Nowadays, the ideat that feminism is somehow connected with the left political movements, such as communism, socialism, anticapotalism, is very popular. Allegedly these movements bring more benefits for women, because they provide the social support of mothers, legal restrictions of labor discrimination, destruction of the "traditional" values.
However, we must not forget that all currently existing political movements are controlled by men and of course pursue male interests. They promise women some benefits in order to once again use our resource for the sake of coming to power. Women are a very effective social group to use, because they are numerous, not united, accustomed to defending other people's interests.

In fact, the current economy is male-friendly, whether it be free-market or state-regulated. This is due to the fact that the economy is most dependent on new people who will 1) work, 2) consume goods and services, and 3) pay taxes.
Thus, everything is built on the reproductive exploitation of women. If women stopped giving birth en masse, then any economy, including the socialist one, would have to go through a severe crisis, there would be a colossal drop in the quality of life.
Therefore, all that socialist men actually offer is the transition of women (our reproductive ability) from private property (belonging to the husband) to collective property (belonging to the state).This is the very destruction of "traditional values": the state takes over the function of the father, it "feeds" mothers on maternity leave, provides a minimum level of income and assistance with the child. Similarly, it also takes on the function of protecting females from aggressive males, which was previously performed by the husband.
It may seem to some that this makes the conditions for women more comfortable, and perhaps it does, if you look at it from a domestic point of view. However, in exchange for more comfortable exploitation, the state demands from women 1) constant reproduction in the right quantities (yes, the ban on abortion is not only a right trick) and 2) loyalty to the existing system. Women are still in the same infantilized position, but no longer in relation to the husband and family, but to the state, which plays the role of a guardian.
Of course, this has nothing to do with the victory over the patriarchy, because this demands that political decisions are made by women, and the economy adapts to the interests and needs of women. We have nothing to compare to, there is no such historical experience, however, it is not necessary to know how such a society would look like, just as men did not know what economic system their power over women would result in. It is enough that women solidarize as a group and receive large-scale opportunities to influence society, then the economy will be transformed into a form that is more convenient for us.

As for the existing political movements, it is possible to cooperate with them, both with the right and the left, but only (!) in a tactical form to achieve specific intermediate goals (measures against migrants, the right to abortion, etc.). At the same time, there must be a strong movement of its own, and in no case should feminism be included in a number of other movements "for social justice." Women, as have already been said, are the very resourceful social base, and it will be better for us if we solidarize and realize our group interests, because then they will have to look for an approach to us and offer more serious benefits for cooperation.


Author: Philosopher's Stone of Artémis
Translator: Yulia N.