• Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 months ago

    Is it particularly wrong that feminists are responsible for lowering birth rates?

    I struggle to see a different way to interpret birth rate changes, the education of women and pushing to give them better rights almost certainly strengthened their positions and in turn lowered the birth rate. There are other factors sure but this “feminists are to blame” issue strikes me as a moment of real stone faced honesty from the right that they intend to destroy women’s rights in order to lock women in the home as baby making machines again.

    I get faced with this kind of often and I think “Yeah, and that’s a good thing” seems to be the only appropriate response? What needs to be attacked in the wider population is the concept that birthrates need to be higher and that growth needs to be infinite. If human societies need to grow infinitely via birthrates or they’re “failing” then we’re fucked really aren’t we?

    • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s actually due to industrialization and urbanization. For subsistence farmers kids were very useful, because they started to help in the fields from a very young age; while for modern urban workers kids are just a drain on limited family resources. Women’s rights are pretty much irrelevant in this scheme, because even if the right succeed in rolling back women’s rights, their husbands still would have the same incentive against having kids. We can also look at GDR-FRG and DPRK-ROK comparisons, where socialist part of the country had consistently higher birth rate due to actually helping families with children, despite having much better women’s rights.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      A different way to interpret the birthrate changes is to acknowledge that people aren’t having kids because the rate of exploitation coupled with lack of social services makes having children impossible.

      If the state provided childcare support, parental leave, free education, etc., then far more people would be having children.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        Don’t get me wrong. I think that’s true as well. I’m not entirely convinced on what quantity of “far more” it would result in though. One thing I think goes under-examined is that access to entertainment has also had a reducing factor. Fewer people using social activities as their means of killing boredom means fewer opportunities where those activities lead to something more. Increases in free time may not increase rates if that free time ends up spent on activities that lead to bedroom time.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Sure, but that’s just another sign of alienation under capitalism. Different social structures would also create different priorities for people and change the way they spend their lives socially.

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Is it? I don’t see how abundance of entertainment choices is related to alienation.

            If we have 5000 ways to spend our free time in a socialist society and people end up choosing to do various forms of entertainment that don’t involve the possibility of leading to sexy time, are they alienated in the socialist society? Or is the issue that the convenient entertainment is muscling out the less convenient entertainment in competition for a person’s limited amount of total time?

            A person does not need to be alienated from their labour to choose to watch tv or play a single player videogame instead of going out to a bar or social event.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              4 months ago

              Abundance entertainment is directly related to alienation because you end up spending time consuming it instead of participating in activities with other people. Imagine a society where people go out to do sports, have picnics, enjoy nature, get together to discuss books, etc. Social planning can ensure that there are parks, libraries, sport centers, and other facilities for people to use and where they can spend time together.

              Abundance entertainment is a direct product of capitalist relations and consumerism. We’ve structured our society around consumption, and entertainment has become a major form of consumption now that capitalism in the west moved into its financialized phase. A socialist society doesn’t have to be structured this way. The focus on producing media to be sold to customers is a direct product of the economic relations in our society.

  • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I bang on about the DPRK not being Marxist, but I must admit that I’m not that familiar with what the state ideology truly was before the '70s. The more modern statements that I’ve seen on this topic were less than inspiring, though obviously still leagues ahead of Occupied Korea.

    I think more of the quoted passage is also worth reading:

    longer quote

    In those days when we waged the revolutionary struggle there were many women revolutionaries. Today, in south Korea, too, many women faithfully carry on the revolutionary struggle without yielding to the enemy in the slightest. At present, however, our officials believe that women are able to perform no other revolutionary work than to serve as chairmen of the Women’s Union organizations at best. Women are human beings, just like men, and they account for half the total population of our country.

    Why, then, can they not become cadres and direct men? In the final analysis, women are not trained to be cadres because our officials have the wrong concept and attitude towards them and the outdated feudal-Confucian ideas are working in their minds. It is because our officials retain these old ideas that they hold women back from playing their part even when they are promoted to cadres. I am told that a certain man is displeased with his wife working as a cadre and torments her, with the result that she cannot perform her duties properly. This is due to the fact that Party organizations neglect the education of men. Moreover, it is said that if a man respects his wife and helps her to carry on social activities with success, some people mock him, saying that he is submissive to his wife. They are absolutely mistaken.

    Because survivals of the old ideas persist in their minds in no small measure, our officials refuse to train women to be cadres and tend to look down upon women cadres. Once I held talks with vice-directors of the departments of the Party Central Committee. When the talks were over, a woman vice-director stood behind the male vice-directors and went out after them. Perhaps she herself thought that she should go out after all the men. On seeing this, I thought that cadres in the Party Central Committee themselves still had the wrong attitude towards women. When this is the attitude of the officials of the Party Central Committee towards women, there is no need to mention those of provinces and counties.

    Party organizations should see to it that officials acquire a correct concept of women and make efforts to train many women to be cadres. Nowadays it is noticeable in the country areas that men walk about with briefcases under their arms while women all work in the fields. This will not do. Men should do difficult work and instead women should be allowed to go around carrying handbags. Party organizations should educate men properly so that in society women are respected and their socio-political activities are fully guaranteed. In schools, too, students must be taught to respect women.

    His writing style reminds me pretty strongly of Mao.

    To be clear, the anti-Marxist trends unambiguously started with Kim Il-Sung and, as a blatant example, the striking of references to Marxism from the constitution happened in 1992, right on the heels of the collapse of the Soviet Union, which sure isn’t a good look. I guess what I’m wondering is the degree to which he ever was really interested in Marxism versus doing what other countries did and adopting that language to get along with the Eastern Bloc (this was most infamously done by Cambodia, though there is absolutely no equivalence between the two governments generally).

      • dead [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        NKNews is a website that mostly rehosts articles published by KCNA, DPRK’s own news agency, except NKNews is anti-DPRK. I’ve seen DPRK issue press statements accusing NKNews of violating international copyright law by rehosting DPRK’s articles.

        Here is an article about the Institute with the portraits hosted on DPRK’s website. Click the camera icon for photos. You can see the Marx/Lenin most clearly on photo 28 of the collage

        http://kcna.kp/en/article/q/349a3f1f2c57f1ccfc8a11db87854fb5.kcmsf

        https://archive.is/jt8tA

        Here is DPRK saying that NKNews is an illegal organization. https://archive.is/u37VK

      • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        Thanks for pointing this out. The paywall really hits different in this context. I was familiar with there being a presentation hosted by the WPK going over the history of socialism going all the way back to Fourier, which naturally put great emphasis on Marx and Lenin, but I missed there being public portraits even though I think it was probably reported in some of the same articles.

        Anyway, it’s better for them to have that than not have that, I guess, but do you see why I might not find it all that meaningful? I was mostly trying to express a question about trying to understand where Kim Il-Sung believed what he was saying regarding Marxism versus paying lip service. KJU putting up portraits but continuing with his not-even-revisionist ideological lines that he inherited from his grandfather (with various transformations, but I don’t think those are very relevant here). Like, this really strikes me as red-washing that is even more superficial than what I was already calling extremely suspect.

        • TankieTanuki [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I’m not sure if it’s red washing either, it just seemed like relevant info. I haven’t yet read the entire Espresso Stalinist blog post to have an informed opinion (sorry). blob-no-thoughts

          archive.ph seems to be down, but you can probably open it in a private/incognito window.

          Edit: Private browsing isn’t working either. I was able to read the entire article just a few minutes ago, too. Apparently I don’t know how the web works.

          • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            There’s no need to apologize, but I think you might find the article interesting. The worst part is the start where he’s occupied with his Hoxhaist ax-grinding; the rest is pretty succinct and helpful imo, even if I don’t agree with everything he asserts.

        • hello_hello [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I don’t see it as red washing at all. The idea of there being a national bourgeois class ruling the country under a false revolution doesn’t make sense if they’re just giving lectures on ML political theory to build party cadres this just seems undialectical.

          • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Legitimizing yourself by pointing to a heritage is very different from training cadres using a specific political theory that is part of but definitely not all of that heritage (again, it went back to Fourier), especially given we have no specific evidence of that presentation representing broader patterns of instruction, and that presentation itself is not especially Marxist. Meanwhile, we can see in the article that I linked in the first comment that they do give instructions that are completely opposed to the basic ideas of Marxism.