[mim3@mim.org comments: This following commentary is completely off base, because the writer has not read MIM literature and simply sides with whatever his friend said last. For the record, this came in the midst of the MacKinnon vs. Reich discussion and tries to claim that we at MIM do not deal with desire! That's ridiculous considering our at-length handling of MacKinnon. Quite the contrary, it is Nakived who made a point of not calling h/herself "feminist." She usually is in the position of denying anything about gender. We at MIM do believe there is a relatively autonomous gender oppression--unlike most calling themselves Marxist. In this post, Nakived switches positions and makes false accusations regarding MIM's line.
Nakived and Gerber also attempt to negate the role that leadership plays under the dictatorship of the proletariat. They fail to understand that power is increasingly centralized and concentrated. Under the dictatorship of the proletariat, the party leaders have access to the means of production unless there is a class struggle to keep the party off the capitalist-road.]
To MIM from J. Gerber (he finally got to this) Written March 3, 1998
MIM Theory 13 Page 111 1st two paragraphs: Factoids MIM criticism of Nakived on Marylin French's book War Against Women.
MIM writes about infanticide in China and doesn't see that the urge/desire/will/temptation to control/dominate/abuse women isn't economic, isn't instantly changed by the rise to power of Mao and a few good men. The anti-female man pretended to change rather than be punished by Mao and the good Chinese Reds allied with Mao. But after Mao, these millions of anti-female men and their sons only revived female infanticide and other numerous other anti-female practices too, infanticide COULD BE economic, similar to abortion. But the whole rest of what they revived is purely based on and caused by DESIRE. You refuse to understand how DESIRE makes people DO things! It's amazing you can be that dumb. Their innate or almost-innate will reasserted itself at the first safe opportunity to resubjugate women. They do this out of sexual desire, they DESIRE IT, so they DO IT like any other perverts SEEK AND FIND their quarries. To use an American example. An obsessed child molester always has this warped desire to do things to children, little boys and girls, aged three even, prior to maybe even murdering the boy for perverted sex thrills (snuff sex even). Despite this insane sick obsession, this DESIRE, the criminal will NOT attack the boy in the presense of cops and the boy's adult relatives because he fears punishment or death!! His obsession did NOT leave, he merely postponed action till a more opportune time.
In the same way, the urge to regulate women or worse lays dormant when the "cop" Mao Tse Tung and his own Secret Police (DUH!!) was there, waiting a more opportune time. If you want a non Chinese real life example, use Afghanistan when the Communists and Russian influence was high women were well treated: BY LAW! After the Moslems defeated the communists Afghanis and their Russian allies, millions of Afghani men swiftly started to physically CONTROL women; this instant change (it might seem instant to MIM type naive people) was really the REASSERTION of the always strong but hidden WILL these men ALWAYS had. They didn't mind spending the money on veils or paying doctors for lunatic operations on women and little girls. An economic loss, a useless expense.
A certain type of man is likely to wage war on women. Another type of man is NOT. He wants orgasms etc, but NOT WAR with women and NOT CONTROL of women. These two TYPES do not easily change because the economic system changes. In the event of change, it is easier to change a man into being anti female than the reverse if even a tiny bit of this kind of twisted sickness is IN that man to begin with. The reason men are anti-female has NOTHING TO DO with economics, it's something VERY VERY deep and twisted and I don't think it can be fixed. Nakived told you: it's a FEAR of letting go, FEAR of losing control, FEAR of what is more like wild nature and FEAR of their OWN nature. It is a TWISTING of their own nature. And it's like a fixation or obsession ----- end of what Jeff wrote.
Nakived says: I'll comment: it would not be hard at all to have a, DEJURE, communist system, a DEJURE gender-equal system with men in it that STILL HAD THESE DESIRES/FEARS and women in it AS PENT UP as they are in the west. It would be all DEJURE and not DEFACTO at all. And DEFACTO pedophiles would DEJURE watch their actions 100% of the time OR ELSE face the gun or gulag or worse. THIS is NOT a change at all. It's a BAND AID used to cover up a CANCER. And we could have DEJURE non-racism with DEFACTO racism waiting to explode in genocide at the LEAST HINT of slackening of the ARMED anti-racist-patrols.
What did we HAVE under MAO? DEJURE Communism with a Political Police to make sure it was DEJURE. What did we have once the Gang of 4 fell? A war. Some who wanted to keep Communism and the advances but they had no real way to do this DEJURE. They fought a war and LOST it to those who were, ALL THE WHILE, hidden, quiet DEFACTO klippoths who were TIRED of "behaving themselves" just as child molestors are TIRED of behaving themselves when COPS watch them. Just as racists are TIRED of abstaining from saying the word "nigger" and all the rest of the shit they WANT TO DO. It doesn't matter WHO was the top man, Hua, Gang, Chiang (ms. Mao) or whoever, even Deng. The way a group runs a business or enterprise OR COUNTRY or tribe, or FAMILY even, has more to do with the GROUP ITSELF, the PEOPLE IN IT THEMSELVES, even if they are "allowed" to do this or that.
HERE ONE SMALL PROOF: In selling the vacuum cleaner, a 300 rebate is given if you buy right then and there. If you have a vacuum cleaner to trade in, then you are "given a rebate of 300 to buy right now AND trade in what you have" whether that be a 50 dollar mini broom or a 1800 dollar Kirby is irrevelant. So then, WHAT are people GETTING if they trade in an older Kirby? 300? And if they trade in a broom? 300? And if they have NOTHING to trade in? 300! So then, they get ZERO for trade in! Bill can't sleep doing such things: he EXPLAINS that he can take the product they have, say, a Kirby, as trade in and give them about 100 for it, PLUS THE 300 REBATE FOR BUYING NEW VACUUM SAME DAY, or they can put an add in a paper and get a LOT MORE for it, but it would be some work, or they can KEEP their Kirby and STILL get the 300 if buy same day. He'd also have to clean up the thing in order to be ABLE to sell it as a salesperson in business so he DOES offer a lot less than anyone COULD get from an ad in paper. But he explains that the 300 rebate is for NOTHING EXCEPT buying that same day. HE IS THE ONLY ONE who does this and he makes sure his own salespeople ALSO do it. But his office is the ONLY office that does this. NO ONE forces him to do this; in fact, legally he doesn't HAVE TO -he CAN rip them off and legally it's not even a rip off! It's HIS CHOICE to BE HONEST about it. OK? GET IT?
No, you don't want to get it. He explains the philosophy to his people. Sure, some might think he is a SUCKER. I think he'd make a good Commie if he lived in such a system! He is that KIND OF PERSON, MIM. NOTHING can change him, even the fact that he can LEGALLY do otherwise but PERSONALLY finds it abhorrent to do such things. Bill would make a LOUSY Mandarin. OK? He'd make a GOOD NKVD. LIKE Stalin, Bill is NOT a rich man and yet he surely COULD BE if he did what he was ALLOWED to do in this business. But he sleeps soundly KNOWING he harmed no one. KNOWING he didn't stomp on anyone. KNOWING he was honest. He also BELIEVES IN the thing he is selling as not only the BEST thing, but a NECESSITY; he really believes this (he also has allergies, so do his kids). If you want HOSPITAL kind of clean house, this IS the product to buy AND USE regularly. 30 year old ones are STILL in perfect condition - so it's NO hype.
Communism in China and the advances were made at the barrel of a GUN and massive political police. NOT SO MUCH of this was going on in the USSR even if you believe the CIA stats. They did not NEED gender reforms in the USSR for one thing. They hardly needed to force collectives on anyone either since what WAS agricultural wanted to do it long before Stalin. They had to FORCE the peasants to NOT just out and out massacre the kulaks at first. But did the kulaks STOP? No. So in the end they had to be dealt with as the peasants had TRIED to deal with them SINCE STENKA RAZIN!
You know, it's like the guy who casually fucks a girl, and she is all for it herself, nothing is forced, in the past and daddy comes, seeing that his little girl is now PREGNANT and so we get to hear, 5 years later, how the guy who fucked her and this pregnant damsel are "happily married." No, the guy married her OR ELSE GET SHOT by the father holding a gun. Chinese SOCIETY and STRUCTURE was turned upside down by Mao. This is NOT the case in the USSR for those people at all except for the mere 5 fucking percent of them that either had to flee, perish, or hide, the vast majority of people were SET FREE by the Reds and the only thing forced on them was "need to industrialize right away." Just some WORK, is all! JUST WORK. The men were not FORCED to treat women any differently under Stalin as they did under a Czar. YOU are NOT FACING THIS. YOU don't want to acknowledge DESIRE and yet the ONLY way to understand the sheer lunatic destructive force of imperialism/capitalism as it is OBVIOUS TODAY TO ALL, is to understand DESIRE at its ROOT. THANATOS is the WILL TO PERISH. What the fuck do YOU see capitalism DOing to the species? MAKING IT PERISH? I see this. REALLY see it.
Just as there are those that came in to Bill and were SO PROUD that they "REALLY MADE OUT" by getting a KIRBY from a customer. Bill was shocked that anyone would be proud of this. He ordered the person to return it or show it and then offer a 200 cookware set and explain to the customer. Just like that guy is NOT happily married to his wife, he DOES NOT want that kid he works to take care of either. He wanted to fuck: NOTHING MORE. He got married because he was threatened with death: simple as that. That's not a marriage. Transplant that idea to Maoist China. It was Communist THE SAME WAY that guy is shot-gun married. Sure, the "Bills" were in China, wanted to keep it Red, but they got outvoted by the ones only too PROUD to "GET OVER" on people. Now, TELL ME you don't know what I mean. TELL ME you can't grasp these comparisons or what I'm SAYing.
WHY is power eroticized in the west? YOU refuse to face what I said it was: S&M in some form. DOMINANCE and the desire to have submissives. And SURE - MONEY is a good way to GET this desire fulfilled in the world. MONEY can buy a lot of things, hit men, cops, you name it. But MONEY CAN NOT BUY BILL. MONEY COULD NOT BUY STALIN OR LYSENKO OR DZERZHINSKY. WHY NOT? What IS IT about these people that MONEY couldn't buy them? Perhaps they already HAD all they wanted in life: and one does not need MUCH to be happy, you know. What can a twisted pervert desiring 2 year old children for sex DO with MONEY? FULFILL his sick, twisted desire.
I'm tempted to wonder what YOU FEAR about seeing this simple thing. YOUR OWN DESIRES? EH?
Andy could not BARE to even look at Dawn after she had that CAPD tube in her belly due to kidney loss: FORGET SEX. Not a chance. But an Afghani man gets a ROCK HARD ON when he even CONTEMPLATES a chopped up, sewn up, butchered cunt and on a LITTLE GIRL!. OK? It TURNS HIM ON and so SURE, as soon as the Red COPS are gone to PREVENT him from doing "his thing" he goes and does it with a vengance as soon as he can, veils and all. I assume veils COST MONEY they are ready and willing and HOT to spend just so long as they can smother females with them. SICK FUCKS. I have the cure: LEAD. In the HEAD. There is NO reforming such men, NO fixing them. NO rehabilitating them. What's wrong with them is TOO DEEP to fix. Their INSTINCT ITSELF is WARPED.
WHY are 3 year old Thailanders for sale in sex shops? Because SOMEONE desires sex with 3 year old children. Cure? FIND A WAY to find out who these people are that HAVE these desires: even if they don't ACT on them. ELIMINATE THEM. Now - THAT is eugenics, Nakived style.
It's the same thing with the shot-gun "do it or else" thing about everyone HAVING TO dress the same way under Mao. It's ONLY clothes. So WHY did they stop dressing in comfortable clothing? I still wear the same kind of clothing I always wore - it's in no style that exists here that anyone can identify except COMFORTABLE. Point is, as soon as they COULD stop wearing the Mao Suit, they DID. WHY? Stalin wore a comfortable uniform and an old beat up pair of boots and slippers all his life! Buy him new, and he chose the old comfortable ones. But no one tried to COPY Stalin's style of dress and no one was forced to. People wore what they felt like wearing; it was no big deal. Sure, uniforms in a school or army would be CHEAPER and it was only the few klippoths that were ENAMOURED (emotionally obscured) by the fancy hoity toity western fashions and GRAND designs of dressing gowns or what-not. I made a dressing gown for New Years dance club. I took a BATHROBE I got from lost and found. I cut the thing in half and sewed up the bottom with an elastic to make a skirt and I made a blouse of the upper part using 5 cent punch on snaps! So now I wear this "blouse" to work with pants and everyone thinks it's SO FANCY. HA!
It's nothing but a used and lost and found piece of HALF a bathrobe. It's not even supposed to be "outdoor wear" and yet there it is, a fancy blouse! HA! HALF a bathrobe! It's VERY comfortable! But I have to wonder, WHO THE FUCK would buy this TO wear as a bathrobe? Whoever it was, they'd never think of (oh my god) wearing it outside to go out or go to work in it! Oh dear. And to think, the street punk looking types pay FIFTY DOLLARS for those junky looking t-shirts they wear "in order to look" like deliberate slobs. They pay over 100 dollars for those JUNKY sneakers and yet my leather boots cost me all of TEN DOLLARS and are SUPER comfortable (and over 20 years old).
So WHY did the Chinese STOP wearing the Mao Suit? You dismiss that but you are NOT looking at the INNER BEINGS of people when you dismiss it. You are not fathoming that a NATION of klippoths ruled by a manic despressive (Churchill) would do klippothic things and could do NOTHING BUT that. There it is: shot gun clothing. Remove the shot gun, the clothing gets thrown out and changed. Remove the threat of law and the father, and that husband would LEAVE his wife and kid, never would have married the girl or even SAW his kid. So it's NOT a marriage. And whatever it was Mao did for Chinese (SOME Chinese people) it wasn't REALLY communism just as that marriage is not a marriage once the gun is removed. Yes, he did a WHOLE LOT FOR the people there, but he was no Stalin and the Chinese PEOPLE were not the same people as the Soviets. The ones in China that wanted to continue Communism should have just made THEIR own nation and severed themselves from the others. Or rather, they should have TRIED to do this. At least SAID THEY WANTED to do it, if only "for the record."
This is NOT to say (as you probably will claim I say) that I'm against what Mao DID do and yes, I see he had no other WAY to do it except what he did. YOU dualize this. I don't. I see clearly that if you want to make modern communism WITHOUT mass slaughter of 99% of humanity, you have to do it all via the SHOT GUN and TERROR. I never denied this.