Prostitution and Communism

[St Leo]

Well, that's communists for you. Still, I like her analysis and observations, even I don't quite agree with her recommended solutions.

[chequita guevara]

It's funny how anti-communists always try and point to the problem of shirkers as an example of cay communism will fail, and then point to efforts to combat shirking as slavery.

[JohnT]

"shirkers"

[St Leo]

Efforts to combat shirking are slavery IMHO. Politico-economic systems are definitely something that people should be able to choose themselves. Punishing people for something they didn't will or do onto themselves is wrong.

Being co-erced into a communist utopia by Marxist idealogues is no better than being co-erced into a capitalist utopia by Libertarian neo-Feudalist Randian Objectivists.

[BlackCat]

Alexandra Kollontai may describe the situation pretty well as it was in 1921, but I can't see any relevance as todays prostitution.

Women don't have to prostitute themself by marriage today - admitted a lot of *****es do it but as a shortcut to that they don't wan't to work for - not of nescessity.

Elder sisters don't have to prostitute themself to support large amounts of younger siblings.

Still there are plenty of prostitutes.

Certainly, many do it because of drug addiction, but they are far from being the main part.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by St Leo
Efforts to combat shirking are slavery IMHO. Politico-economic systems are definitely something that people should be able to choose themselves. Punishing people for something they didn't will or do onto themselves is wrong.

In a society of plenty, those who don't work aren't a drag on society. In revolutionary Russia at the time that Kollantai was writing, production had collapsed, they were under assault by 14 countries, and fighting a civil war, and had just finished fighting three years of WWI! A reasonable person might consider that to be something akin to exceptional circumstances which require exceptional measures.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


In a society of plenty, those who don't work aren't a drag on society. In revolutionary Russia at the time that Kollantai was writing, production had collapsed, they were under assault by 14 countries, and fighting a civil war, and had just finished fighting three years of WWI! A reasonable person might consider that to be something akin to exceptional circumstances which require exceptional measures.

Surely, trying to gain and maintain power with force is certainly to be considered exceptional circumstances, and if anyone tries to oppose, exceptional measures are of course allowed.

[chequita guevara]

Given that the Soviets were elected, they represented the will of the Russian people at the time the civil war broke out. The invading countries certainly had no mandate, nor did the generals who sought to reimpose the Tsar or make themselves dictator of Russia. No one was fighting to restore the unelected Provisional Government or the dismissed Constituant Assembly, regardless of how you might feel about those institutions. The only organizations in that war that had any legitimacy were the Soviets.

[BlackCat]

That might be, but sadly they forgot how they got that legitimacy, or rather, they dropped it because they would loose heavily and had to use supression to keep their power.

[Ned]

From the Kollantai article:

"The workers’ collective condemns the prostitute not because she gives her body to many men but because, like the legal wife who stays at home, she does no useful work for the society."

But Che says this is no longer the case, or is it the case of ideal communism, because there is plenty and shirkers can be tolerated. So, is prostitution and marriage where the wife stays at home, which commies contend is a form of prostitution, OK?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by BlackCat
That might be, but sadly they forgot how they got that legitimacy, or rather, they dropped it because they would loose heavily and had to use supression to keep their power.

I don't disagree.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
So, is prostitution and marriage where the wife stays at home, which commies contend is a form of prostitution, OK?

Without a money economy, for what could you prostitute yourself? Consider though that Kollantai was writing not about communism, but the proto-socialist society in which she lived, and in the formative years of that society.

As for wives (or husbands) staying home, if we have the abundence to allow it, I see no reason not to. One would hope they'd chose to develop themselves more fully, taking advantage of neighborhood or workplace based creches, however.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Without a money economy, for what could you prostitute yourself? Consider though that Kollantai was writing not about communism, but the proto-socialist society in which she lived, and in the formative years of that society.

As for wives (or husbands) staying home, if we have the abundence to allow it, I see no reason not to. One would hope they'd chose to develop themselves more fully, taking advantage of neighborhood or workplace based creches, however.

In a society where there was such abundance that noone had to work, would anyone actually work at all? Why even have schools? From the earliest age, people would just play and have fun.

But, truly, such a society cannot exist except in some fantasyland. So the concept of a requirement to work must be introduced. But this is where the vice of prostitution to a commie is exposed. The prostitute is a free-enterpriser, who does no productive work, and like a housewife, must be condemned.

So, in truth, communism will always condemn prostitution for the same reasons given by Kollantai. They trade sex for support and do not perform productive work.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
In a society where there was such abundance that noone had to work, would anyone actually work at all? Why even have schools? From the earliest age, people would just play and have fun.

Because humans are creative creatures who take pride in doing and accomplishing things. We fullfill our creative and productive emotional needs through work and it helps us to define a sense of self. Work does not have to be the drudgery that it is in class society. Furthermore, much of the repetitive, uninteresting work can either be automated or shared. For example, maybe each of us has to spend one day (obviously different days) a month collecting garbage for four hours. It may be more inefficient from a time and motion perspective to have everyone do it rather than have someone "specialize" in it, but is it really right to waste human potential specializing in collecting garbage?

Why would people learn? You have children, don't you, Ned? Don't they ask questions about how the world works, why things are the way they are? And of course, society has a material interest in ensure that the future generations are educated. Why assume we'll just sit around playing on an Xbox all day?

[Ned]

Che, so you suggest the average woman, between 13 and 23, would volunteer to perform sex services for men?