1932: Playing with the Japanese Communist Party with a doll

It’s not…completely impossible.

Li Desheng recalled the shocking scene where ten of the Red Army's fighting masters were hung up and beaten by a woman named UMP45.

To be honest, Ma Shiwu's appearance and outstanding performance greatly inspired the vast number of female comrades in the Soviet area and indirectly promoted the liberation of rural women.

Whenever someone says "women are so-and-so", someone will pull out UMP45 - look at her, and then you can try to say women are not good enough!

As a result, many male chauvinists, especially those who had been beaten by UMP45 or crushed by them in terms of knowledge, were speechless.

However, Li Desheng and many other high-ranking CCP officials secretly scoffed at this view, but they didn't say it because they didn't want to dampen the enthusiasm of the majority of women comrades.

Comrade Ma Shiwu is so strong and capable, what does that have to do with you, a woman who can't carry anything, can't lift anything, is lazy, can't even distinguish between grains, can't even beat a slightly stronger boy, and has only average education!

Just because she is okay doesn’t mean you are okay too!

If Mark knew what Li Desheng was thinking, he would probably follow suit and express the same opinion:

The lower-class laborers who led the British Empire now know that the glory of the British Empire has nothing to do with them. Are you planning to reap the benefits created by our girls?

what

No wonder later generations have been able to make a fortune by taking advantage of their predecessors. It turns out there is such a precedent.

…Since we can only admit that women are biologically inferior to men, and are less efficient and produce less in most labor, especially physical labor, then shouldn't they get less when distributing the fruits of their labor?"

Mark cuts the peeled orange into a large half and a small half:

"The more you work, the more you get; the less you work, the less you get; and no work, no gain. Whoever gives, whoever receives. This is a simple universal truth, isn't it? If those who give more always suffer, won't fairness and the balance of values ​​be disrupted?"

"Most importantly, will this, in the long run, lead those who suffer losses to believe they are being oppressed, or even to experience a new form of exploitation?"

New exploitation, or transfer payments.

This concept became very popular in later China.

Because everyone feels they are being forced to make transfer payments.

For example, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen always think they are so rich, but they have to pay a lot of taxes every year to support the poor in the central and western regions. They are being sucked dry and exploited.

But the "poor bastards" are also very aggrieved and angry. Under the pressure and policies of the central government, so much cheap labor, food, water resources, energy, transportation capacity, and industrial and agricultural products are sent to Shanghai every year. How should we account for this?

The same applies to issues concerning men and women.

As the female labor force participation rate has steadily declined (from 79.39% in 1990 to 68.57% in 2019, and has fallen from the top ten to the bottom fifty in the world), men have gradually discovered that they are being exploited by women through various means;

Women think that I'm the one taking care of the children and the household. So, after all, my housework is worth $124 million a year! It's you men who are exploiting us women! You're sucking our blood out of us women!

(Speaking of which, there is a very strange phenomenon. After the outbreak of the epidemic in 2019, the female labor participation rate suddenly increased. If it weren’t for the female data workers, I still haven’t figured out the reason - you can’t count technicians in it.)

Regardless of who is right or wrong, in a family where cooperation is essential for survival, it is difficult to settle such a mess. Working to earn money is hard, and taking care of the family and children is also hard.

However, the intensifying gender struggle between men and women fully reflects the ineffective resolution of distribution issues by the top authorities in the past few decades, which is in line with the increasingly fierce conflicts between labor and capital and the widening gap between the rich and the poor.

“New Exploitation…”

This word is too sensitive.

Li Desheng's eyes narrowed suddenly.

Indeed, if this continues for a long time, and those who contribute more receive less, then the principle of fairness and justice is violated. Then what is the essential difference between this and a landlord who works less or nothing but gets more through various means?

Isn't it all exploitation?

He, Li Desheng, and many other members of the Communist Party do not mind that they give more but receive less, but you cannot expect everyone to be a tolerant and generous man.

When someone suffers a loss, they will inevitably feel unhappy, and when they feel unhappy, they will definitely find a way to vent.

If you can't find the target or the target is too big to fight, the first choice is definitely to find trouble with the "exploiter".

If it turns out like this, it would be a real joke.

In a socialist country that claims that everyone is equal and that all are provided for, old and young, women and children, why didn't everyone start fighting against capitalism? Instead, men and women within the country started fighting first?

Hey!

Shame on you!

Shame on you!

However, Li Desheng frowned and thought for a while about this statement, and still disagreed:

"That's true, but overemphasizing this point can easily lead to social Darwinism. If we don't care for the vulnerable, can we still call it socialism? How do you answer this question?"

When talking to Li Desheng, of course, we cannot talk about the "basic base issue". In his eyes, all Chinese people are the "basic base", regardless of gender, age, strength or weakness.

So, from another perspective:

"What is socialism? One major difference between socialism and capitalism is its attitude towards the vulnerable: socialism never abandons or gives up, and it does its best to help them if resources allow. You're right about that.

“However, I have always insisted that as a socialist country, we should take care of certain vulnerable individuals, rather than a group that is too complex and has nothing to do with vulnerability.

"Take Ding Ling, for example. She was indeed a woman, but was she vulnerable? Her economic and political conditions were better than those of most men! Does the phrase 'taking care of women' mean we should allocate resources to care for people like her? Do you think that's appropriate?"

“That’s true, but governance of a country and society has costs. Excessive segmentation will cause the costs to rise to an unbearable level. We cannot identify each one individually, but can only use a certain group as a substitute.

“So this is the government’s responsibility. It’s really impossible to go into detail. Our productivity hasn’t developed to that level yet, and technology is far from that level. But we must adjust the distribution model and proportion within the big framework.

Mark snapped his fingers:

“Simply put, since we cannot achieve a completely fair and equitable distribution, the only option is to allow the party that suffers the loss and cedes more power to obtain some compensation and protection from other aspects as much as possible.

"Go on.

"From a family perspective, the current model of most Chinese families is still 'men work outside, women work inside,' with women shouldering the majority of housework and child-rearing, and their contributions are worthy of recognition."

"So, many men are happy to hand over their income and property to women for management, while they work hard outside to provide the necessary living and security for them and their children. Is this right?"

Li Desheng nodded and commented:

It’s patriarchal thinking, but it’s true.

"So, we want to promote the women's liberation movement, liberate productivity, and allow the majority of women to enter society and move beyond simple family life. Although this benefits women, isn't it actually undermining the power and interests of some men?"

"That's right...

Li Desheng's answer was a little difficult, but fortunately it was him who could put aside his emotions and think rationally. If it were some emotional fairies or stupid turtle men, they would have been furious by now and would have been labeled as such.

"Then, do you acknowledge that men are currently the main labor force in our country, the main force in creating wealth and paying taxes, and the core force in achieving revolution?"

"I admit it."

"That's right!"

Mark switched to Fujiwara Kanesaki mode at this time and said with a smile:

"So, have you figured out how to compensate and appease them? For this group of capable, energetic, yet unstable and difficult-to-manage men?"

Li Desheng took a deep breath and slowly uttered two words: "Marriage."

556 Talking about money only will not hurt feelings

What is marriage?

To explain it at a micro level, it is a voluntary long-term union between a man and a woman to form a family as husband and wife in terms of economic life, spiritual and material aspects.

But micro things do not have much significance for the macro. From the perspective of national governance, the meaning of marriage, strictly speaking, is only one - to stabilize society.

Because, as Engels said in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, marriage is "the modern individual family based on the open or hidden domestic slavery of women";

In other words, this is a product of the patriarchal era. In fact, marriage did not exist in the early days of human society and in the communist era, when its shadow was not yet visible.

So what exactly does it do?

It is very simple. It is a guarantee of sexual resources and reproductive rights allocated by the ruling group to the ruled, which is used to win over the men who are ruled and thus consolidate their own rule.

There's no way around it. The fighting power of a bunch of unemployed, homeless, and unattached single men is just too terrifying.

When they gather together, the terror is multiplied;

What’s even more terrible is that there is no shortage of beer halls, mustaches and idea kings everywhere, both in ancient and modern times, in China and abroad.

Therefore, rulers of all dynasties have been strictly guarding against this group of people, attacking them and trying to win them over.

There are those who would sacrifice everything to buy it off;

There are those who try their best to consume themselves to death;

There are those who are guided in the direction of romantic emasculation;

There are those who give them various weaknesses;

There are disciplines that make them value family;

There are also some who use nationalism, religion or other things to unite.

In short, in order to prevent this group of guys from rebelling or causing trouble, the rulers of various countries have been working very hard, and are even willing to give up part of their precious ruling power to avoid being overthrown by them who are becoming more and more powerful as time goes by.

(This is the core reason why the overall status of civilians in modern society far exceeds that of ancient times and is getting higher and higher)

Many people don't actually understand that from ancient times to the present, patriarchy and male power have always been two different things:

The former is an extension of ruling power, while the latter is the real "male power".

force".

In order to achieve their rule, the ruling group must implicitly treat women, or sexual resources, as a kind of property, distributing them to at least a considerable number of ordinary men who can afford to marry, and recognizing the gender dependency relationship in marriage;

In return, these men must obey the rule of the ruling group, which is why there is a saying that "those who have constant property have constant heart", because generally only those who "have constant property" can afford to marry a wife!

what?

The real poor?

The genes have been cut off and there will be no descendants.

If the ruling class refuses to give in, ordinary men will not be able to obtain sexual resources at all, but the ruling class itself will be destroyed by the angry male civilians.

In this repeated game, patriarchy and male power will be combined into one, and ordinary men will enjoy the little power allocated by the rulers and be loyal to the ruling class, and together they will become a mountain that oppresses ordinary women.

Don't say you didn't give women a chance. Even if you did, the problem is that it was useless!

Hundreds or even thousands of years ago, people had implemented the policy of "equal land distribution for men and women", but the problem was that women could not farm as well as men, nor could they beat men in competing for resources, and eventually things returned to their original state.

Communists want to liberate all mankind?

Great indeed.

Liberate women?

Liberating productivity and eliminating economic and legal oppression is also a good thing.

thing

But what about ordinary men whose interests are harmed in this process?

Some internet leftists or nymphomaniacs might shout, "So what if it's a loss? What's the big deal? For the sake of communism, can't we make some sacrifices?"

of course can.

Then you will have to bear the cost of social instability and damage to the country's overall strength at a time when patriarchy is still impossible to completely get rid of, patriarchy and male power will completely part ways, the country's basic foundation will be damaged.

You're promoting "women's liberation," and as a result, I've lost all my patriarchal rights, my rights, and not only haven't I gained anything, but my interests have actually been damaged. So why should I protect all the order and structures you've established based on patriarchy?

Don't say they are not aware. Even if they are not aware, what can you do?

They are the people!

Even your most reliable base!

Communism cannot be achieved by leaps and bounds simply by a few left-wing figures shouting a few slogans;

It is impossible to completely liberate women without bearing this price.

It is impossible to have both.

Mark knew these things, and Li Desheng also understood them, so when the former said it, the latter understood it immediately:

If you still need to rely on the vast majority of ordinary male compatriots to complete the revolution, achieve national prosperity, national rejuvenation, and people's happiness, how do you plan to please and consolidate your base?

There are certainly many ways, but for now, the most efficient, lowest-cost, most consistent with the cognition and values ​​of most people, with the highest overall score, and the most effective tool for restraining these men who still have sexual desire and reproductive desire, is still the old one:

marriage.

The marriage system provides ordinary men with legal and reproductive rights, allowing them to pass on their genes and thus support themselves (of course, necessary "discipline" is also indispensable).

At present, having children, passing on the family line, and continuing the bloodline are not only recognized by the majority of male compatriots, but also by the majority of female compatriots. They are part of the "consensus" and "universal values."