-
🌐 Follow : https://www.reddit.com/r/Librandu Powered by @reddit2telegram & @r_channels
"Is the Indian bourgeoisie comprador?" The Anvil's critique of Nazariya's characterization of the Indian ruling class.
https://redd.it/1fbwfqf
@r_Librandu
The Detriment of Fascist Feminism (Final Part)
# So...........what's the point?
Why have made this long-ass post? What is the point to it?
Well, I want to draw some conclusions here. We need to push forward for intersectional, inclusive and radical feminism. We need to reclaim radical feminism.
But how do we do that? I would love to listen to your thoughts on this, but I have a few solutions.
We all need to listen to more perspectives on feminism and not just from Savarna or White women. We need to listen to women of colour, we need to listen to trans women, queer women, Dalit women, Adivasi women and so on. This is the least we all can do.
We need to fight for equality of all kinds. We will remain oppressed under the power hierarchies of this society unless and until we fight all of them and not selectively choose one. We need to fight the Patriarchy, we need to oppose Capitalism, we need to abolish race and caste, we need reclaim revolutionary movements and causes from the libs.
We can't talk about women's issues in isolation, we need to talk about the whole oppressive system.
Women in India will never be liberated until caste is annihilated. Until capitalism is deconstructed. Until patriarchy is fought.
https://redd.it/1fbbdnk
@r_Librandu
The Detriment of Fascist Feminism (Part 2)
# Savarna Feminists
We have white feminists of our own in this great country that we call India- Savarna Feminists.
Savarna feminists are libfems who are usually ignorant of the class and caste struggles of DBA women. They prefer caste solidarity over supporting women.
>
Now, it's no doubt that Savarna feminism, just like white feminism, is exclusionary. It's casteist. Similar to white feminism, Savarna feminism too, exists to consolidate resources for the Savarnas. It uses pre-existing structures of oppression to further an elite part of women's society. They too impede the annihilation of caste. I urge you all to add to this, as I am not qualified enough to talk about this issue in its entirety. But now let me get to why I have yapped for so long.
# About that Sub...........
Now, the reason I started with this post- the radical feminist sub. I was initially very supportive of this sub. I really like the idea of radical feminism in the Indian context. But I saw whiffs of transphobia in the community and called it out, thinking that it would be well received. I wasn't aware that it was a women exclusive sub at that time and joined in the conversation, to which I am sorry. I have deleted my comments there in order to comply with the rules of the sub. But before doing that, I had some TERF-feminists countering my argument. That person said-
>
I agree that liberal feminism is just white feminism with extra steps. I am still undecided on choice-feminism. But this blatant transphobia was too much to handle for me. People of this sub are misgendering trans people, denying their identity and just being your average TERF. As a queer man who strongly feels for this topic, I was disturbed. I was shellshocked even. Most feminist spaces I have frequented were very inclusive and progressive, then I saw the rules of the sub-
>
Now, this screams Svarna feminism!!!!!!!! I am in support with the collective liberation of women from the oppressor class, but that is impossible with such restrictions.
All the dots are now connected. A few Savarna women read books written by a few White feminists like **Andrea Dworkins, Shiela Jeffris, Simon** etc. (don't get me wrong, their works are eye opening, but also problematic, as discussed with Simon's example above) and came to the conclusion that only patriarchy is oppressing women all around. This lack of diversity in their booklist, their privilege blindness, their ignorance to the history of feminism and their blatant disregard and lack of empathy for trans women has led to them becoming these RadFems who are just Savarna feminists.
This is a classic case of Savarna people hijacking detrimental issues and contaminating it with their privilege. The same thing happened with communism in India.
They claim to strive for the collective liberation of women, but ignore the fact that race, caste, class and other identity markers have oppressed women for a long time alongside patriarchy. These feminists, who claim to strife for liberation, inadvertently propagate patriarchal Casteism and capitalism which keeps the status quo alive. They are ignorant of intersectionality, thinking that it is only a fraction of Liberal feminism (which it isn't). They don't want liberation of women; they want to appear to be working towards it, when in actuality, they're the one who are stopping actual change.
This is, what I would like to call, right wing feminism. Conservative feminism. They view women's oppression and the conception of feminism with a redundant attitude. The fight for women's liberation for them is a binary war between them and the patriarchy. When in actuality, women's oppression is multi-faceted and multi-dimensional. But they can't lower their curtains of privilege to see the oppressive powers other than patriarchy.
This sub not only disgusts me with their transphobia, but it also infuriates me with its ignorance.
\[Conclusion here- [The Detriment of Fascist Feminism (Final Part)
the intersectionality in the oppression of coloured women. It’s a feminism that prioritizes achieving equality for white women, insisting that their equality will open up doors for all other women. Due to time and word-limit constraints, not to mention my lack of expertise, I will recommend some videos down here to better understand white feminism through Barbie-
[The White Feminism of Barbie (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucyDC8mlc2s)
[The Plastic Feminism of Barbie (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RToUZJ0l7Pk)
[\*sigh\* …it’s time to address white feminist shenanigans 🫠 | Khadija Mbowe (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou9chutOWpw)
But there are problems with white feminism that I want to address here now. White feminism is fascist. Plain and simple. It depends on the existing hierarchal systems to further the power consolidation of the White race. It's purely evil, in my opinion. White feminists don't just betray the cause of ending ALL women's oppression, but they, like the white Suffragettes, impede societal progress, especially for the marginalized. Black feminists in the US, such as the great Audre Lorde, have consistently noted that White women tended to side with their racial interests at the cost of pan-woman solidarity.
But there is an extra topping to it. The White RadFems.
Radical feminism is something I strongly feel for, but of course, it has been muddled by white people. Radical feminism seeks to end patriarchy and liberate women from the clutches of the status quo, I, personally, am a big fan of liberation. I want the society to be cleansed off patriarchy. But where I disagree with white radicals like **Shiela Jeffreys** (who is a transphobe) is how to do it exactly.
Jeffris believes that women will only be liberated if they live separated lives from men in a sex-negative lesbian society. Now, I am very sympathetic of this. I, too, support 4B. It's a women's prerogative whether or not she wants to interact with men. But I don't think segregating is the solution for patriarchy. And that is for two reasons- Lesbian fetishism and in-groups.
Lesbian relationships are not perfect. They too, can be violent and toxic. But somehow, there is this notion that a same-sex relationships are inherently good. They're certainly can be better than your average heteronormative relationship but aren't completely free of sin.
Also, there will always be in-groups regardless of any separatist movement. For instance, Jinnah wanted a Muslim Pakistan, but look at Ahamadiyah, Shia and previously the Bengali population there have been suffering the brunt of the Sunni establishment. But I really do respect separatist movements, but I am allowed to be a little skeptical of them right? Please provide more insight if you can.
Though separation of the sexes (not gender, we will come to it later) seems like a legit option to shelter women from the crimes of men, I don't think this will end patriarchy. But I don't want to discuss solutions just yet. Please bear with me for some more time.
# Trans is a Colour too
TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists) are a hell of a kind. The flagbearer of the TERFs, the billionaire author of the Harry Potter series, J.K Rowling has been notorious for her anti-trans rhetoric that has affected many trans people, trans women in particular. She has propagated misinformation, dealt with Nazi crime denial, reinforced Eurocentric standards of racism and associated with anti-feminist, anti-abortion Nazi organizations just because they too are transphobic. I don't have the time and energy to elaborate on every granule of detail, so please check these videos out-
[J.K. Rowling | ContraPoints (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gDKbT_l2us&t=4038s)
[Explaining JK Rowling’s Transphobia (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GBUArD51KY&t=3476s)
[JK Rowling & the Moldy Transphobic Racism (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2OxYPDXTXI)
[JK Rowling's New Friends
The Detriment of Fascist Feminism (Part 1)
# Introduction
I am sure all of us on this sub are feminists or allies. But what kind? Can feminism be fascist? I want to explore these questions today.
A new sub has been established to further the cause of radical feminism (which I support) in the Indian context. Just to be on the safe side, I will not be naming the sub as it might constitute as brigading. But that sub is a "safe space for Indian radical feminists". We will come to it later.
But I have some apprehensions about the core tenets of the sub after interacting with one of its members, which I will talk more about later.
The topic that I want to look deeper into is exclusionary feminism and the belligerently fascist subtexts to it.
# Disclaimer
But before that, full disclosure- I am a Savarna cis man. I am no expert either. But I hope this post can be insightful and interactive. Please do call me out if I cross any lines or speak out of ignorance. Please do add more to the discussion if I missed something.
# The Suffragette Movement
Women were historically deprived of basic human rights for the longest of time. From Ancient Greece to post-revolution France, women saw negligible autonomy in both their personal lives and social lives. This sparked a mass movement by women living in Western countries to demand enfranchisement. The Suffragette Movement is a very prominent event that shaped the polity of many European and western countries, particularly the US and Great Britian, to a significant extent. This was, obviously, a huge win for women. I's sure all of you are aware of this, so I shall not dwell too deep into the timeline of the movement.
But was this movement progressive by the modern standard? No, it wasn't. It had a lot of problems. But I am sure some would find it surprising to hear that a lot of Suffragettes, particularly from the US, were also racists and Nazis.
In the early 20th century (post-civil-war time) black men were demonized as disgusting predators who are a threat to the white woman's purity and virginity, ergo, the white race (this is also an example of how women are dehumanized to be baby making factories, but I digress). These stereotypes and racist dehumanization were the fuel that often justify slavery. This can be understood with the blatantly racist film, ***The Birth of a Nation*** directed by **D.W Griffith**.
>They \[pro-confederacy writers like Griffith\] also had to create the idea that the war had *nothing* to do with slavery, and instead was about state’s rights and protecting the homeland from invaders, especially protecting their vulnerable women.
([Source](https://digpodcast.org/2021/08/08/the-birth-of-a-nation/))
This racism was eminent in the larger white society, even women.
>The suffragist heroes Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony seized control of the feminist narrative of the 19th century. Their influential history of the movement still governs popular understanding of the struggle for women’s rights and will no doubt serve as a touchstone for commemorations that will unfold across the United States around the centennial of the 19th Amendment in 2020................. Historians who are not inclined to hero worship — including [Elsa Barkley Brown](http://wmst.umd.edu/people/core-faculty/elsa-barkley-brown), [Lori Ginzberg](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/09/28/elizabeth-cady-stanton) and [Rosalyn Terborg-Penn](http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/product_info.php?products_id=21286) — have recently provided an unsparing portrait of this once-neglected period. Stripped of her halo, Stanton, the campaign’s principal philosopher, is exposed as a [classic liberal racist](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/09/28/elizabeth-cady-stanton) who embraced fairness in the abstract while publicly enunciating bigoted views of African-American men, whom she characterized as “Sambos” and incipient rapists in the period just after the war. The suffrage struggle itself took on a similar flavor, acquiescing to white supremacy — and selling out the interests of
The Detriment of Fascist Feminism (Part 1)
# Introduction
I am sure all of us on this sub are feminists or allies. But what kind? Can feminism be fascist? I want to explore these questions today.
A new sub has been established to further the cause of radical feminism (which I support) in the Indian context. Just to be on the safe side, I will not be naming the sub as it might constitute as brigading. But that sub is a "safe space for Indian radical feminists". We will come to it later.
But I have some apprehensions about the core tenets of the sub after interacting with one of its members, which I will talk more about later.
The topic that I want to look deeper into is exclusionary feminism and the belligerently fascist subtexts to it.
# Disclaimer
But before that, full disclosure- I am a Savarna cis man. I am no expert either. But I hope this post can be insightful and interactive. Please do call me out if I cross any lines or speak out of ignorance. Please do add more to the discussion if I missed something.
# The Suffragette Movement
Women were historically deprived of basic human rights for the longest of time. From Ancient Greece to post-revolution France, women saw negligible autonomy in both their personal lives and social lives. This sparked a mass movement by women living in Western countries to demand enfranchisement. The Suffragette Movement is a very prominent event that shaped the polity of many European and western countries, particularly the US and Great Britian, to a significant extent. This was, obviously, a huge win for women. I's sure all of you are aware of this, so I shall not dwell too deep into the timeline of the movement.
But was this movement progressive by the modern standard? No, it wasn't. It had a lot of problems. But I am sure some would find it surprising to hear that a lot of Suffragettes, particularly from the US, were also racists and Nazis.
In the early 20th century (post-civil-war time) black men were demonized as disgusting predators who are a threat to the white woman's purity and virginity, ergo, the white race (this is also an example of how women are dehumanized to be baby making factories, but I digress). These stereotypes and racist dehumanization were the fuel that often justify slavery. This can be understood with the blatantly racist film, The Birth of a Nation directed by D.W Griffith.
>They [pro-confederacy writers like Griffith\] also had to create the idea that the war had nothing to do with slavery, and instead was about state’s rights and protecting the homeland from invaders, especially protecting their vulnerable women.
(Source)
This racism was eminent in the larger white society, even women.
>The suffragist heroes Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony seized control of the feminist narrative of the 19th century. Their influential history of the movement still governs popular understanding of the struggle for women’s rights and will no doubt serve as a touchstone for commemorations that will unfold across the United States around the centennial of the 19th Amendment in 2020................. Historians who are not inclined to hero worship — including Elsa Barkley Brown, Lori Ginzberg and Rosalyn Terborg-Penn — have recently provided an unsparing portrait of this once-neglected period. Stripped of her halo, Stanton, the campaign’s principal philosopher, is exposed as a classic liberal racist who embraced fairness in the abstract while publicly enunciating bigoted views of African-American men, whom she characterized as “Sambos” and incipient rapists in the period just after the war. The suffrage struggle itself took on a similar flavor, acquiescing to white supremacy — and selling out the interests of
Nearly four in ten (39 percent) Gen Z women identifying as religiously unaffiliated compared to 34 percent of Gen Z men.
https://www.americansurveycenter.org/newsletter/young-women-are-leaving-church-in-unprecedented-numbers/
https://redd.it/1cpdxu5
@r_Librandu
Is this class consciousness?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C6tFferMwf1/?igsh=NHoyZzl4dWl1dWhy
https://redd.it/1cp435t
@r_Librandu
'Men With 2 Wives Will Get Rs 2 Lakh': Congress Leader's Bizarre Promise Sparks Row; BJP Calls It 'Cheap Thinking' - News18
https://www.news18.com/world/men-with-2-wives-will-get-rs-2-lakh-congress-leaders-bizarre-promise-sparks-controversy-bjp-calls-it-cheap-thinking-8884929.html
https://redd.it/1cp7be4
@r_Librandu
Who you want is not in your hands but majority choose
https://redd.it/1cp4nry
@r_Librandu
Delhi Court Frames Sexual Harassment Charges Against BJP MP Brij Bhushan Saran Singh
https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/delhi-court-frames-sexual-harassment-charges-against-bjp-mp-brij-bhushan-saran-singh-257609
https://redd.it/1cou79i
@r_Librandu
The decision to convict and imprison the two executors while allowing the masterminds to remain free is perplexing and raises questions about the thoroughness of the investigation. Dr. Narendra Dabholkar's family continues to seek justice, but their efforts have been thwarted by this outcome.
https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/pune-court-conviction-narendra-dabholkar-murder-case-257590
https://redd.it/1corlh8
@r_Librandu
MACKLEMORE - HIND'S HALL (Pro-Palestine anthem)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgDQyFeBBIo
https://redd.it/1cok6w2
@r_Librandu
Maharashtra Congress president Nana Patole says, "We are going to purify Ram Mandir in Ayodhya after INDIA Alliance comes to power. Shankaracharyas were opposing this (Pran Pratishtha), all the four Shankaracharyas will purify the Ram Temple.
https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1788846300210831826?t=yRKPADcca2kZ3HToCqBagA&s=19
https://redd.it/1col2cg
@r_Librandu
Harish Patel's wife gave birth to a child in a private hospital in Kushinagar,UP.
Harish couldn’t pay 4k ₹ fees.
The hospital held his wife & newborn hostage.
Harish sold his another child for 20k and freed his wife& newborn
https://x.com/AG_knocks/status/1832502139656020017
https://redd.it/1fbq1xo
@r_Librandu
: ](https://www.reddit.com/r/librandu/comments/1fbbdnk/the_detriment_of_fascist_feminism_final_part/)\]
https://redd.it/1fbbzik
@r_Librandu
(youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou_xvXJJk7k)
I don't consider TERFs to be feminists. But their justification for why they're transphobic is rather interesting. This is from the Radical feminist subreddit earlier-
>Since radical feminist belief in the existence of patriarchy relies on the notion of two sexes, one of which acts as the oppressor sex, radical feminism lies at odds with modern gender ideology which dictates that sex is mutable. The notion that a person can identify in and out of their sex - and by extension in and out of their oppression - renders patriarchal oppression a meaningless concept. Whether or not this constitutes transphobia is up to you.
These people hide behind their hate by justifying it with BS philosophical inclusions. Something the Nazis did too. This is a clear juxtaposition between TERFs and Nazis. Both rely on misinformation and BS science to justify their bigoted positions.
Now let me digress a bit.
Biological essentialism is the belief that certain characteristics, behavioral patterns, abilities (cognitive and otherwise), likes or dislikes are inherently linked to an individual's genetics and not at all related to social and cultural stimuli. This belief system has given rise to evolutionary psychology, a very problematic and controversial field. Bio-essentialism has been used to justify gender roles
Radical Feminists apparently believe that even oppression is biological. They're propagating the very same ideas that has oppressed women for centuries and even now is cited by incels to justify their hate. This is like a self-goal.
\[Continued here-[The Detriment of Savarna Feminism (Part 2) : r/librandu (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/librandu/comments/1fbbae0/the_detriment_of_savarna_feminism_part_2/) : \]
https://redd.it/1fbb405
@r_Librandu
African-American women — when it became politically expedient to do so. This betrayal of trust opened a rift between black and white feminists that persists to this day.
([Source](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/28/opinion/sunday/suffrage-movement-racism-black-women.html))
Throughout much of the 1800s, the women's alcohol temperance movement was a powerful force in the greater push toward women's suffrage. Meanwhile, many suffrage leaders — such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton — had also championed black equality. Yet in 1870, the suffragists found themselves on opposing ends of the equal-rights battle when Congress passed the 15th Amendment, enabling black men to vote (at least, in theory) — and not women. That measure engendered resentment among some white suffragists, especially in the South.
([Source](https://www.npr.org/2011/03/25/134849480/the-root-how-racism-tainted-womens-suffrage))
White Suffragettes were apathic to the problems of the black community, so much so, that they stood in odds with them. White Suffragettes of that time saw people of colour (specifically black me) as competition. They saw women's rights to be in direct contention with the rights of non-white races.
This conflict between the White Suffragette movement and the greater racial equality movement was an opportunity for white supremacist men to further divide the oppressed along racial lines. Racist Capitalist **George Francis Train**, a wealthy and influential businessman at that time funded **Susan B. Anthony's** works to further divide the civil rights cause ([Source](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/susan-anthony-getting-support-revolution-taking-on-an-unusual-ally-180958480/)). And this was particularly infuriating for Black Suffragettes, who saw woman who were seemingly trying to "demand for women's equality" to uphold race solidarity over human rights.
The White Suffragette movement was very much the foundation of second wave feminism, feminism in third world countries (like India, but I have a feeling that people won't like it if I say that) and to a great extent, even the modern conception of what feminism means in the liberal mainstream. Now, please keep this and mind as we move on to a different era.
# The Second Wave/Sex
The second wave of feminism was another significant era where feminists started talking more about the effect of patriarchy with greater intensity and detail. **Simon de Beauvoir** (no introductions required) was a key figure in the second wave, with her book, ***The Second Sex***, which is, not gonna lie, pretty amazing. She was able to articulate so much so good. "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman" is an iconic line. GO read it if you haven't already.
But even though I personally respect her and like her, she and her book have its fair share of problems. It stands as one of the most striking examples of the essentialization of women in the figure of the white bourgeoise mother and hence disregard for other forms of oppression such as race or sexuality. When Simon says woman, she means *white* woman. Therein lies the problem. Her understanding of patriarchal oppression is one dimensional and her attitude towards the oppression of women of colour and of atypical sexuality is optically dismissive.
>In de Beauvoir's view, then, the justification for inferior contradictions of race, class, and caste are not just comparable but rather the same.......in this way, she sheets each of these as a discrete system of oppression that could be compared but never overlap.....In every comparison that Beauvoir makes between women and Blacks, however, the Blacks are assumed to be American and male and the women are assumed to be white.
-**Rafia Zakaria** (American-Pakistani feminist) in her book ***Against White Feminism.***
Even though the book has problems, it is undeniably one of the most influential feminist literatures of all time. But therein the problem lies.
# White Radical Feminism
White feminism is feminism that focuses on white women and fails to address
African-American women — when it became politically expedient to do so. This betrayal of trust opened a rift between black and white feminists that persists to this day.
(Source)
Throughout much of the 1800s, the women's alcohol temperance movement was a powerful force in the greater push toward women's suffrage. Meanwhile, many suffrage leaders — such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton — had also championed black equality. Yet in 1870, the suffragists found themselves on opposing ends of the equal-rights battle when Congress passed the 15th Amendment, enabling black men to vote (at least, in theory) — and not women. That measure engendered resentment among some white suffragists, especially in the South.
(Source)
White Suffragettes were apathic to the problems of the black community, so much so, that they stood in odds with them. White Suffragettes of that time saw people of colour (specifically black me) as competition. They saw women's rights to be in direct contention with the rights of non-white races.
This conflict between the White Suffragette movement and the greater racial equality movement was an opportunity for white supremacist men to further divide the oppressed along racial lines. Racist Capitalist George Francis Train, a wealthy and influential businessman at that time funded Susan B. Anthony's works to further divide the civil rights cause (Source). And this was particularly infuriating for Black Suffragettes, who saw woman who were seemingly trying to "demand for women's equality" to uphold race solidarity over human rights.
The White Suffragette movement was very much the foundation of second wave feminism, feminism in third world countries (like India, but I have a feeling that people won't like it if I say that) and to a great extent, even the modern conception of what feminism means in the liberal mainstream. Now, please keep this and mind as we move on to a different era.
# The Second Wave/Sex
The second wave of feminism was another significant era where feminists started talking more about the effect of patriarchy with greater intensity and detail. Simon de Beauvoir (no introductions required) was a key figure in the second wave, with her book, The Second Sex, which is, not gonna lie, pretty amazing. She was able to articulate so much so good. "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman" is an iconic line. GO read it if you haven't already.
But even though I personally respect her and like her, she and her book have its fair share of problems. It stands as one of the most striking examples of the essentialization of women in the figure of the white bourgeoise mother and hence disregard for other forms of oppression such as race or sexuality. When Simon says woman, she means white woman. Therein lies the problem. Her understanding of patriarchal oppression is one dimensional and her attitude towards the oppression of women of colour and of atypical sexuality is optically dismissive.
>In de Beauvoir's view, then, the justification for inferior contradictions of race, class, and caste are not just comparable but rather the same.......in this way, she sheets each of these as a discrete system of oppression that could be compared but never overlap.....In every comparison that Beauvoir makes between women and Blacks, however, the Blacks are assumed to be American and male and the women are assumed to be white.
-Rafia Zakaria (American-Pakistani feminist) in her book Against White Feminism.
Even though the book has problems, it is undeniably one of the most influential feminist literatures of all time. But therein the problem lies.
# White Radical Feminism
White feminism is feminism that focuses on white women and fails to address
“Grow a spine or resign,” democratic rights groups protest ECI’s inaction against hate speech and misconduct
https://maktoobmedia.com/india/grow-a-spine-or-resign-democratic-rights-groups-protest-ecis-inaction-against-hate-speech-and-misconduct/
https://redd.it/1cpishi
@r_Librandu
India is not a "Democracy"
This post is not about one particular political party, I'm not Dhruv Rathi. this is about the whole system of "democracy", the structure is flawed in its core.
TLDR; rich people run the show, regardless of what symbol they use in election, at the end of the day they serve the 1% and not the common citizen.
In a democracy, if I am unhappy with current state of things and I want to bring a change by getting elected then I should be able to do it. If my policies are popular enough then I will be voted into power.
Problem starts with how our elections are conducted. You have to run a campaign to gain popularity and you need money to do that. Election commission has set such spending limit at maximum of ₹95,00,000. and that is speaking legally, we all know politicians are spending multiple times of that amount. so the point is, if you want to have chance to compete in election you need to save approx. ₹1,75,000 per month. on top of that you can't work a regular job if you want continued media presence but lets not dig in that deep.
so what percentage of people in this country can actually participate in "democracy"? 90% of population makes less than 25,000 per month so there is clearly no democracy for them. source\[1\](https://wid.world/document/indian-inequality-updates-2015-2019-world-inequality-lab-technical-note-2020-09/)\[2\](http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/ChancelPiketty2019RIW.pdf)
https://preview.redd.it/q768ibp68rzc1.png?width=1679&format=png&auto=webp&s=a7623230199f02714d3541b5071aab9d9768b721
now the only ones who can practically participate in the democracy are the top 0.1% and their class interests are not same as the 90% of the population. they don't care about unemployment, reservations, healthcare, education etc. They have insane amount of wealth to care about that.
# "But politicians have to answer to the people or else they won't get elected"
This argument doesn't hold much ground because at the end of the day nobody is doing politics because they want the good of the people. If I had 1 crore in my bank account I wouldn't have been a communist. nobody does politics out of "ideals". There are material reasons for it.
So what material benefits do politicians get from being elected? Salary of an MP after all the allowances that they get is around ₹1,76,000 (source) That's not even enough to get their campaign money back. so how come they are surviving?
One source of money could be that, they are getting funds from their respective party for elections. Ideally these funds are supposed to be gathered from common public but that's not possible because 90% of them live in poverty. so funds come from businesses. Now if the party has to keep getting these funds then they have to please their overlords and interests of corporations and the public are not the same. So again, politicians are working for the rich 1%, not the public.
only other source I can think of would be corruption and I don't think that needs explaining.
As we can see they don't have to answer to the public because, they are gatekeeping the elections from the common citizen, its too expensive to participate in. so however much we complain we can't do anything about it. its not in politicians material interest to advocate for the common people.
If anyone is interested in reading more about why liberal democracies are a scam try Democracy for the Few by Michael Parenti. Books goes in great detail about how justice system, media, bureaucracy etc. operate. its from US perspective but we have very similar system so it works.
https://redd.it/1cpdrmc
@r_Librandu
The term caste comes the Spanish colonial race hierarchy in South America, and how it was mostly solved in Paraguay.
From an outsiders perspective, Ambedkar went light on India with reservation despite winey upper caste people complaining about scheduled caste peoples daring to have even the smallest leg up in society. What India really needed was someone like José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia, who prevented Spaniards from marrying another pure Spaniards.
Also as a liberation theology follower Ambedkar is goat material for walking out on Pius XI for being a mediocre right wing capitulatulator/not standing up for Goa'n lower caste ppl
Anyways heres the source on mandatory race mixing to solve the casta problem chao
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9GasparRodr%C3%ADguezdeFrancia
Also yalls subreddit is based af gotta say
https://redd.it/1cp5ffd
@r_Librandu
People should worship their faith by their own. Not forcefully. The average indian say
https://redd.it/1cp4b0n
@r_Librandu
In UP’s Sambhal, cops ‘lathi-charged’ voters in Muslim-dominated villages
https://youtu.be/okYwpTAqYBo?si=qJgXRx23tIDzZaf7
https://redd.it/1coq7li
@r_Librandu
Shivaji Nagar Police Deem Themselves 'Not Guilty' in Pardhi Children Custodial Violence Case
https://m.thewire.in/article/rights/shivaji-nagar-police-investigation-own-role-pardhi-children-abuse
https://redd.it/1conqoh
@r_Librandu
Kya Hawa Badal Rahi Hai? Ya Sirf Ye Log Halke Se Jhoke Se Dar Rahe Hain?
https://redd.it/1conxy7
@r_Librandu
I posted this comment on a reel in Instagram and 20-30 hi hindutvadis started abusing me left and right, I blocked most of them, they even started writing abuses on my posts.
https://redd.it/1col2du
@r_Librandu
