Chapter 07 - The Family Form of the Workers' Movement
Section Notes¶
The Family Form of the Workers’ Movement¶
Late 19th century: new workers movement
Demanded family wage
Aspired to (and sometimes achieved) family form
Alexandra Kollontai: family abolitionist in the Soviet Union
The Thesis of the Workers’ Movement¶
Instead of aiming to abolish wages, money, and class, workers developed working class pride
Sought to found socialist society on experience of industrial labor
Lots of internal oppositions, divisions
Split proletariat into respectable & lumpenproletariat
The Housewife-Based Family Form¶
Bourgeois family form became available to some workers
Male-breadwinner family form
Even if couldn’t remove wife from the market, WC families pursued:
Not living with other families
Single-family dwellings
Men assume finance control
Wives assume reproductive labor
Victory for stability and survival of millions of WC people
Pros: neighborhood organizations, sustained struggle
Cons: putting down lumpenproletariat, Black, queer people
Unions organized to exclude women from labor force
Working women = more labor availability, less pay
Capitalist competition improved production techniques, drove down prices, improved real wages
Production moved from the home into factories
Shift away from team-based work
Far fewer children at work
Pushed into schools
Campaign to restrict child labor
Municipal governments built public infrastructure for working class neighborhoods
Respectability and the Working Class Family¶
Families with working moms faced condemnation and exclusion from neighbors
Male workers took pride in supporting their families
Working class family form: claiming moral dimension to wages, legitimizing pro-worker legislation
NOT enforced by capitalists!!
Most employers lacked direct control over domestic arrangements of workers
Expansion of bourgeois class values not inevitable: was a choice by (white) WC
Many WC families left behind
“Civilized” vs. “uncivilized”
Contradictions of the Family in the Second International¶
Workers movement had 2-sided approach to family politics
Normative pursuit of male-breadwinner
Seeing socialist equality as dependent on shared experience of waged work
Internal basis for pursuing family abolition through women’s employment and collectivizing reproductive labor
Kautsky: no socialist dreams of legally and forcefully abolishing family
Housewives main organizers of WC neighborhoods and social orgs
Bestseller: August Bebel “Woman and Socialism”
Debating women’s participation in labor markets vs. their role at home
Different strategies for socialist movements
Racial Division of the American Workers’ Movement¶
White workers pursued and won access to normative family form, but it was violently imposed on Black and Indigenous people
End of 19th century: most US americans worked in agriculture
Northeast industrializing rapidly
Midwest small white family farms
Southwest seized from mexico in mid-century, then settled and farmed once railroads built
Railroads built by chinese and mexican immigrants
World War 2: radical new gender order
Full proletarianization, breakup of family, more gay & women’s rights, massively increased state control
For Black people, first access to non-agricultural employment
Abolishing the Family in the Russian Revolution¶
Rather than communist struggle to abolish bourgeois society, new family abolition called for full proletarianization through the collectivization of social reproductive labor
Close of World War 1: early years of Russian Revolution
Russia’s small industrial working class had not achieved housewife-based family form
Bolsheviks wanted full mobilization of women
Implemented easy divorce, gender equality in the law, access to abortion
Implemented pro-gay policies
Kollontai wanted state to take over social reproductive labor
Univeralization of wage labor under state authority
Stalin consolidated power; Kollontai gave up opposition to become the Soviet ambassador in Sweden
Quotes¶
“The workers’ movement had a two-sided approach to family politics. The normative pursuit of a male-breadwinner form was in tension with another, contradictory impulse that shaped the movement’s struggles over gender: seeing socialist equality as dependent on a shared experience of wage work. This impulse provided an internal basis for asserting the positive abolition of the family through women’s employment and collectivizing reproductive labor. The tension between the legitimacy and stability provided by the male-breadwinner family form to the socialist movement, and the equality of universal employment, shaped the debates and struggles over the family regarding the course of the workers’ movement.” (pp. 118)
“The demand to abolish the family took on a different and new meaning during the workers’ movement. While much of the workers’ movement abandoned the call to abolish the family, the other tendency toward full proletarianization offered a path to envisioning the overcoming of the working-class nuclear family. Rather than a communist struggle to abolish the bourgeois society, the new form of family abolition called for full proletarianization of women’s work through the collectivization of reproductive labor.” (pp. 123)