Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby JackRiddler » Mon Mar 07, 2011 5:25 pm

kool maudit wrote:if you don't believe the above is true, i am not going to argue it. my position is that this board tends to hold the aforementioned sympathies.

i am certainly not going to get into an argument regarding the comparative merits of this general worldview. i think you are aware that my personal positions, in many areas, lie to the right of the board's overall average. i'm fine with that.


So why do you post? To drop in and let us know that you lie far "to the right of the board's overall average" but you have nothing to add or subtract from the conversation other than reminding us that such as you exist (as though we were unaware)?

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby kool maudit » Mon Mar 07, 2011 5:28 pm

i dropped in with a mild critique of what i perceive to be a tone of ideological rigidity at r.i.

i do believe that this is, at times, a problem here.
kool maudit
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby JackRiddler » Mon Mar 07, 2011 6:03 pm

kool maudit wrote:i dropped in with a mild critique of what i perceive to be a tone of ideological rigidity at r.i.


You dropped in with a tone, perhaps, but with no actual critique. Your statement: "if you don't believe the above is true, i am not going to argue it."
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby American Dream » Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:18 am

https://www.academia.edu/17643705/The_P ... apegoating

The Political Economy of Scapegoating

Ben Debney

Scapegoating is as old a tactic as political power itself, and a vital tool in the perpetuation of political, economic and social privilege. James Madison, the Father of the US Constitution, expressed a great truism about state power when he described its fundamental role as being to defend ‘the minority of the opulent from the majority.’ What Madison neglected to mention was that the defense of the minority of the opulent against the majority tended to entrench and exacerbate social and economic inequality. This in turn precipitated social chaos as inequality and disorder exacerbated social and class conflict, threatening the stability of the system as a whole.

Faced with this situation, the minority of the opulent required some mechanism or other to neutralize social conflict and ensure stability without having to address its root causes in the defense of their economic and social privileges from economic democracy and social justice. They needed to be able to establish and maintain a state of peace without justice, a state long understood to be synonymous with tyranny. Whether the tyranny concerned was that of an individual autocrat, or a class of them, the same problem remained; what the minority of the opulent needed in effect was an ideological safety valve to take the pressure away of actually existing social conflicts and tensions and divert them onto a scapegoat, onto one or another ideological punching bag for the shortcomings of a society devoted to maintaining the minority of the opulent in the lifestyle to which they had become accustomed.

Its Machiavellian tenor notwithstanding, a characteristic that has threatened here and there to give it away, the great strength of the ideological safety value throughout the centuries has been its adaptability; while the form taken by the safety valve any particular period of history has been unique to that incarnation, the essential dynamics have always remained the same. Arthur Miller demonstrated as much when he caught it in the spotlight with The Crucible, drawing an adroit parallel between the Salem Witch Trials and the McCarthyist Red Scare politics of the 1950s. Unfortunately the ideological safety valve slipped the noose, being allowed to run amok throughout the Cold War before reappearing once again as the defining feature of the official US reaction to the 9-11 attacks.

Perhaps part of the explanation for the longevity of the ideological safety valve lies in the fact that it is only in the last few decades that it has come to be recognized for what it what is, in this instance by sociologists concerned with the recurring phenomenon of what we today call moral panics. This being the case, it becomes far easier to track the history of the scapegoating mechanism backwards. As it turns out, perhaps unsurprisingly, this ideological safety valve is one with an ancient vintage, each new incarnation of the ideological safety valve tending to innovate on the previous incarnation, Moreover, each new incarnation of the exact same ideological safety valve invoked in defense of the minority of the opulent seems often to contain elements of older ones so as to resonate with a ready-primed, if not especially self-aware, audience, and bury its message of fear deep in the back passageways of the collective unconscious.

We find the roots of the scare-mongering dynamics associated with moral panics, the ideological safety valve and the defense of the minority of the opulent from the majority in what historian Norman Cohn described as an ‘ancient fantasy.’ The essence of the fantasy, what we might describe these days as a propaganda trope or cultural motif, was, as Cohn wrote, that ‘there existed, somewhere in the midst of the great society, another society, small and clandestine, which not only threatened the existence of the great society but was also addicted to practices which were felt to be wholly abominable, in the literal sense of anti-human’ (Europe’s Inner Demons, ix).

The fantasy changed, became more complex, down through the centuries. It played an important part in some major persecutions; and the way in which it did also varied. Sometimes it was used merely to legitimate persecutions that would have occurred anyway; sometimes it served to widen persecutions that would otherwise have remained far more limited. In the case of the great [European] witchhunt it generated a massive persecution, which would have been inconceivable without it. In pursuing its history one is led far beyond the confines of the history of ideas and deep into the sociology and social psychology of persecution (ibid).


It is in fact this concern with the horrific and oft-bloody consequences of historical events like the European Witch Hunts that has been the driving force for research into the technical aspects of moral panics — in particular, ‘deviance production’ in sociology and ‘moral disengagement’ in social psychology. Sociological research into the ‘production of deviance’ has been based on the fact that deviance is a product of the power to impose a particular interpretation of the meaning of ‘deviance’ on popular discourse at any given moment, as opposed to any particular characteristic, activity or behavior associated with anyone thus labeled. Along the same lines, research in social psychology into moral disengagement has focused on the various psychological devices by which we disable the mechanisms of self-condemnation in order to reconstruct actions that might otherwise be interpreted as immoral, harmful, dangerous, irresponsible or even criminal to maintain a positive self-image (or put more simply, the bullshit stories we tell ourselves to neutralize our consciences by tricking them into thinking we’re good people when we’re not). This approach recognizes that we rarely reject the idea of morality out of hand, merely apply it selectively.

Sociological approaches to studies of moral panics help us to understand various manifestations of moral panic for the ideological safety valves they are by looking at the ways various social issues are overblown and turned into pretexts for repression. Stuart Hall et al for example describe what they call a ‘signification spiral’ that results in the production of a deviant as scapegoat for social ills created in the service of the minority of the opulent: a) The intensification of a particular issue; b) The identification of a subversive minority’; c) ‘Convergence’ or the linking by labeling of the specific issue to other problems; d) The notion of ‘thresholds’ which, once crossed, can lead to further escalation of the problem’s ‘menace’ to society; e) The element of explaining and prophesying, which often involves making analogous references to the United States – the paradigm example; f) The call for firm steps (Policing the Crisis, 220).

Complementing and enhancing this sociological approach, research into moral disengagement has made a vital contribution to our understanding of the ideological safety valve to the extent that it reveals how the production of deviance functions in practice to facilitate persecution of ideological scapegoats. Typically, we ‘disengage’ from the targets of blame-shifting, political persecution and ideologically-driven scapegoating though such strategies as playing the victim, blaming the victim, and invoking the “with us or against us” fallacy so as to conflate being doubted, contradicted, questioned, challenged or criticized with attacks on our person. In many ways, this latter mechanism is the cornerstone of moral disengagement and one of its most powerful mechanisms, particularly insofar as the logic of ‘if you think for yourself the deviant practitioners of evil win’ provides an initial pretext for all the others.

One way or the other then, the function of moral disengagement mechanisms is largely to (1) reconstruct immoral conduct, (2) displace or diffuse responsibility, (3) misrepresent injurious consequences as beneficial to the victim, and (4) dehumanize the victim. Additional strategies include euphemistic labeling (‘collateral damage’); advantageous comparison (‘I hit Saddam with the plastic spade in the sandpit because he hit me first’); displacement of responsibility (‘just following orders’); diffusion of responsibility (‘everyone does it’); and disregard or distortion of consequences (‘they love it’). Defenders of the minority of the opulent can use any or all of these psychological mechanisms to establish a rationale for targeting under cover of moral panic those whom they feel threatened, having demonized them as deviants from whom society needs rescuing in one manner or another.

We need not look too hard to find historical examples of Cohn’s ‘ancient fantasy’ as ideological safety value in practice. The aforementioned experience of the European Witch Hunts was so protracted in its wanton and brutal dispensing of state terror and mass murder that it now serves as an archetype or cultural trope for any scare campaign perpetrated in the process in particular of defending the indefensible; when someone is ganged up on by cowards on the basis of lies and falsehoods they are ‘witch hunted.’ Two main historical factors serve otherwise to demonstrate the continuing historical significance of the Witch Hunts:

1) Their instrumental role in rescuing the social and economic tendencies in Europe responsible for sewing the seeds of modern capitalism from peasant movements pursuing alternative models of economic democracy built around the commons, as feminist historian Silvia Federici has documented in her seminal work Caliban and the Witch (Autonomedia, NY);

2) Their instrumental role in invoking what I call ‘the wages of patriarchy,’ after David Roediger’s The Wages of Whiteness (Verso) which discusses the role token privileges given to the white working class in capitalist societies plays in fuelling intra-class ethnic divisions and entrenching the hierarchical social order dominated by the minority of the opulent.


As a protracted scare campaign waged as part of the massive waves of social warfare that occurred throughout Western Europe during the medieval era (eg the English Peasant Revolt of 1381, the French Jacquerie, the Flemish peasant revolts, the Peasant War in Germany), the gendered nature of the persecutions under the European Witch Hunts paid male peasants a ‘gender wage’ insofar as it spared them burning at the stake — the classic tactic of state terror designed to demonstrate to all and sundry what happened to those who opposed the minority of the opulent. The Witch Hunters operated their persecutions through the secular courts of Europe rather than the church-controlled ecclesiastical ones, a most telling fact about the class nature of the European Witch Hunts when we remember that no such thing as democratic franchise existed during the Middle Ages.

As a means of class warfare, the witch persecutions functioned as a ‘divide and conquer’ strategy in the classic sense of the term. In fact the ‘wages of patriarchy’ worked and continue to work exactly the same way as the ‘wages of whiteness,’ a fact that ought to be the cause of sober reflection in English-speaking countries outside of Western Europe founded on colonialism and genocide and that continue to be characterized by marked inequality and social chaos.

Thankfully, the roots of the witch-panic fuelling the European Witch Hunts are quite well understood. The hateful stereotype of the old hag on a broomstick, a specifically female folk demon whose purported role as Bride of Satan was to aid the execution of the latter’s diabolical plot against God, a goal she would achieve by carrying out maleficarum, or evil works, did not simply fall out of the sky, no more so than the dynamics and processes associated with moral panics as such. On the contrary, the roots of the witch stereotype originate back at least as far as the Roman Empire before Constantine, when the Pagan authorities persecuted the Christian minority on the basis of myths that Christians themselves adopted later for exactly the same purpose when the aforementioned adopted Christianity as the state religion.

‘The stereotype of the witch, as it existed in many parts of Europe in the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,’ wrote our historian benefactor Norman Cohn, ‘is made up of elements of diverse origin . . . some of these derived from a specific fantasy which can be traced back to Antiquity.’ (ibid, ix.) Illustrating the application of the ‘ancient fantasy’ to the witch panic, Cohn quotes a pagan description of early Christians in the following terms:

I am told that, moved by some foolish urge, they consecrate and worship the head of a donkey, that most abject of all animals . . . Others say that they reverence the genitals of the presiding priest himself, and adore them as if they were their father’s . . . As for the initiation of new members, the details are as disgusting as they are well known. A child, covered in dough as to deceive the unwary, is set before a would-be novice. The novice stabs the child to death with invisible blows; indeed he himself, deceived by the coating dough, thinks his stabs harmless. Then — it’s horrible! — they hungrily drink the child’s blood, and complete with one another as they divide his limbs. (ibid, 1).


In this example, we find the foundational tropes of Cohn’s ancient fantasy as it appeared in Roman times: the diabolical feast and the incestuous orgy. Similar tropes appear even earlier in fables concerning the Bacchanalia. Ironically enough, they appear again later in texts written by orthodox Christians integrated into the Roman state.

One such text comes from Psellos, a ‘leading Byzantine statesman’ from Constantinople and author of a Greek dialogue entitled On the Operation of the Demons. In demonising dissident religious groups such a the Paulicians, who had split from the official church with a view to recovering what they felt was the spiritual vitality of early Christianity through more non-hierarchical approaches, Psellos turns the tables on his persecutors by applying the ancient fantasy to a religious context as a pretext for attacking religious dissent. Psellos’s target in this case was the Bogomiles, another minority Gnostic sect who shared heretic status along with the now-minority pagans who were likewise guilty of thinking differently. The basic elements of Cohn’s ancient fantasy are unmistakable:

In the evening, when the candles are lit, at the time when we celebrate the redemptive Passion of Our Lord, they bring together, in a house appointed for the purpose, young girls whom they have initiated into their rites. Then they extinguish the candles, so that the light shall not be witness to their abominable deeds, and throw themselves lasciviously on the girls; each one on whomever first falls into his hands, no matter whether she be his sister, his daughter or his mother. For they think they are doing something that greatly pleases the demons by transgressing God’s laws, which forbid marriage between blood relatives. When this rite has been completed, each goes home; and after waiting nine months, until the time has come for the unnatural children of such unnatural seed to be born, they come together again at the same place. Then on the third day after the birth, they tear the miserable babies from their mothers’ arms. They cut their tender flesh all over with sharp knives and catch the stream of blood in basins. They throw the babies, still breathing and gasping, onto the fire, to be burned to ashes. After which, they mix the ashes with the blood in the basins and so make an abominable drink, with which they secretly pollute their food and drink, like those who mix poison with hippocras or other sweet drinks. Finally they partake of these foodstuffs; and not they alone but others also, who know nothing of their hidden proceedings (ibid, 19).


These two examples of scare mongering demonstrate the adaptability of the ancient fantasy as ideological safety valve, as does their adaptation to the changing needs of persecutors and persecuted. Changing fortunes precipitate a reversal of roles, persecuted becoming the persecutors in a way that bears parallels with more modern conflicts (particularly around the Middle East). The same was demonstrated again as proponents of primitive mercantilism amongst the opulent minority found themselves at loggerheads with proponents of primitive communalism amongst the dispossessed classes of the peasantry, many of whom expressed their desire for social justice in religious dissent (‘heresy’), or outright apostasy.

As a pretext for repression and ideological persecution, the utility of the Bride of Satan stereotype built on the power of previous incarnations of Cohn’s ‘ancient fantasy’ to drive a wedge between the class enemy by using women’s sexuality as a weapon against them. The Malleus Maleficarum (Witches’ Hammer), the medieval witch hunter’s handbook penned by the acutely unhinged Inquisitor Heinrich Kramer, demonises female sexuality as the root cause of such evils as miscarriages, the wiping out of harvests and the affliction of men and women ‘with terrible ailments, both inner and outer’ (1A). Kramer’s deeply misogynistic invective accuses women of being prone to sexual temptation by Satan and accordingly becoming his willing accomplice due to weaknesses of character purportedly inherent to their gender. Predictably enough, these are described in terms that suggest the same lack of self-restraint as those precipitating the bloody feast and licentious orgy of earlier times — a more carnal disposition and diminished capacity for religious faith.

The Bride of Satan or witch stereotype also cast the minority of the opulent as victims of those who dared resist the oppressiveness of medieval hierarchies, or voice a desire for social justice, especially through religious dissent. For the female half of the target population, the scapegoating dynamics of the European Witch Hunts had the effect of blaming peasant women for existing on the one hand, and on the other for resisting moves by the minority of the opulent to maintain and extend their power — particularly through the enclosure movement in England — at the expense of the atypical levels of freedom the peasantry of Western Europe enjoyed in the latter stages of the Middle Ages. For the male half of the target population, the Witch Hunts gave them with additional temptation to accept the wages of patriarchy, abandon their social responsibilities to their female comrades, and victim-blame. Modern ignorance of the vision of economic democracy spurring medieval peasant movements indicates the degree of success of the application of the ideological safety valve in the archetypal form, as does the general level of sexism and misogyny in what passes for civilization.

Of additional relevance is the fact that the targeting of women during the European Witch Hunts and the demonization of female sexuality had another function, that of incorporating the enemy class of landed peasantry into a new work regimen known as the wage system, and 2) sourcing and exploiting means of startup capital from which to kick-start the cycle of capitalist production. In actual fact these two goals were opposite sides of the same process, known to modern political economists as ‘primitive accumulation’ (see Michael Perelman, The Invention of Capitalism). As it was developed by the nascent capitalist classes of the period between the end of the Late Middle Ages and the beginning of the Modern Era, the process of primitive accumulation took three main forms:

(1) Colonisation of the feudal commons via enclosures, an act that first forced the landed peasantry out of the economic self-sufficiency they had been habituated to throughout the feudal era as the cornerstone of subsistence production, first into agrarian wage labour and then into the cities to become industrial wage slaves;

(2) Military acquisition of colonial possessions for exploitation of land and human resources (see Jason W. Moore, Capitalism in the Web of Life);

(3) Colonisation of the female body as a means of breeding factory fodder for exploitation in industry via the wage system and war fodder for the military acquisition of colonial possessions; the extirpation from women in general of the habit of freedom and their subjugation for the purpose of being rendered brood mares for capital and the state.

In this context the adaptation of the ancient fantasy and the ideological safety valve as a weapon of social and class warfare in a time far closer to our own follows a set pattern, though naturally by this stage the stereotype of the witch had long faded into the realm of fairy tale. The fact is well established by Edward Herman (The Real Terror Network) and Noam Chomsky (Deterring Democracy, numerous others) amongst others that ‘War on Terror’ mythology did not begin spontaneously with the 9-11 attacks as the pretense of their reaction suggested, but rather in the 1980s as a product of the tail end of the Cold War. In this instance, Reagan was fond of linking conflict in the region to the purported machinations of the Evil Empire:

There is no doubt that far more than simply arming the PLO, the Soviets had made Lebanon the center of Soviet activity in the Middle East . . . Based on documents they had captured, it was clear that a terror network sponsored by the Soviets and involving Hungary, Bulgaria, the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen, Pakistan, India, the People’s Republic of China, East Germany and Austria were all involved in assisting the PLO
(Mattia Tolado, The Origins of the US War on Terror, 82).


If you resist the settler colonialism of those who colonize, persecute and then play the victim on the basis of having been persecuted historically themselves following exactly the same manner as the Christians of two millennia ago, the communist terrorists win. The ‘ancient fantasy’ as ideological safely value cum scare mongering and moral panic, with all that involved in terms of the production of deviance and moral disengagement, was and remains as strong as ever.

As the quote from Reagan reveals, the Terror Scare, the global moral panic over terrorism that characterized the US response to the 9-11 attacks, was built on Reaganite ‘War on Terror’ mythology in the same way that the Cold War was built on the ‘Domino’ Theory of encroaching communism — the peril of an exterior threat a classic example of Cohn’s ‘ancient fantasy,’ and thus of the ideological safety valve. Its reappearance here, as with other examples throughout history, merely serves to demonstrate its continuing value as a means of spreading state terror, shutting down rational thought, driving the population thus panicked into the arms of tyrants and reconstructing state power such that those responsible for deploying the ideological safety valve, in presenting themselves as The Salvation of All That is Good from the Evil Others from Outside, thus become cures of the problems for which their defense of the minority of the opulent is ultimately the cause.

A social order based on privilege and justice, and whose very existence depends on lies and dishonesty, can hardly appeal to reason or the better angles of human nature when looking to get itself out of hot water. The defenders of the minority of the opulent must look instead to the ‘ancient fantasy’ and the ideological safety valve for a pretext for blame shifting and repression. To date it has been extremely effective at rescuing the minority of the opulent from basic accountability and ownership for the consequences of their actions as a succession of ruling classes, a fact that would appear to account for its popularity across two millennia. The fact that their victims are forgetful does not help matters much, though we can easily redress the situation by refusing to further neglect our own history.


Ben Debney is a PhD candidate in International Relations at Deakin University, Melbourne. He is researching moral panics and the political economy of scapegoating, ‘the oldest trick in the book.’


This article originally appeared in Counterpunch, Vol. 22, No. 8.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby American Dream » Tue Dec 27, 2016 9:35 am

The Hammer in our Hamlets: Patriarchy on the Left Part 3 of 4 | Unity and Struggle

Image

The classic image of a woman with a feminist “hammer” intent on “smashing patriarchy” is telling. Many of us tend to view patriarchy as something tangible, almost an object, and with our trusty feminist tools, we can overcome it. Unfortunately, this is simply not the case. As parts one and two of this series argue, patriarchy and sexism are social relations that the left cannot hope to overcome in isolation from a broader class struggle. Further, our “tools” for dealing with patriarchy and sexism are limited by the working class we are a part of. If the class does not provide us with the proper tools, developed through struggle, we are stuck using the tools of the past and therefore unable to move forward. We are living in a world that is growing increasingly hostile toward women and queers. Our President Elect has been accused of sexual assault and gloats about pussy grabbing. The Alt Right holds rallies to belittle rape survivors. White boys on college campuses organize defense campaigns to protect their “right” to force themselves on women’s bodies. Transwomen, mostly black, continue to be murdered in the streets, attacked in bathrooms, and are sent to prison for defending themselves. These attacks must be countered by a mass of people, led by women and queers who make it possible for us all to make leaps and create new directions.

But unfortunately, we are not there yet. And in the face of these challenges, the U.S. left is in desperate need of a healthy dose of realism. We are not special. There is no magical hammer that will smash the sexism we face in our left communities. Many will find this explanation of sexism on the left frustrating and defeatist. However, coming to terms with the fact that we cannot magically absolve ourselves from the race and gender contradictions around us does not mean there is nothing we can do to deal with these problems. Revolution will reshape the fundamental social relations that make up society, liberating gender and abolishing patriarchy as we know it. In the meantime, short of this goal, there are two approaches we must take: prevention and management.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby American Dream » Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:25 pm

Thinking back to when i first met these sistas
their lights shone so bright, lit up the night, forgot it was dark
rapping, take action, impassioned, lasting impression made marks
on me, i see you, i hear you,
i got your backs from the start
mami (mami)
did you see? (did you see?)
what she did? (what she did?)
tatooin? (whatchu mean?)
i mean i know i mean patriarchy
is fuckin up everyone's chi
it's biggest mother fuck on we
displaced us from where we should be
she's a force awakening
she's a forced awakening
we're before a wake again
she'll restore and make again
and again and again and again, again
cuz y'all know we're the warriors
cleanin up after these men, shit.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RflM5uVNbb0

I release the lioness in my lines
filipina goddess keeping my stars aligned
women hold up half the sky
only call me mama when You comment on my instincts
Maternal when I'm spittin giving birth to new beginnings
from genesis to revolution
-get ya hands up-
if you're for the people
-get ya mutha fuckin hands up-
Indigenous gettin free
Land defendin 'em sendin em peace
Our steez is your disease
Why we pilin up medical fees
But kimmortal never cease
I see the beauty in my beast
Mode steady cut my teeth on that independent shit
I get no sleep -zone- codes I hack
crackinsomniac uh huh My dreams they got me stayin woke
Lady dragon wit my cannon
Only Bragging bout
the womyn who have held me up
stepped into her jungle book
Danced up on her bush
Robin Hood think you hot shit?
Ya neva met the sisterhood
"If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything."
-Malcolm X
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby American Dream » Sun Feb 18, 2018 7:48 pm

http://www.its-her-factory.com/2018/01/ ... the-witch/

FEMINIST THEORY WEEK 2: SYLVIA FEDERICI, CALIBAN AND THE WITCH

January 22, 2018 · by Robin James · in Uncategorized

This is the second installment of me blogging my way through the course texts for my spring 2018 seminar in feminist theory. Today we read selections of Federici’s Caliban and the Witch.



This is a classic text in feminist theory. It argues two main things:

ONE

As Europe transitioned from common ownership to private ownership and enclosed both the European commons and colonial terra nullius (null land, land that’s not owned by an individual as their private property), women became, for men, what the commons had previously been for everyone. “For in pre-capitalist Europe women’s subordination to men had been tempered by the fact that they had access to the commons and other conununal assets, while in the new capitalist regime women themselves became the commons, as their work was defined as a natural resource, laying outside the sphere of market relations” (97;emphasis added). European women, their labor and their bodies, were things that anyone could access without asking women’s consent: “a communal good anyone could appropriate and use at will” (97). If private property is that which cannot be intruded upon without consent, then commons don’t require consent or permission for intruding upon them. (It’s obvious how this idea that men are entitled to women’s labor and bodies without needing to ask women for their consent persists in contemporary Western culture.) As Federici explains, “every woman (other than those privatized by bourgeois men) became a communal good, for once women’s activities were defined as non-work, women’s labor began to appear as a natural resource, available to al, no less than the air we breathe or the water we drink” (97).

So not every woman is a commons. Those married to bourgeois men were their private property. Here we see a hint of how marriage is a private property relation. Unlike enslaved women, who were fully owned by white masters, white wives had to initially consent to become property–that’s what a marriage contract is (“Do you promise to honor and obey….?”) If proletarian European women were a commons, this means that their gender status is slightly different than enslaved women, who were private property; so the racialized gender distinction is a distinction between two types of property relation: commons and private property. Both the commons and private property can be intruded upon without consent: the former by anyone, the latter by its owner.

A few questions:

How does Federici’s analysis of gender and race as different kinds of property relations work intersectionally? In other words, what about black women? Or, perhaps, was it the case that black women’s status as private property cancelled out their use as a commons, so they weren’t gendered ‘feminine’ in the normal/hegemonic way?

The idea that sex is biology and gender is social role is common in women’s studies. But Federici argues that gender isn’t a social role related to body type, but a property relation defined by gender status. If we buy her argument here, does this mean that the appeal to bodies was just an attempt to naturalize (i.e., make seem natural) what’s actually a totally artificial property relation that ultimately has little to do with so-called sex organs?


TWO

Late 20th and early 21st century neoliberalism–especially the kinds of reform the World Bank and IMF impose on so-called “third world” nations (but which were pioneered in NYC in the 1970s)–are reproducing that exact same process of enclosure in new contexts. For example, Federici claims that the practices of enclosure–and all the forms of white supremacist patriarchal domination and violence that went with them–are “comparable to that which has occurred in our time throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America, in the countries “structurally adjusted” by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund” (76). These ‘economic’ reforms are also reforms in gender and racial relations, both locally and globally. We are seeing “a new round of primitive accumulation” that takes the form of “regulat[ing[ procreation rates, and, in this case, reduce the size of a population that was deemed too demanding and indisciplined from the viewpoint of its prospected insertion in the global economy” (Preface). Many of the texts we read in this class will address some aspect of this claim, especially the Murphy.

Some questions:

If neoliberalism is in fact enacting a parallel process of enclosure, how are the gendered logics Federici identifies in early modern Europe translated to contemporary Western culture? For example, was GamerGate and its anti-SJW campaign a kind of contemporary witch hunt? How are women dispossessed of their productive and reproductive labor?

Additional points for consideration:

Federici points out that Enlightenment “men of Science” who were otherwise absolutely skeptical of mystical stuff like sorcery consistently wrote in favor of killing witches (168). So this means that cultural objections to witchcraft weren’t scientific or religious, but “political” (168). How might this fact help us think about more contemporary uses of “science” to advocate for misogynist practices, such as the infamous Anti-Diversity Manifesto written by a Google employee? What’s the political project behind these contemporary phenomena? How is it related to the political project behind witchcraft, especially given Federici’s parallel btw neoliberalism & the original period of enclosure & primitive accumulation?

Federici argues that part of capitalism involves “the transformation of female sexuality into work” (192). What does this mean? How is it manifest in 21st century life?

Federici discusses the historical intertwining of witch hunts performed to newly/becoming white women in Europe and witch hunts and devil worshiping charges performed on non-whites in colonies (198). This suggests that intersectionality is actually a historical phenomenon: patriarchy and white supremacy were built together, in mutually influencing ways. If we take intersectionality as a way to describe the architecture of both the concepts of race and gender and the material/intellectual histories of white supremacist patriarchy, how does this impact how we use intersectionality as a concept, rubric, or analytic to talk about contemporary stuff? Is this understanding I’m proposing via Federici similar to or different from what you take to be the dominant uses of the term today in both academic and non-academic spaces?

Federici writes that “in the history of capitalism,”going back” was a means of stepping forward, from the viewpoint of establishing the conditions for capital accumulation” (203). Is the public re-emergence of Nazis an instance of such “going back”? How might white supremacist fascists be part of a new type of primitive accumulation/enclosure? What’s getting taken from the public? By whom?
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby Grizzly » Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:59 am

Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism or, Should we ask.... What is the Witchery???

The sorcery of the spectacle?



Ceremony: Uranium and Ck'o'yo Magic



The destructive magic that was loosed at the witches' meeting in Leslie Marmon Silko's book, Ceremony, was a web of destruction that culminated in the uranium mine near the reservation.


I Just took a mental health break from RI, the internet in general and and the rUSSIA, rUSSIA rUSSIA Hysteria to do analogue reading as the internet has really fucked my book reading.... re-read this visionary work (Silko's book, Ceremony) Hadn't read it in many decades... What came to me afterwards was...

What We need is a new story, a new Ceremony. There are many ways of 'seeing' this is one of many. Whose is the true way?

I’m reminded of Terence Mckenna, -paraphrasing William Blake- in that, “If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed.”

Have we just changed mediums from the idiot box to the monitor? As Bob Wilson sd, (Read: Robert Anton Wilson)
God save us from the "silver screen of sorcery" ...

"The border between the Real and the Unreal is not fixed,
but just marks the last place where rival gangs of shamans
fought each other to a standstill." - Robert Anton Wilson



“We are caged by our cultural programming. Culture is a mass hallucination, and when you step outside the mass hallucination you see it for what it's worth.”
―Terence McKenna
Eros and the Eschaton lecture (1994)
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby American Dream » Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:45 am

Caliban and the Witch and Ceremony are both great, great books. Each is an achievement in its own right.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Who Were the Witches? – Patriarchal Terror & Capitalism

Postby American Dream » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:39 am

Organizing Histories

Asad Haider June 19, 2018

Image
Aspects of Negro Life: An Idyll of the Deep South (Aaron Douglas, 1934)

Let us now arrive at what is, after all, the story I sought to tell in Mistaken Identity: the beginning of the term “identity politics,” and its reversal of fortune. It is a story which begins with the Combahee River Collective in 1977, to which I devote the first chapter. The Combahee River Collective proposes the term “identity politics” as a strategic maneuver to disrupt the exclusionary hegemonic universals that had been constructed in the black liberation movement, the feminist movement, and the socialist movement. The assertion not only of the identity of black women, which lay outside the spontaneous self-consciousness, or ideology, of these movements, but quite explicitly the autonomous political organization of black women, could undermine these structures of exclusion and bring about a new general emancipatory possibility, which can be read plainly in a core proposition of the famous collective statement: “If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression.”19 And what is clear from the historical literature on the Combahee River Collective and in the reflections of its members is that autonomous political organization brought about the possibility of a practice of coalition.

Barbara Smith, a founding member of the collective and co-author of its collective statement, has reflected on this practice of coalition by pointing out that identity cannot be taken to determine or exhaust any political standpoint:

I always say that the people I can work with are the people with whom I share political values and goals and priorities. So that means just about anybody as far as ethnicity, race, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. I don’t have a litmus test for, like, “I only work with certain kinds of people who share my specific identities.” I’m going to be a political idiot if I only work with Black lesbian feminists and refuse to work with anybody else. I mean, I wouldn’t know the things that I know about Black feminism and about organizing if the only people I had ever worked with were Black feminists who were lesbians. Don’t get me wrong. I have learned a tremendous amount from working with people whose specific identities I share, but I also would have lost a lot if I had never worked with people who are different from myself.20


The puzzle of my book is to understand how the concrete, specific, and nuanced revolutionary political hypothesis of the Combahee River Collective came to be inverted, in the present moment, into an abstract and totalizing allusion to hypostatized categories of “race and gender,” and a series of political practices which reject coalitions and solidarities and instead operate according to reductive and essentializing conceptions of the self. This is a complicated history, which I trace in my book with reference to the crisis of hegemony in the 1970s.

As Briahna Joy Gray has pointed out, the consequences of this inversion are practical and contemporary – they are not merely intellectual, and they are not restricted to marginal left infighting. In an analysis of mainstream electoral politics and media debates, Gray writes: “once the distinction between perspective and identity is erased, voters of color become an undifferentiated hive mind incapable of political independence.” The obscene expression of this assumption is that “leftists of color are regularly told—by white liberals!—that we are white and/or secretly racist.”21

Gray identifies three general risks with this weaponized deployment of identity: first, “if people are defined by their demographic characteristics, they can be reduced to those characteristics in a way that obscures differences within groups.” Second, if their “identity” is equated with their “perspective,” then “dissenting members within the identity group risk having their viewpoints erased.” Third, “people of a particular political faction” are able “to wrongly imply that they speak for all members of their racial or gender group.”22

Quilting Points
Allow me to shift, then, to a narrative which you may be relieved to hear is a comedy: the 2016 Democratic primaries. This comedy came after a black president had been elected, and in his two terms largely carried on the neoliberal and militarist practices of governance that he inherited from the Clinton and Bush years. In this context the characters of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders came to operate as what Lacan called points de capiton – varyingly translated as quilting points, anchoring points, or nodal points – where the shifting relations of racial, sexual, and economic issues were fixed. As Lacan put it, there is the plane of “the sentimental mass of the current of discourse, a confused mass in which appear units, islands, an image, an object, a feeling, a cry, an appeal.” For our purposes it is the plane of the lived experience of social relations, of bodies affected and adrift. And then there is the plane of the signifier, “a pure chain of discourse, a succession of words, in which nothing is isolable.” The quilting point is “the point at which the signified and the signifier are knotted together, between the still floating mass of meanings.”23

Part of what Clinton represented was the continuation of a neoliberal and militarist legacy. Yet she became a quilting point for a “civil rights” agenda, against racial and sexual discrimination, equated in the popular discourse with “identity politics.” Clinton became the fixed signifier of a program that opposed racial and sexual discrimination, instead of being a signifier of a continuing neoliberal and militarist legacy, and any criticism of that legacy was interpreted as an attack on civil rights, or even on particular identity groups themselves. As Gray points out: “if we believe that Hillary Clinton is ‘the candidate of women and people of color,’ and ‘women and people of color’ are defined entirely by those identities, it becomes impossible to understand how anyone who shares the identity could reject the candidate.”24


https://www.viewpointmag.com/2018/06/19 ... histories/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DrEvil, Elihu and 33 guests