Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- en:digital:1917:abortion [2024/12/03 12:32] – created no_name12
+++ en:digital:1917:abortion [2025/04/20 19:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <WRAP center round info 80%>
-This translation was created for the purposes of archiving and does not originate from the original creators of the text.
+This translation was created for the purposes of archiving and does not originate from the original creator of the text.
 </WRAP>
@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 Most importantly, the reversal of the decision is presented as a traumatic event for all women. This paternalistic attitude not only does not empower women to take control and responsibility for their own lives: it encourages active feelings of helplessness and hopelessness, making women more likely to react to the decision by seeking 'safe spaces' rather than organising a fight for their rights. Psychotherapy is increasingly replacing politics, or politics is increasingly being confused with psychotherapy. Mass demonstrations are taking place, it is true, but they are driven more by blind anger than by sober politics, as the prevailing rhetoric suggests. We need to take seriously Luxemburg's dictum that to be human is to "gladly throw one’s whole life, when need be, onto the ‘great scale of destiny.’"[10]
+How did the Democrats react? Given the gridlock in Congress and, therefore, the difficulty of overcoming 'filibustering' and codifying abortion rights into federal law, they have focused on asking Biden to use his executive powers to protect abortion, but not much can be done without violating the limits of executive authority. [11] Alexandra-Ocasio Cortez, in addition to repeating the false rhetoric about democracy,[12] tweeted that men are to blame for the decision, despite the fact that the 1973 decision was made entirely by men while the current decision had the support of one of the two women on the Supreme Court. She and many other Democrats try to present themselves as defenders of bodily autonomy, but our experience with mandatory vaccination and the increasing surveillance being pushed by Democrats in the US demonstrates their hypocrisy. We should not trust them for either our privacy or our bodily autonomy.
+**3. Socialists and abortion**
+What would a socialist perspective on abortion look like? Abortion today is divorced from politics and understood and discussed as primarily a moral issue. There have been endless debates about whether abortion is moral or not: the 'pro-life' portion of the world sees abortion as ending the life of an unborn human being, while the 'pro-choice' portion sees abortion as a legitimate choice necessary for a woman's physical and social autonomy. Historically, however, socialists have understood that the debate about the morality of abortion is of little importance as abortions will take place under capitalism no matter what. Working-class women often have abortions because they cannot afford to raise children they would otherwise prefer to have, i.e. they have abortions because of poverty and economic insecurity. This will continue as long as poverty and economic insecurity continue - that is, as long as capitalism continues. Other women postpone or refuse to have children because they would rather have a career, which will also continue as long as society requires people to work in order to survive and be successful. And let's not forget that sometimes abortions are necessary to protect the health of pregnant women, or desirable because the pregnancy is the product of rape or a problematic relationship. Since abortion is a necessity under capitalism, socialists have traditionally supported the decriminalization of abortion and its free and immediate availability.
+However, while socialists recognized the need for the right to abortion under capitalism, they also understood that very often (though not always) abortion was only the lesser of two evils for many women and families.[13] As I mentioned above, many women want to raise children but cannot afford to do so. While morality is about doing "the right thing," under capitalism it tends to be limited to choosing the lesser of two evils. Too often abortion is an indicator of our lack of freedom, our lack of good choices. Moreover, socialists understood that the role of abortion in capitalism is increasingly that of promoting the production of surplus value by facilitating women's entry into the workforce, and also that of a measure of austerity, a way for capital to mitigate the discontent of the poor: they are given the choice of not having to raise a family and having more mouths to feed. If abortion did not have such a role, I find it doubtful that it would be legalized in many capitalist states: if and when there is a shortage of labor, there is always the possibility that a state will try to revoke the right to abortion.
+Given the role of abortion in capitalism, socialists supported not only the right to abortion, but reproductive freedom in general. Reproductive freedom is one's freedom to reproduce or not to reproduce. Socialists understood that under capitalism women need the freedom not to reproduce, but they also recognised and fought for women's freedom to reproduce and to raise families when they want to. In other words, they were not satisfied with accepting abortion as a necessity: real reproductive freedom and freedom of choice for women means having both the choice to abort and the choice to reproduce and have families. One can support both the right to abortion and social assistance in raising children, and socialists have historically advocated both. Those who don't want children should not be forced to bear them against their will, but also, those who do want children should not be forced to not have them because of social disadvantage.
+Socialists also recognised that the state is unreliable in terms of such rights and choices, and therefore, instead of focusing only on the demand for the legalisation and funding of abortion by the state, and the demand for state subsidies for people who want to start a family, they also attempted to provide such resources themselves. They provided contraceptive assistance and education to women seeking to prevent pregnancy, assistance to those facing pressures to terminate a pregnancy they would prefer to continue, and safe and affordable abortions regardless of whether the abortion was legal or not. After all, the historical task of the left is to organize civil society against the state, not to rely on a paternalistic state for help.
+Today the left seems to have forgotten this approach to abortion. It has long ago ceased to link the right to abortion with other economic requirements designed to promote reproductive freedom, and is content to be the tail of the liberals in their moralizing on the issue. The left is now only interested in making abortion available, not unnecessary. It increasingly sees abortion as a positive good, not an often necessary evil whose necessity must be addressed and overcome. The necessity of abortion is normalized due to the fact that capitalism and the bourgeois state have been normalized and therefore accepted by the left. Raising children is increasingly seen as a luxury, whereas it is a luxury only under capitalism. There is no socialist vision beyond and independent of the state - the Left is reduced to asking Democrats to use the state to better run society.[14] Even worse, the more lukewarm the Left's demands and actions on abortion become, i.e. the more the Left feels powerless to address the systemic causes that impede reproductive freedom, the more it targets and demonizes the 'pro-life' opponents of abortion. This is unfortunate because a significant portion of the American working class opposes abortion, and that portion must be won over to the cause of socialism that includes reproductive freedom.[15]
+In his critique of the 1936 abortion ban in the Soviet Union, Trotsky wrote the following: "These gentlemen have, it seems, completely forgotten that socialism was to remove the cause which impels woman to abortion, and not force her into the “joys of motherhood” with the help of a foul police interference in what is to every woman the most intimate sphere of life."[16] He accused the Soviets of criminalizing abortion instead of addressing its causes. The same accusation can be directed at today's Left: it supports the right to abortion without addressing the causes that drive women to abortion. In other words, the Left is following the liberals in making a compliment to the necessity of abortion. With or without abortion rights, in the absence of a Left that challenges the necessities of capital, the future of humanity looks bleak.
+-----
+[1] https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-offers-critique-roe-v-wade-during-law-school-visit?fbclid=IwAR2duKA1t-tb7k88yL_-EgwhAhVNBWPnIEQuu147sj8G8CoYKJcSLOwusSs
+[2] https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-irrational-misguided-discourse
+[3] Another important role of the judiciary is to control the executive.
+[4] It is important to note here that it is possible that the decision had an ulterior motive. It may be that what the judges wanted was to criminalise abortion and that they exploited a particular interpretation of the constitution to further that purpose. I'm not here to judge that. The same can be said of the original decision: both may have been political decisions cloaked in legalistic language about constitutionality. Whatever happened, the constitutionality argument needs to be taken seriously and addressed by abortion rights advocates, especially on the left.
+[5] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-overturns-roe-v-wade-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization
+[6] https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-offers-critique-roe-v-wade-during-law-school-visit?fbclid=IwAR2duKA1t-tb7k88yL_-EgwhAhVNBWPnIEQuu147sj8G8CoYKJcSLOwusSs
+[7] https://themilitant.com/2022/06/25/taking-the-socialist-workers-partys-program-to-the-toilers/
+[8] https://themilitant.com/2022/06/25/taking-the-socialist-workers-partys-program-to-the-toilers/
+[9] In her 2013 interview, Ginsburg said that the effect of overturning Roe would be limited primarily to poor women living in anti-abortion rights states. Many states would never ban abortion and the wealthiest women would always be able to travel to those states. https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-offers-critique-roe-v-wade-during-law-school-visit?fbclid=IwAR2duKA1t-tb7k88yL_-EgwhAhVNBWPnIEQuu147sj8G8CoYKJcSLOwusSs
+[10] https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/letters-from-prison
+[11] https://time.com/6191737/abortion-biden-democrats-legal/
+[12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?fbclid=IwAR3uqZZhpl8JAfhAxrS2kDH_cvV5C-mRiveq099cPGLzAMws1c9ga_l1sZg&v=V3poeFdzJK4&feature=youtu.be
+[13] To avoid misunderstandings: I am not saying that abortion is justified just because it is necessary. What I am saying is that to the extent that it is necessary it is a problem: we want to make abortion a truly free choice for the woman in all cases.
+[14] https://jacobin.com/2021/12/abortion-rights-roe-v-wade-supreme-court-congress-legislation
+[15] According to Waters, it is important to  “answer those who cloak their assaults on women’s rights — including decriminalization of abortion — under a ‘pro-life’ mantle. The working-class party that fights for the liberation of humanity is a party of life. We must take back that banner as ours.” The Left fights for both life and choice, not just the latter. https://themilitant.com/2022/06/25/taking-the-socialist-workers-partys-program-to-the-toilers/
+[16] https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1936/revbet/ch07.htm?fbclid=IwAR36rALKyM1f0MP3taaQd2touVgHpoPfamZTLu6wt1YeJEAFVMEo50nUcjE#ch07-1
+//The views expressed are the personal opinions of the authors.//
+//Phedias Christodoulides is a PhD candidate in philosophy at Northwestern University and a member of the 1917 group. He is also involved in the Platypus Affiliated Society. He can be contacted at ph.christodoulides [at] gmail [dot] com.//
 {{tag>