 |
|  |
 |
|
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.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
BlackCat
|
|
quote: 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.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
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.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000 time: 00:34
|
|
quote: 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
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:34
|
|
quote: 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.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000 time: 00:34
|
|
quote: 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?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
JohnT

|
 |
Capitalist
Mar 1999 time: 00:34
|
|
quote: One would hope they'd chose to develop themselves more fully, taking advantage of neighborhood or workplace based creches, however. |
Now, this is the sort of ignorant comment that pisses me off:
1. The purpose of parenthood is to develop the child.
2. This is such a time-consuming and exhausting task that only those without children can assume that one can just blithely "chose to develop themselves" - and has the time and energy to do it.
3. Learning about children and how to deal with them requires a great deal of development as one changes from a self-centered shmuck to a person concerned more about others.
4. Neighborhood "creches." Makes taking care of 10 0-5 year-olds sound as peaceful and as easy as tending a garden. "Creches." 
And comments like this just fly in the face of reality:
quote: 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? |
So you want Godel, Escher, Bach, et al to become generalists, good at a lot of things but great in none? You think it's more of a waste of human potential to have people "specialize" in any endeavor (including the removal of waste) than to insist that nobody specialize at all - regardless of your aptitude in other fields? Rather than having a brilliant mathematician who does math and only math, you'd prefer a "pretty-good" mathematician who is spending much of his intellectual capacity removing trash, being a traffic cop, and whatever "menial" job you think is unworthy of "human potential?"
No wonder Communism is a theology of the workers and peasants - only people as ignorant as peasants can fall for such crapola... except for those who like to build intellectual castles with foundations made of sand.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34. Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|