The Female Socialist
The Female Socialist
The Female Socialist
Male thinking in a female brain
Charles J. Hunsinger
Angelica Balabanoff (1878-1965) spent her entire life promoting the causes of Socialism from the streets of Berlin to alleged intimacies with and the instruction of a blossoming Benito Mussolini in the fruits and truisms of Marxist thinking, to Paris, Switzerland and New York City. Her participation with the Bolshevik Revolution and her endearment of the Communist ideology in Russia in 1919 was, perhaps, her greatest achievement. She was promoted to Secretary of the Comintern under Leon Trotsky and Vladimir Lenin when she wrote in the L’Avanti, a Socialist publication, an article entitled, “The Communist.”
An excerpt from that writing, “YOU cannot form any idea of what is taking place here. One witnesses daily the miracle of re-organization of an old, decrepit and rotten system which only the new regenerative forces can put life into; one looks on at this work of constant renewal going on amidst attempts to boycott it, to sabotage and blockade it in all directions. The spectacle is infinitely inspiring; it fills you with pride; it revivifies your faith in human power and in the divine potency, of the ideal. With all kinds of material deficiencies and with a continuous struggle going on against the enemy without, a great creative work is nevertheless being undertaken in the domains of Science, art and the education of the masses and the new generations.”
Comrade Balabanoff was not a Feminist, as there is no real evidence to indicate such, but there was no reason for her to identify or to embrace such an ideology, as the goals and objectives of that philosophy, Marxism, were now at hand and culminating under Communist rule in Russia and revolution in Germany. Feminism, after all is from the mind of a man for the destruction of the family unit, private property and capitalism. Her enthusiasm for the great, “cause” and “creative work”, as she puts it is well represented in her words. As the truth of history has shown however, nothing could be further from the truth then her words and the very rude displacement of her trust in the Marxist Socialism that enveloped Russia and Europe. To her credit, possibly, we will take the high road here; she left her position, as Secretary in 1920 and Russia out of disgust for the rapidly evolving corruption, incompetency and savagery that was to become the Union of Soviet Socialists Republics. From the dream of a great socialism, the “creative work”, “a new regenerative force”, and “the education of the masses” to the reality of socialism, great poverty, hunger, sadism, sprawling slums and drunkenness, total incompetence and demagoguery to the murder of an estimated 25 to 50 million Soviets by the great cause of socialist ideology, for the common good.
Women, I have come to realize, are more prone to the socialist cause then men. The male, on average, is much more independent and shuns regimen. The exceptions, of course, are those males who are in control or who want control. The female wants security more then independence and what better security than government. Perhaps, in the destruction or emasculation of the male can we better achieve the socialist cause.
Comrade Balabanoff reminds me of George Orwell, the author of 1984. Orwell was a committed Socialist who held to the great promise of a world without war, where all people would share equally in the fruits of mankind, harmony and joy would be the order of the day. People would be united in a singular cause; the cause of social justice, a global citizenry. I think that this is a dream that is shared by most, but Orwell like Balabanoff was an altruist, a dreamer who envisioned Man, as something he is not and at the same time failed to understand that power over others is more enticing and addictive than any narcotic or any sum of money. He however, I believe, came to this understanding after reading the United Nations Charter and the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights. That understanding of the great human failing of the greed for power is quite dramatically embodied in his novel “1984”. This is the totalitarian rule of a socialist state and the correct portrayal of human nature. Other novels worth reading that adequately depict the quest for power over others is, The Lord of the Flies and Fahrenheit 451.
A note of interest is that with the onset of the Bolshevik Revolution, the birth of Marxist Socialism in 1917 all of Europe was enamored with the great Socialist cause, the freeing of the masses, holding hands and singing songs around the camp fire. All would be equal and humanity would flourish. Differing forms of socialism emerged; the Fascism of Italy and the Nazism of Germany, Democratic Socialism. The rule of the totalitarians from Japan to Germany engulfed the world and 55 million people would die, countless wounded, orphaned, homeless, raped, looted, destroyed. But it did not stop there sadly, it continues under different names, different causes. The great desire to control and to rule others, for their own good, for the common good, prevails today.
It is ironic that our valiant lady crusader, Angelica Balabanoff, after making some enemies of the Socialists of Europe took refuge in New York City, still spewing the great joy of Socialism, until the ruling Socialists of Europe were defeated in WWII when she immigrated back to Europe..
Labeling or name calling is and has always been somewhat repugnant. In many ways to do so is a sign of ignorance, a sign of defeat or resignation or, perhaps, utter frustration. I am talking about the Socialist or Marxist or even the Democratic Socialists, Nazi. All of these identities are a contradiction to what I hold, as the definition of freedom, as manifested in the American Bill of Rights. All of these identities represent a destruction agenda aimed at individual freedom, the family and, essentially the American way of life. If I am to communicate to you that cancer can kill you; should I not call it cancer? We know, by virtue of its history, that cancer will lead to death, as we know historically the death knell of the socialist cause. Is it any wonder why the Socialists, of any description, would not want to be identified, as such? For the benefit of society, for the common good, for diversity and inclusiveness: what should we call that which wants to control us and destroy that, which gave so much to the world, American freedom. I don’t think that it would be repugnant for the doctor to call a cancer a cancer.
Socialism is an economic philosophy; one that is predicated on an abundance of all things desirable; where all people share in this abundance, but it does not account for the motivation to create this abundance. The very idea of socialism is a contradiction to that motivation, profit. Karl Marx in his, perhaps, most famous`of quotes and one that is the flag ship of social justice and social democracy around the world is, “From each according to his abilities and to each according to his needs.” What a wonderful sentiment, but the reality is far from the truth. This is the essence of the socialistic cause that inspires so many around the world. The history of socialist government is quite the opposite and there is no reason to believe that the future of any socialist movement can be any different. Who; what authority defines what ones abilities are, and what authority defines what ones needs may be. This is where socialism ends and totalitarian rule begins. This is the Fascism, the Nazism, and the Communism that was so repugnant to Balabanoff. This is the essence of the Orwellian novel ‘1984’ Certainly, Fascism and Nazism are dead. Communism fell, as the Berlin wall was torn down and the Cold War came to an end and the age of transparency came into being. The truth of transparency, I think, is akin to a window; you can see through it, but yet it remains a barrier not to be breached.
The quote by Marx is center to the socialist. It is a promise, a primrose path to utopia. It is the goal, the objective, the mandate, the just cause that all must strive for, if true equality and peace is to be achieved. It is no different than the promise of theistic belief. The next time some one quotes Marx, you might ask how does the Marxist government define my abilities or what needs I have.