Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

momta

(4,079 posts)
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 01:56 PM Oct 2022

Oppressing women has NEVER been a good idea

Women in Iran are bravely marching and protesting for freedom from religious tyranny. Women in the U.S. are marching and protesting for...well, the same thing. It's good to see, but not exactly surprising. We find ourselves in pretty serious fuck-around-and-find-out times, and the religious zealots are finding out what happens when you mess with women. People who know their history already know...

(emphasis added)

On March 8, 1917, in Petrograd (February 23, 1917, on the Julian calendar), women textile workers began a demonstration that eventually engulfed the whole city, demanding "Bread and Peace"—an end to World War I, to food shortages, and to czarism.[22] This marked the beginning of the February Revolution, which alongside the October Revolution, made up the second Russian Revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Women%27s_Day

The Women's March on Versailles, also known as the October March, the October Days or simply the March on Versailles, was one of the earliest and most significant events of the French Revolution. The march began among women in the marketplaces of Paris who, on the morning of 5 October 1789, were nearly rioting over the high price of bread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_March_on_Versailles

With a single carefully-planned act of protest, refusing to give up her seat on a bus, NAACP activist Rosa Parks gave new vigor to the civil rights movement in the early 1960s. Black women were among the protesters arrested during a May 1963 civil rights march on Birmingham, Alabama, and were key organizers across the country for the 1963 civil rights March on Washington that featured Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have A Dream” speech.

https://now.org/about/history/history-of-marches-and-mass-actions/
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

nycbos

(6,034 posts)
1. I don't know if the Russian revolution is a good historical parallel.
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 02:26 PM
Oct 2022

Because they went from the Czar to Stalin in the span of just a few years. They traded one form of oppression for another.

momta

(4,079 posts)
2. Kinda beside the point
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 02:48 PM
Oct 2022

The point is that despite the outcome of the uprising, the uprising itself was instigated largely by women; not ONLY by women, but women were prominent, and are seen historically as causing the flashpoint that led to real change.

nycbos

(6,034 posts)
3. No it is is the point. Outcomes do matter.
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 03:36 PM
Oct 2022

Trading the oppression of Czar for the oppression of Stalin is definitely not "real change."

I am beyond awed by the courage of the women protesting in Iran. But if your main historical parallel is the Russian revolution it doesn't really bode well for them.

jaxexpat

(6,828 posts)
4. One should totally get that movements to change ....
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 03:58 PM
Oct 2022

Must have women in their midst if they have hope for relevance. The onset of the Russian revolution, throwing off the Czar, had little to do with the eventual rule of Stalinist totalitarianism. There is no direct line to be drawn from the March 1917 women's strike to Stalin. There was an interim government and a civil war between the two events as well as a guy named Lenin.

PatrickforB

(14,574 posts)
7. Yeah, but the women didn't know that would happen. They, like most Russians of the time
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 05:24 PM
Oct 2022

were really tired of being serfs.

Not only that, but Russia was doing badly in the war, and the Germans sent Lenin back to Russia in a sealed train car from Switzerland because they knew he and his Bolsheviks opposed the war.

So, yes, Lenin ended up running what became the USSR after taking over the revolution from the majority Menshaviks (note that the term Bolshevik implies majority, but they were the radical faction of the reform party. They were all part of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. They wanted to work with other liberal groups to form a provisional government much like the Wiemar Republic in Germany during the 20s.

When Lenin arrived, like Hitler later did, he used elections to take power for his minority Bolsheviks.

Then they all fought the bloody civil war against the Whites (Czarists), who collapsed in 1923. Thirteen allied countries intervened on behalf of the Whites because they wanted Russia to reopen the eastern front against Germany. The US actually sent Marines to Archangelsk, did you know?

At that time, and still, Russia is very patriarchal. The women led the way, but little men in their soldier uniforms killed millions in their quest for more power. So ultimately, every Russian who yearned for a more democratic government and the end of serfdom (which is basically agricultural and industrial slavery) ended up under yet another authoritarian patriarchal government.

But that wasn't the women's fault - they had no way of knowing that would happen any more than our people had any way of knowing Martin, Malcolm and Bobby would be killed.

Remember, ANY TIME a popular movement EVER starts that has the desire to impose a fairer government and seeks economic and social justice, the oligarchs (I fondly call them billionaire parasites and Wall Street greed-lizards) ALWAYS...

let me repeat...

ALWAYS

do everything in their power to sabotage that movement, supplant its leadership, and coopt it so that the so-called 'reforms' instituted actually funnel MORE money and power to them, not less.

They write the laws, though, and they interpret the history.

The Iranian patriarchy will try and impose itself on the Iranian women as well. If the Ayatollahs fall, any reform government may prove weak and another Ayatollah or Shah will arise. Because Persia is still a patriarchal culture.

As to us, we have this one chance this November to save this republic through our votes, but even if we do any reforms toward actual economic and social justice will still be opposed tooth and nail every step of the way. The capitalist cancer is very firmly metastasized into our social and economic fabric. We see this even on here when people like me mention cutting war spending, nixing the new moonshot, raising taxes and providing Medicare for all Americans.

Oh, they say, we don't want any socialist medicine! The government can't do it properly...

All that stems from years and years - decades - of corporate propaganda over Fox 'news,' right-wing talk radio, and social media. The government is, the snake Reagan said famously, not the solution, but the problem. DECADES of that message being pounded into us while oligarchs drain our treasury.

The bottom line is we are witnessing here in the US a forceful move back toward patriarchy because of the fear of old white men - fear of people of color, LGBTQ people, and women. THAT is what we are fighting.

Tommymac

(7,263 posts)
8. I side with momta here. It parallel's the START of the Revolution pretty well.
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 07:27 PM
Oct 2022

What comes after is not what is being discussed here.

Change is change no matter the outcome.

And what is happening in Iraq as I type is the start of real fucking change in every possible way.

This will be as significant in History as the coup that put the Ayatollah in power was.

More as it shows that women in all those middle-Eastern cultures are not going to just sit back and take it anymore.





bluboid

(560 posts)
5. brilliant to point this out... thank you!
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 04:43 PM
Oct 2022

I had forgotten about the role of women in the early 1900's in Russia & Europe - & the other examples you give. the women in Iran & other middle eastern countries are extremely brave - & are following in the well-worn footsteps of women throughout history.

Warpy

(111,261 posts)
6. The Russian Revolution in 1917 also started with women marching
Sun Oct 9, 2022, 05:20 PM
Oct 2022

and generally raising hell over the oppressive policies of the Czar and his henchmen and the appalling conditions of soldiers at the front, more poorly supplied and trained than the ones in Ukraine today, while their families were left to go hungry. When it looked like it might actually succeed, the men jumped into it and took over.

I've always said sourly that's why it ultimately failed and installed the Party as a de facto new aristocracy, Lenin as Czar.

Personally, I want to bring back Sheela na Gig and install her in all the offices of men who think they can get away with running things without us. You find her in Europe, especially England and Ireland, in churches and castles built in the Dark Ages.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Oppressing women has NEVE...