LWDT V: Completing the Five Thread Plan

[Conserative Morality]

So here's a question for ya'll.
Assuming that in a country the Revolution succeeds (communist, socialist, syndicalist whatever) what now?
Do you spread the Revolution by force? Through subversion? Or do you behave peaceably and simply lead by example as a beacon for the workers?

Yes.

Force where we must, subversion where we can, and work as an example everywhere else.

[West Leas Oros]

So here's a question for ya'll.
Assuming that in a country the Revolution succeeds (communist, socialist, syndicalist whatever) what now?
Do you spread the Revolution by force? Through subversion? Or do you behave peaceably and simply lead by example as a beacon for the workers?

Yes.

Force where we must, subversion where we can, and work as an example everywhere else.

Practical and ideologically consistent

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

The real revolution is the friends we make on the way.

/thread

[West Leas Oros]

The real revolution is the friends we make on the way.

/thread

what?

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

So here's a question for ya'll.
Assuming that in a country the Revolution succeeds (communist, socialist, syndicalist whatever) what now?
Do you spread the Revolution by force? Through subversion? Or do you behave peaceably and simply lead by example as a beacon for the workers?

I suppose "subversion" would work as my plans. As a socialist, I say that we should simply vote in socialist candidates and topple non-democratic regimes.
If people want socialism? Then they have it. If they don't? We don't want to force it on them. Any peoples' revolution is worthless if the people disagree with it.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Yeah, DS9 kind of peaked in early season 6 with the station occupation arc. After that, it wasn't quite as good.

I agree.

[West Leas Oros]

So here's a question for ya'll.
Assuming that in a country the Revolution succeeds (communist, socialist, syndicalist whatever) what now?
Do you spread the Revolution by force? Through subversion? Or do you behave peaceably and simply lead by example as a beacon for the workers?

I suppose "subversion" would work as my plans. As a socialist, I say that we should simply vote in socialist candidates and topple non-democratic regimes.
If people want socialism? Then they have it. If they don't? We don't want to force it on them. Any peoples' revolution is worthless if the people disagree with it.

That sounds kind of populist... I like it.

[Aillyria]

I've just never gotten in to either of them.

Babylon 5 is kind of like Star Trek DS9.

BABYLON 5!!!! I've started rewatch that too, I haven't seen it since I was little. I aslo plan to rewatch Earth: Final Conflict.

[West Leas Oros]

LWDT V: Star Trek Shitpost Edition!

[Aillyria]

LWDT V: Star Trek Shitpost Edition!

K'plah mofo!!! Don't mess with we hardcore trekkies!!!!

[West Leas Oros]

LWDT V: Star Trek Shitpost Edition!

K'plah mofo!!! Don't mess with we hardcore trekkies!!!!

Unless the Klingons are a metaphor for the bourgeoisie, I see nothing relevant in this discussion.

[Cekoviu]

>anarchist
>socially conservative

???????

But wouldn’t forceful censorship of “statist” ideas be considered socially conservative? Or am I wrong?

No.

[Cekoviu]

Space is terrible, yo. Unless you turn yourself into a human tin-can you insta-die.

That's exactly why it's awesome.

Also because of crazy space dust.

[West Leas Oros]

But wouldn’t forceful censorship of “statist” ideas be considered socially conservative? Or am I wrong?

No.

Ah, so censorship can be a tenet of social progressivism. Thought so.

[Cekoviu]

No.

Ah, so censorship can be a tenet of social progressivism. Thought so.

Not that, either. Censorship is entirely unrelated to social views.

[West Leas Oros]

Ah, so censorship can be a tenet of social progressivism. Thought so.

Not that, either. Censorship is entirely unrelated to social views.

What if you censor opposing social views? That seems related, no?

[Cekoviu]

Not that, either. Censorship is entirely unrelated to social views.

What if you censor opposing social views? That seems related, no?

Not really.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

And then there will be no borders because all the same country

That would be nice.

[West Leas Oros]

And then there will be no borders because all the same country

That would be nice.

Unless that country was say, Nazi Germany

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Unless that country was say, Nazi Germany

Sure, that goes without saying.

[The Parkus Empire]

99% of check outs that aren't for little kids are movies anyway

You can't get rid of libraries unless you want to fight me.

Don't worry, I won't. My main concern is that minorities and the poor might use libraries to educate themselves and therefore become a threat to the proper order of things. But as my imagination was swamped by the horrific nightmare of minorities and the poor educating themselves and reading books, it all suddenly appeared to me to be so very silly and outlandish, and I couldn't keep a straight face.

[Aillyria]

So here's a question for ya'll.
Assuming that in a country the Revolution succeeds (communist, socialist, syndicalist whatever) what now?
Do you spread the Revolution by force? Through subversion? Or do you behave peaceably and simply lead by example as a beacon for the workers?

Yes.

Force where we must, subversion where we can, and work as an example everywhere else.

^this.

[The Parkus Empire]

Yes.

Force where we must, subversion where we can, and work as an example everywhere else.

^this.

*checks watch*

[Free Arabian Nation]

The Greatest threat to the revolution is our primitive technology.

We need our alien comrades to help us achieve global communism

[Threlizdun]

No, socialism without feminism is class-reductionist and ignores the role that gendered labor ideologies maintain the capitalist system through the emotional labor of women and organization of workers into a family unit of production, reproduction, and consumption as well as providing an additional matrix of oppression and division for the constitution of violence and hierarchy as normative features of society.

Wtf is emotional labor?

Feminism is in opposition to the nature of socialism, which is egalitarian, which feminism is not.....as its name suggests. The family as a unit of society, and the strengthening of that unit, is one of the best ways to weaken the dependence on states and increase the support system of the individual.

How? Liberal feminism isn't, of course, but I don't see how the core ideals are incompatible.

Feminism isn't egalitarian, it is female supremacist. It is also terrible for men and
women.

How do you figure? I mean I despise the current non-socialist feminist movement, but I can definitely see how woman will be liberated, as will men, through the end of capitalism.

Feminism doesn't liberate anyone from anything.

Emotional labor is labor which capitalist ideology divorces from productive labor. It entails the expectation that women do the cooking, cleaning, tend to the emotional needs of men, and care much more for the emotional needs of their family overall than a man should. Its the expectation that women and girls constantly work to make themselves more presentable to men and to comfort men in daily interactions. It is a stranger demanding that you smile, because the act of simply existing in your own headspace without directly working to create a presentable form to men is interpreted as an act of aggression for which you will be labeled "cold", "harpy", or "bitch".

The patriarchal family unit is indispensable to capitalism. It operates as a means of organizing workers in means suitable for productive, reproductive, and consumptive purposes while weakening social bonds with those outside the family unit. It operates a chief mechanism for producing the sort of individualist and consumption based mentality that is needed within a capitalist system. Michel Foucault outlined the ways in which capitalist alongside clergy, state bureaucrats, and scientists worked to construct a scienta sexualis, a science of sexuality for which the state could construct and limit discourses on sexuality to align them with the interests of the state and the capitalist system while limiting those which may be seen to subvert it. As such, the early sexual sciences became chiefly concerned with demographics, and the organization of workers into units designed to maximize reproductive potential while also aligning reproductive units along lines of gender hierarchy, private property ownership, and necessary functions of consumption. It is this early focus on reproduction within a family unit that led for the first time of the construction of the homosexual as distinct category of person, whereas previously homosexuality was seen simply a form of sexual behavior that some people engaged in, whilst not being the defining attribute of that person. It was through this science of sexuality that homosexuality and other sexual expressions categorized as non-normative were no longer simply decried as "sinful", but were pathologized as mental disorders.

Beyond the role in the regulation of sexual behavior. The family unit and the entrenchment of gender roles worked to assign women the labor function of maintaining the home environment for its continued productive functioning. This demand of women to engage in constant emotional labor whilst creating the ideological separation between it and 'productive labor' underscored why it would remain unpaid, as it was not accepted as labor at all, merely something that women were expected to do as an inherent aspect of their femininity. However, it must be noted that proletariat women still regularly engaged in productive labor as well as emotional labor, and through the demand of them to do so while absolving men of the same obligation, it served to trap women in positions where they effectively were having to work both within market settings and within the home. This notion of the additional labor required by women has come to be known as "the second shift". The second shift endures to the present day. Just think about the types of chores normally relegated to women and those relegated to men. Men are expected to take out the trash and perhaps mow the grass if they have a large enough yard, or occasionally repair things that are broken. Yet you do not have to take out the trash every day, and you can regularly go weeks without mowing the lawn, and sometimes months between repairs. Most housework as a whole has been feminized. Cooking, cleaning, getting kids ready, planning family events. Women are expected to do a far wider range of chores and to do them every day. If a man volunteers to do some of those chores, he is praised as a caring husband or father. When a woman does them; that's simply her job. Only when she fails to do them are her actions noticed.

Another function of the patriarchal family structure was in the maintenance of an essential gender hierarchy. The additional toll placed upon women placed them in a lesser position to challenge oppression or exploitation in other spheres. The wage gap exists both because the labor of women is less valued and because women have long been in a lesser position to adequately challenge them. Women formed the backbone of labor organization. regularly caring for strikers, feeding them, organizing events by local labor unions, and even standing on the front lines and engaging in militant action, yet they seldom rose to leadership positions within these, and their work regularly goes unrecognized. Attempts to focus on the challenges they face were and still are regularly rejected as divisive from the "true struggle". Women's issues were always secondary to the class struggle, even though women face far higher poverty rates than men and face unique problems through poverty that men regularly do not have to face. The maintenance of a gender hierarchy and gendered violence also operates as a safety valve for the capitalists to redirect the anger and sense of powerlessness of working class men towards their wives and children. A man may be abused by the boss at work, but at home he becomes the master of his house. Gendered patterns of violence are systemically useful for having the oppressed punch down at those directly beneath them, rather than uniting to fight against those above. In fact, toxic masculinity is often enhanced by men who feel they are otherwise powerless or alienated, as even other identities they hold such as their class or race may be socially negative, their status as men can offer them at least some degree of prestige, and heightening it to exaggerated degrees operates to relieve them of the stress and shame they otherwise experience.

So yes, feminism is indispensable to equality and it is indispensable to socialism, as it understands the relation gender roles and the patriarchy hold to the maintenance of capitalism, white supremacy, colonialism, cissexism, heterosexism, and ableism, and that one cannot be challenged without challenging the others.