Women and the Corporate State

Fascism has always gotten a bad rap when it comes to women and the perceived role it assigns to them in the world. The placing of the family, consisting of a mother, father and children as the foundational unit of society has been used by Fascism’s opponents to smear it as a reactionary, misogynistic movement; with the intention of subjecting women to a life at home lacking enlightenment or learning, for no better reason than to express some inward desire to repress the opposite sex. There is some truth to this criticism, but a truth wrongly applied to Fascism.

For those familiar with my previous articles, a constant theme which runs through them is the failure of both the left and right to elucidate coherent ideologies. Fascism is the completion of their incomplete thought, replacing the utopian internationalism of the left with a realistic nationally centered idea and the abstract individualism of the right with a collective view of life which views the individual as gaining his individuality through interaction with real concrete social groups. In this particular circumstance the left has often pushed for a false liberation of women, viewing the human family as a means to keep women enslaved to a social structure designed to oppress them. The right through their half-hearted opposition, support for individualism and Capitalism has added fuel to the fire, unintentionally aiding and abetting the desire of the left to destroy the family unit.

Where the right gets it right is more often than not in regards to instinct, and where they get it wrong is in construction. Conservatives often display a valuing of family, religion, and nation. Concepts the left dismiss as artificial constructs created by one class to rule over another. The problem arrives when the right attempts to formulate these instincts into social ideas. Their patriotism and loyalty to their country necessitates a need to synthesize their instincts with the architects of their countries and more broadly western civilization. In the case of America this creates a problem. The founding political philosophy of the United States was derived from an enlightenment tradition which viewed man as a being extracted from all social groups and contexts, a being purely theoretical, created to justify the overthrow of an existing social order which was viewed as an impediment to the accumulation of wealth by a rising merchant class. This contrasted sharply with the morals of most citizens who valued family and religion. The political history of America since has been the evolution of this ideology into more and more perverted forms. The American Right unable and unwilling to recognize the false foundations of their own beliefs and unable to articulate a coherent argument which doesn’t compromise their ideology have attempted to fight the erosion of the values they hold dear through emotionally laden arguments meant to smear their opponents as Godless Communists and Femi-Nazis, while ignoring the role their own ideology has played in bringing about the rise of Feminism and Communism.

Capitalism is not only an economic system and a way to allocate resources but a social structure which shapes how individuals and ideas are formed. It’s dualistic in nature untying Capital from the worker, Nation, and State, viewing these as commodities to be used to expand profit or in many cases to dispose of as impediments to expansion. At the end of the Second World War with the rise of Corporate America there was no more viable potential for expansion than to tap into the female population, most of whom were stay at home mothers. Feminists while meaning well worked with Business (who didn’t mean well) to change social mores to ‘liberate’ women for the sake of economic profit. College instead of being an institution of higher learning meant to help individuals grow intellectually became a means to getting a good job, movies and television shows began to portray the working mother as a heroine, while portraying the sacrifice of the stay at home mom as an impediment to financial success, and the increasing amount of sexuality in advertising and movies devalued the family and values which make it successful. Without the family as the source of personal fulfillment more and more females entered the workplace; this had the effect of increasing the supply of labor and driving down wages, along with the social pressure brought on by advertising to acquire more and more wealth it became next to impossible for those wanting a traditional family relationship to make it financial reality. Women through their liberation by Capitalism have the worst of both worlds, having a biological need to have children while confronting a structural pull to adapt to a society which looks down upon the traditional female role as a mother and wife. The free market ideology of those opposed to this new order has served to nullify all of their arguments and has actually created the conditions which have given it legitimacy.

Fascism despite its appeals to masculinity has always viewed women as having a central place in its thought. The family being the foundation upon which everything else in society rests, the fact that women bear children and primarily care for them in their early years solidifies the female as the bedrock upon which the whole structure rests. This isn’t to imply that the Father, children, and extended relatives don’t also have imperative roles to play; much like the human body each component can’t function without the other, each complements the others through the fulfillment of different functions. So when policies are pursued at the Federal level geared towards liberating Females, such as legalized abortion, gay marriage, and lessening restrictions on pornography the freedom to engage in these activities become chains enslaving them to lifestyles which take away from the discipline and sacrifice inherent in family life. With the destruction of the female’s role in the family come the destruction of the family itself and consequently the other social institutions built upon the virtues of family life. Many of the social ills plaguing society from drugs and gangs to an impotent government can be traced back to the breakdown in family structure.

This begs the question what policy alternatives are available to us to reverse this process. First, we need to explain what can’t be done. It would be very easy to fall into the trap of mandating through legislation certain policy outcomes deemed conducive to our ideals. Forcing someone to engage in any occupation against their will defeats the purpose of the type of State and society we’re attempting to construct. Morality only exists where the will is capable of comprehending it. Sacrifice only thrives when it’s freely embraced. To posit that all women should be housewives denies the reality of the inherent diversity of men and women. Some have a natural inclination for science, arts, politics, etc. and they should be able to develop these skills to the fullest of their ability. What we’re proposing is a structural change in society that would actually give women an option

So what needs to be done at first would be economic reform. The option to be a full time mother doesn’t exist for many women who would otherwise prefer that alternative due to a continually deteriorating economy 50 years in the making. The pressure of materialist accumulation together with a reduction in wages relative to the cost of living has excluded this as an option for most families. The Corporatist structure holds the key to once again making the family wage a reality. The shared management of industry between owners and workers is a built in safe-guard preventing the over accumulation of wealth in management at the expense of labor. This helps to prevent the current economic situation where consumers don’t have the purchasing power to absorb the present amount of production. A well-regulated economy which increases wages while keeping prices manageable would be a return to giving families a real choice on how they would like to structure themselves.

To address materialism and its effects on the family we need to first address the problem of the role of the State relative to the society. Democracy holds that the State is a manager reflecting the values and needs of the individuals and associations which compose it. As wealth under capitalism accumulates, it accumulates in a vastly unequal manner creating groups with power which in many cases supersedes that of the State itself. These groups are then able to direct policy towards their own benefit at the expense of the public. They’re allowed to influence what is bought, sold, and advertised; society becomes a reflection of the plutocracy; with the values of wealth acquisition at the heart of the system spreading to the individuals and families which comprise its component parts. Philosophically a change in the role of the State must be advocated before an adjustment in the social structure can be contemplated. A State which attempts to mandate supply and demand and the composition of the marketplace must first have the moral authority to embark on such a task, something lacking under liberal democracy. When the State is recognized as being the creator of the Nation and the highest expression of all its component parts then will it be able to use the Corporate structure to manage the flow of information to the public, putting emphasis on those aspects that promote family, sacrifice, discipline and other values deemed to promote the collective and individual well-being.

Because of the lack of money involved in being a housewife there traditionally hasn’t been much in the way of vested interest groups fighting for issues valued by this demographic. So, recognized as a lifestyle integral to society’s existence the State would integrate this vital aspect into the corporate structure. Just as Carpenters, Office Workers, and Artists would have representation through their Corporation so would housewives. Being a stay at home mother would have the same prestige and standing that all other occupations have, with official representational interests.

Staying the course under current conditions can only lead to the destruction of the family unit and in consequence the society we live in.

3 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All