Conservative Socialism: Thoughts on Feminism and Nationalism

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was postulated by International Relations (IR) scholars that Nationalism as an ideology would become split between Neoliberalism and Authoritarianism. We know that there has been an ongoing surge in Nationalism since the 1990s, with some of them having led to the rise of new nations and the rekindling of old animosities across the Eurasian landmass. Ideas like Balkanization, Anti-Globalization, Americanization, Euroscepticism, and Postmodernism were also emerging around that same decade. The explosion of “Nationalisms” cannot be excluded to more well-known ones like “Czech and Slovakian Nationalisms” or “Croatian and Serbian Nationalisms” with competing claims about Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia respectively.   

Some caution deserves to be raised regarding “Female Nationalisms” with competing claims about a “Female Consciousness” applicable to the womenfolk of all nations. Such arguments are being made in the context of Civil Society where womenfolk constitute themselves as a Civil Society separate from the actual Civil Society-as-Patriarchy. In Production for Profit and Production for Utility, where it is literally customary to objectify women, the problem is inevitable and devoid of meaningful resolutions. In Production for Dasein, however, this sort of thinking is outlandish within a Totality all women and men engage in the State of Total Mobilization and be recognized for their own achievements as Selves by the State. Women and men, as members of the Totality, contribute to their Totality’s National Consciousness.    

The Patriarchy is only about as powerful as the Quantities of Kapital and Schuld at its disposal, courtesy of the Market/Mixed Economy, Fractional-Reserve Banking and Double-Entry Account Bookkeeping. Neither “Patriotic” nor “Paternalistic,” the Patriarchy consistently treats women as Kapital and Schuld. With Kapital and Schuld, it is next to impossible to ascertain how women in general are receiving their just treatment compared to the rest of the Totality. Most Feminists are inclined to agree with this Author for arguing why there is something seriously wrong about this following statement:   

“Men accrue more Kapital and less Schuld than women, whereas women accrue less Kapital and more Schuld than men.”  

The Patriarchy would reflexively defer to the “Economic Calculation Problem” in order to justify this. It is part of that ‘Perverse Incentive’ related to “the greatest Quantity of Kapital for the least Quantity of Schuld.” Since there are so many factors preventing women from creating as much Kapital and Schuld as men, it becomes inevitable under Production for Profit and Production for Utility to give it the “Full Faith and Credit” of a Fiat Currency. I feel that most Feminists would also agree with me on this next statement:

“Everybody contributes Arbeit and Geld, yet certain people contribute far more than others.”

From the standpoint of Feminists, reading The Fourth Estate, it is bemusing to learn that women and men under the Work-Standard are equally capable of contributing Arbeit and Geld under an infinite number of contexts among the Domains of the Work-World. The “Figure of the Arbeiterin,” the female analogue to the “Figure of the Arbeiter,” finds her tools of empowerment through proactive engagements with the Totality and the State. In a functioning Council Democracy, a woman ought to be empowered in some way, shape or form to participate in the SSE, the VCS Economy, the Reciprocal-Reserve Banking System, the Council State, and the National Intranet. She looks after the Totality, the Totality looking after her in return. She fulfills her Legal Duties to the State, the State in turn upholding its Constitutional Obligations to her. The lynchpin that gives life to this image is of course the Work-Standard.       

Even so, a point of contention continues to exist in Feminism since the Death of Bretton Woods. The ideology remains divided over competing Female Nationalisms about Transpeople. Some Feminists argue that Transwomen, no matter how much they try, will never become real women. The term “Female Nationalism” is appropriate here because this is an eschatological conflict over a particular aspect of human consciousness, which in itself is split into a multiplicity of different National Consciousnesses. Unlike political conflicts, where the participants are compassionate and empathetic enough to compromise, eschatological conflicts are absolute and irreconcilable.

One of the fundamental problems associated with most forms of Nationalism is that the political claims of a particular Nationalism can be easily opposed by those espoused by another Nationalism. A Nationalism gets to define the National Consciousness until dethroned by another Nationalism. Instead of Nationalisms bordering on Chauvinism, the State of Total Mobilization needs new Nationalisms whose Patriotism toward the Homeland is both Paternalistic and Maternalistic.

Categories: Politics

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: