In a classroom, I feel I'm the only one present with a working-class background due to assumptions of class and student status. I get put into a room full of like-minded socialists and because of my general affiliation with a university, am immediately shunned as middle-class.
To top it all off, I was inadvertently additionally shunned for "being trained to think differently" with my education in both Sexuality and Women's Studies. I say inadvertently because this specific individual had no idea what my educational background was and simply gave both disciplines as an example of how all academics have a hard time seeing capitalism as a root cause of the current political climate in the U.S. Yeah, let that marinate for a second...
• I have a BA in Women’s Studies and am a MA in Gender and Women’s Studies.
• I have a Certificate in Sexuality Studies.
• I am sitting in a weekly meeting of the International Socialist Organization.
• I clearly think capitalism is a root cause of the current political climate in the U.S...
o Despite my “being trained to think differently”.
Never in a million years did I expect a room full of self-identified Radicals and Socialists to assume so much of an individual’s identity and life experience.
In this particular branch of this particular Socialist organization, there is a general belief in a clear and strict dichotomy between academics and activists. Even though this organization has a branch within the university. Even though this organization emphasizes educating themselves and others through the same history and classical theoretical foundations that academics frame their own work on. Even though this organization acknowledges the Marxist theory that social class does not determine social consciousness.
Even though both their ideologies and realities do not seem to match the dichotomies they vehemently believe in, this particular organization asserts that all academics are middle-class and in opposition to activists who are working-class. The classed identities of academics and activists can never blur, and no individual can be both an academic and an activist.
To that, I first say – Can an individual be both a scholar and an activist?! ;)
I also say – What the fuck?!
This rigid dichotomy that is propped up by both academics and activists is pure hatred and a major setback to all facets of social change. There are several foundations for this dichotomy but the predominant one – the notion that academics have no field experience and that activists are all field experience with no basis in fact or analysis – discourages cross-pollination. Further, it discourages new alliances and individuals from joining forces with groups and ideologies that prop up this standard.
The activist/academic dichotomy has particular ramifications for Gender and Women’s Studies Departments and Socialist organizations. Why the ISO so adamantly believes that socialism and feminism cannot go together – and further, why Gender and Women’s Studies as a discipline would encourage a way of thinking that is entirely outside of socialist thought – is beyond me. Exactly what kind of thinking do GWS departments encourage, and how does it distract from socialist ideologies? How does it prevent feminists and feminist academics from identifying capitalism as a primary institutional social problem?
Perhaps the ISO sees feminism as looking at gender and nothing else. Perhaps the ISO has had no exposure to feminism or GWS – certainly not enough to know that, particularly GWS programs, are looking more and more at issues of class – certainly not enough to know that capitalism is routinely criticized in GWS classrooms.
The ISO has been completely unexposed to feminism and therefore, their own socialist history. If they truly read as much as they acclaim, if they truly understood and had grounds for their claims that GWS programs train their students to think differently so that one may not see capitalism as an underlying cause for the current political climate in the U.S. and further, the social structures, then they would know that there is a long and rich correlation between socialism and feminism within both academic thought and activism.
Feminism has danced with socialism since socialism first made its way into the political arena. Though many women felt ostracized from socialist thought because it was dominated by men, women certainly identified with socialism. Most importantly, women contributed to socialist thought in under-recognized ways.
It is evident that the ISO needs to brush up on their reading. Some great feminist and socialist authors throughout almost 100 years of history include:
Alexandra Kollanti
Angela Davis
Emma Goldman
Barbara Ehrenreich
Donna Haraway
Nellie Wong
Clara Zetkin
When finished, perhaps we can discuss the ways in which feminism and socialism do, in fact, have the ability to think together and to contribute to one another.
Yes, the two ideologies that cannot go together. Yes, the two identities that cannot go together. Yes, the two histories that are seemingly distinct. They go together!
To humor you: There are specifically two feminist theories that are split with socialism.
1. Marxist Feminism: Marxist feminism generally asserts that capitalism plays a primary role in women’s lives and the oppression of women and therefore, needs to be eradicated and replaced with a more socialist society in order to achieve gender equality. It relies on Marxist theories and incorporates a stronger gender analysis of such theories.
2. Socialist Feminism: Socialist feminism is a broader version of Marxist feminism. It argues for the eradication of capitalism as a primary factor in women’s oppression while taking a radical feminist position regarding patriarchy. Socialist feminism tends to believe that both patriarchy and capitalism as institutions perpetuate women’s oppression, so both need to be eliminated in order to achieve liberation from economic and cultural forces.
It doesn’t get any more blatant than that. Feminism and socialism intricately go together – in theory and in practice. Gender and Women’s Studies – as the mother to these academic feminist theories – is innately connected to socialist thought. Clearly – ever so clearly – GWS does not teach its students to think differently from socialists.
In conclusion, feminism is about correcting the oppression of people through equality and equity while examining this oppression primarily through the lens of gender. Socialism is about correcting the oppression of people through economic equality and equity. The two may be different in foundation and theories, but there are places where they converge. Most importantly, they share ideas of oppression and visions of the future.
If nothing else, both socialism and feminism are founded on theories that were written by dead academics who were also activists; these theories are contemporarily used by both camps. Take a hint!
Disclaimer: While my status as an academic - which was assumed based on little information - was wrongly assumed to be disassociated with activism. Most of my work involves the convergence of the two. I will also state that while I am educated, my class background was also entirely wrongly assumed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
