127. Feminism, an industrialist's dream

-
I realise I am about to open a huge hornets nest, but in thinking about the incorporation of women to the workplace in the 50s and 60s, a critical step on the emancipation of women, as many would tell you, I cannot help but thinking also about the impact that this had on the value of labour in its ages old to and fro with capital for the share of the wealth created in the economy. By doubling the supply of labour overnight, it over time halved its value. The result is that a working couple today has, all else being equal, similar relative acquisitive power to a one worker couple in the 60s, whilst corporate profits have exploded since. This is a bad deal for workers and a capitalist dream. Women should, of course, have access to the workplace in fully equal terms, but the way this should work, in the interest of the working class, should have been with one of the couple, it does not matter who, entering the labour force, thus preserving the unit value of labour and the price it commands

Length: 1,001 characters 
Location: Hereford, UK

Comments

Melkisecebe said…
As long as corporations are designed to maximize profit, social changes will always be twisted to erode workers rights. Many different things could have happened when women started being part of the labour force. As you mention, a free and not gender biased choice in couples for work. We could also be all working half time (can you imagine? 3 days a week each in a family? That would have been heaven). Of course it was not like that, because while the aim of feminism was to achieve equal rights for women, these rights are achieved within the frame of capitalism. Another good option to achieve equal rights for women would have been to monetarize all the unpaid work that they have been doing for centuries absolutely free, raising also their total status. Women could have got money and social power by caring of kids and elders, cooking and cleaning. Unpaid activities that, by the way, are absolutely necessary for the system to survive. It did not happen for the same reason, how would the law of maximum profit accept to pay for something that is already being done for free?
When you aim to be fast, you run; when aim to eat, you look for food. When your aim is to accumate goods, you maximize profit over everything else. That is the aim of our current social system and that is what we get. And that is why robots will do everything and we will have no jobs or income, it is cheaper, it is better, some will be richer and they will Not care about the rest.
August 5, 2020 at 2:42 PM
Niccy said…
Feminism is not the positive liberator that it purports to be. That's for sure.

It's a hornets nest that needs to be opened, like so many other things, and talked about. Like so many other things, there is no black and white single answer, and those things that are most worth discussing and addressing don't come with those neat and simple answers.
August 6, 2020 at 4:18 AM
Elia said…
Estoy de acuerdo
August 6, 2020 at 5:42 AM
SantiDominguezV said…
Thank you for the comments, guys, I reply to all of them in one. Of course, women should have exactly the same access to the workplace as men do, the same prospects for career growth and the same work/life balance. The problem occurs when the feminist dialectic opposes man's power, rather than the power of some. Feminists (and women in general) should work with most men (I think it is most, but however many men believe in equal rights) to further the prospects and rights of all, indistinctly of gender. It is unnecessary to make a distinction. And yes, we should, as a consequence of women joining the workplace in vast numbers, all be working 3 days per week and sharing house work and child rearing, which should indeed be remunerated (with a basic income). Basic income is in fact probably the most implementable solution to these problems and, even though it is strongly resisted by many (mostly those doing well and who don't need it), the advent of automation and machines may well make it inevitable. It is also easy to afford, just taxing properly corporate profits and large wealth (for example, a 30% tax of Jeff Bezos wealth would suffice to pay a €600 basic income to all Greek, Romanian, Bulgarian and Hungarian citizens over 18), bringing them along economically,increasing their acquisitive power which would help reactivate the EU economy and liberating them to take more risk both with job selection and entrepreneurship.

I do think it is probably pretty obvious to anyone who is not seriously sick where the money is better deployed...
August 9, 2020 at 6:12 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

149. It's all about the bike

-
The title of this post is shared with a book by Rob Penn, based on the construct of Rob travelling all over the World to his favourite manufacturers of bike parts, to build his perfect bike. It’s a great idea and an enjoyable read. For me, it’s not about a specific bike, but about being on a bike. Specially, on the high roads. The great passes of the Alps, the Pyrenees and even of other, minor chains. The tunnels of Tourmalet from St Marie de Campan, the innumerable hairpins of Finestre, the desolate heights of Iseran, the majestic solitude of the climb over the last wall to the glacial cirque of Troumousse. The bike opens up landscapes in a way that no other means of transport does. Silent. Outdoor. Hard. Reaching each peak demands pain and pays back in satisfaction and awe at nature’s beauty. Every descent demands temerity and rewards with the occasional feeling of that perfect high speed line through the bends. A good bike is beautiful to look at, but even more beautiful to look fro
Read more

34. The 'Todos tus libros' platform

-
My eye has been caught in the last few days by an initiative started in Spain to protect local bookshops. The idea is simple and can be extended to any other industries. It aims to address the short term cash problem that independent bookshops can have due to the fact that they are currently closed and therefore can’t generate revenues, whilst still needing to pay most of their bills, especially as government help is there theoretically in some cases, but can be harder or more complex to access than would be ideal. ‘Todos tus libros’, which means ‘All your books’ allows you to spend money now with your bookshop, which you can then redeem for any books later, once they are back open. This is a great idea. It seems obvious, like all great ideas. It could save many retailers (and other companies) during these difficult times, if they have the support of their communities. And consumers should really support it, unless we want to come back to a World of large chains and internet shopping
Read more

28. Patience is one of the differences between life science and property development

-
I read with relief that the irresponsible touting of hydroxychloroquine as a miracle coronavirus remedy by Trump and his acolytes has ceased after the drug was shown to have, if anything, a detrimental effect to survival chances in a retrospective clinical trial. Trump was enthusiastic about early evidence and could not help himself. Those who work in life science know that every single day, new treatments and tests against all kind of conditions show promise. Most of them fall by the wayside during the stringent marketing regulatory approval process designed to agree the ethics of their use and to establish their safety and efficacy. An early, anecdotal article on promise is no more than an attempt by the scientific team to inform of the potential and attract some funding, echoed by media looking to produce some content. Patience is needed. This I can imagine is hard to understand for a property developer with a rich dad, whose patience muscle has probably not had enough exercise L
Read more