“This week I had to get my hormones for the first time on a new insurance plan.”
And this was the event that precipitated your Marxist tome? An inconvenience?
Hm. Most “socialist revolutionaries” are inspired by the class struggle between the poor and rich. You were inspired because you were inconvenienced in obtaining a pharmaceutical. Sort of a difference in scale there, eh? :-)
The US capitalistic economy is the most successful economic machine the world has ever known, if ONLY measured by its ability to lift people out of third-world-type squalor. It has redefined “poor” to mean a life with ample food to eat, computers for your children’s education, a roof over your head, medical care, access to transportation, and currently, a job if you want one (and if you don’t, access to social services that keep your head above water).
Does it have its warts? Of course. There is no perfect economic system. This is not news; a prophet 2000 years ago noted that there would be poor, always. Once that fact is acknowledged, however, the entire exercise of throwing out what works and what has worked over 250 years for the promise of something that has failed becomes a bit ….. lacking in sanity.
Capitalism necessarily leads to suffering and loss of quality of life for trans people.
Opinion stated as fact. And false. Capitalism, as an economic system, prospers more when all its productive elements (read: human beings) reach their full productive potential. It doesn’t matter what your race, gender, or who you prefer to do bedroom gymnastics with.
Contrast that with all historical implementations of collectivism, be they socialist, marxist, communist, religious, or maoist; all of which have rigid social codes which outlaw nonstandard expressions of gender and sex on the grounds that they weaken social cohesion. Why? Because they value social order higher than they do individual rights and freedom.
Marxists always promise both social order AND individual rights; once implemented, however, those pesky individual rights get lost in the shuffle, somehow.
Capitalism requires a certain level of unemployment.
No, it doesn’t.
Since having a reserve army of labor is necessary, capitalism requires a set of criteria for who will be granted status
Impossible. Unlike the collectivist authoritarian system you are proposing, which requires centralized management and control, capitalism does not; it is distributed in its “management” throughout tens of thousands of profitable enterprises, from Wal-Mart and Exxon all the way down to the Subway shop at the corner. Ergo, there is no central authority that has any ability to grant or remove status.
However, that “status”, to which you refer to, does exist; it is “granted” by each individual person, to themselves, by their experience, their educational level, their work ethic…..all of which add up to their productive capacity. And (to your point) although there are SOME in this “capitalistic management system” who would put aside productive capacity as the only measure and allow “race, gender, sexuality, and gender identity” to factor in, we have laws against that; so, the occurrences of discrimination in our capitalistic system are limited to smaller, privately owned enterprises which prefer to scoff at the law and discriminate.
In short, it’s a problem, but not a large one. Certainly not one that requires us to overturn a successful system (by revolution, which is the only way it could occur) and doom everyone to a generation of a wrecked economy and starvation while the revolutionaries figure out what comes next.
Liberal capitalist attempts at addressing social marginalization have all failed because such discrimination is necessary for capitalist economies to function.
At this risk of repeating myself, this is false. However, discrimination is a common feature of the collectivist authoritarian system you espouse. Think about it.
Capitalist and liberal solutions have repeatedly failed to provide real protections for trans people.
Hm. Depends on how you define “real”, I suppose. I would suggest you replace the term “real” with “satisfactory to me” and provide examples. Your statement is too vague to be commented upon.
A Marxist analysis of the social and economic forces which produce anti-trans social violence concretely demonstrates that the discrimination trans women face is inseparable from capitalist economics.
Well, yes, of course; any analysis from the perspective of a preferred ideology will generally find that other ideologies are lacking. They’ve got a bridge to sell you, after all. :-)
Same comment. Any Marxist analysis will conclude that non Marxist solution will fail. Obviously.
Only communism offers a theory of revolutionary struggle against the material conditions that produce trans social marginalization.
Well, that was the same conclusion that Angela Davis and Roger Nash Baldwin came to. They both regretted the fact that murder was necessary in order to implement their desired utopia (see the irony there?) but they acknowledged that there was no other way “forward”.
Only the overthrow of this capitalist class, the collectivization of labor, and the establishment of a revolutionary socialist state can provide a way forward.
Count me out.
Fortunately, you’re just blowing smoke. The chances of a revolution in the U.S. are, as they say in international football… “nil”.