Kollontai did not reject morality, but she did qualify
its practical meaning. She wrote “What is the fundamental quality of the working
class? What is its strongest moral weapon in the struggle? Solidarity and
comradeship is the basis of communism. Unless this sense is strongly developed
amongst working people, the building of a truly communist society is
inconceivable. Politically conscious communists should therefore logically be
encouraging the development of solidarity in every way and fighting against all
that hinders its development. Prostitution destroys the equality, solidarity
and comradeship of the two halves of the working class. A man who buys the favors
of a woman does not see her as a comrade or as a person with equal rights. He
sees the woman as dependent upon himself and as an unequal creature of a lower
order who is of less worth to the workers’ state. The contempt he has for the
prostitute…affects his attitude to all women. The further development of
prostitution, instead of allowing for the growth of comradely feeling and
solidarity, strengthens the inequality of the relationships between the sexes.”
She developed these ideas by adding:
Prostitution is alien and harmful to the new
communist morality which is in the process of forming…In bourgeois capitalist
society all attempts at fighting prostitution were a useless waste of energy,
since the two circumstances which gave rise to the phenomenon–private property
and the direct material dependence of the majority of women upon men–were firmly
established. In a workers’ republic the situation has changed. Private property
has been abolished and all citizens of the republic are obliged to work.
Marriage has ceased to be a method by which a woman can find herself a
“breadwinner” and thus avoid the necessity of working or providing for herself
by her own labor…
But we also need to understand the
importance of creating a communist morality. The two tasks are closely
connected: the new morality is created by a new economy, but we will not build
a new communist economy without the support of a new morality…Communists must
openly accept that unprecedented changes in the nature of sexual relationships
are taking place. This revolution is called into being by the change in the
economic structure and by the new role which women play in the productive
activity of the workers’ state. In this difficult transition period, when the
old is being destroyed and the new is in the process of being created,
relations between the sexes sometimes develop that are not compatible with the
interests of the collective. But there is also something healthy in the variety
of relationships practiced...
Can we who uphold the interests of working
people define relationships that are temporary and unregistered as criminal? Of
course we cannot. Freedom in relationships between the sexes does not
contradict communist ideology…
A relationship is harmful and alien to the
collective only if material bargaining between the sexes is involved, only when
worldly calculations are a substitute for mutual attraction. Whether the
bargaining takes the form of prostitution or of a legal marriage relationship
is not important. Such unhealthy relationships cannot be permitted, since they
threaten equality and solidarity. We must therefore condemn all prostitution,
and go as far as explaining that these legal wives are “kept women” and what a
sad and intolerable part they are playing in the worker’s state…
Kollontai’s criticisms of evolving socialism were clearly
stated in subjective and objective terms. “We must ruthlessly discard the old
ideas and attitudes to which we cling through habit,” she wrote. “The old
economic structure is disintegrating and with it the old type of marriage, but
we cling to bourgeois life styles. We are ready to reject all the aspects of
the old system and welcome the revolution in all spheres of life, only…don’t
touch the family, don’t try to change the family! Even politically aware
communists are afraid to look squarely at the truth, they brush aside the
evidence which clearly shows that the old family ties are weakening and that
new forms of economy dictate new forms of relationships between the sexes.
Soviet power recognizes that woman has a part to play in the national economy
and has placed her on an equal footing with the man in this respect, but in
everyday life we still hold to the ‘old ways’ and are prepared to accept as
normal marriages which are based on the material dependency of a woman on a
man.”
Kollontai was seeking to extend the revolution and socialism
more deeply into daily life. Today we argue that her “two-halves” statement
falls far short of understanding gender identity in a revolutionary way. We
transcend Kollontai’s shortcomings here by going to the core of her thinking.
She wrote “In our struggle against prostitution we must clarify our attitude to
marital relations that are based on the same principles of ‘buying and selling’.
We must learn to be ruthless over this issue…We have to explain unequivocally
that the old form of the family has been outstripped. Communist, society has no
need of it. The bourgeois world gave its blessing to the exclusiveness and
isolation of the married couple…in the atomized and individualistic bourgeois
society, the family was the only protection from the storm of life, a quiet harbor
in a sea of hostility and competition…In communist society this cannot be.
Communist society presupposes such a strong sense of the collective that any
possibility of the existence of the isolated, introspective family group is excluded…New
ties between working people are being forged and comradeship,
common interests, collective responsibility and faith in the collective are
establishing themselves as the highest principles of morality…”
Kollontai repeated her point and provided important
contrasts when she wrote “… (U)nder communism all dependence of women upon men
and all the elements of material calculation found in modern marriage will be
absent. Sexual relationships will be based on a healthy instinct for
reproduction prompted by the abandon of young love, or by fervent passion, or
by a blaze of physical attraction or by a soft light of intellectual and
emotional harmony. Such sexual relationships have nothing in common with
prostitution. Prostitution is terrible because it is an act of violence by the
woman upon herself in the name of material gain. Prostitution is a naked act of
material calculation which leaves no room for considerations of love and
passion. Where passion and attraction begin, prostitution ends. Under communism,
prostitution and the contemporary family will disappear. Healthy, joyful and
free relationships between the sexes will develop.”
No comments:
Post a Comment