is I have this somewhat interesting perspective on it because of my upbringing. My family is from the Soviet Union. And we're immigrants to the US. And one thing I have observed is the difference in how my mother and father praise/reject the Soviet Union. My father despised it because of "communism" and the like, "you get paid the same as a coworker who doesn't give a shit" he would say, "so why should you give a shit?" And praised US individualism and "freedom." (Actually the only thing I can remember him "praising" about the Soviet Union is the fact vagrants would be punished with prison/hard labor if they refused to work. So like, kinda just happy that grueling punishment exists I guess..?) My mother though, she praised the Soviet Union in terms of its social safety nets/social programs. You want to go to school? You can go to school. You want to go to university? You can go to university! (She mentioned if you did well you even get paid a stipend or something?) Housing was secured for you. Healthcare was provided for you. (She also talked about how often she would see plays and ballet and stuff all because it was part of the culture and being a well-rounded individual.)

I think about that from the perspective of how women really need social safety nets. Especially due to pregnancy and childbirth. Women need social collectives and social cohesion, meaning humans need collectives and social cohesion to thrive. Men? They kinda... can just be violent to get what they need. (But ultimately in my mind, it is a choice they make to be violent.) Idk I don't really have much "on topic" to your point to say but I just wanted to bring these personal observations of mine up in hopes it's interesting to some ppl.