29
Feminism and Astrology
(hexbear.net)
I don't understand why there are so many people who consider themselves "Marxist feminists", but at the same time are distracted by astrology.
The origin of feminism is working class, and as a working class movement, it is materialist. I don't know if they at least know what dialectical materialism is, since they don't see such an abysmal contradiction between astrology (pseudoscience) and feminism (materialism).
They remind me of the liberal “feminist” Gloria Steinem.
And the same with some anarchists.
What do you think about it?
i call myself a marxist and a communist because i agree with marx's analysis and critique of capitalism, and other marxist and adjacent theorists critiques of imperialism and advocacy for democratic centralism. i largely agree with historical materialism as a means of analysis, but i'm just not sold on strict ontological or epistemological materialism, in the sense of eliminativist physicalist realism. i have yet to be convinced out of epistemological nihilism and metaphysical/ontological agnosticism. obviously any specific beliefs like astrology or solipsistic idealism without any empirical evidence or epistemological basis are probably BS, but it would be foolish to assume we know basically everything about reality imo.
Not to mention that western materialism erases or dismisses indigenous peoples', and for that matter, any non-western forms of knowledge. This is colonialist in nature, and reinforces the patriarcal, objectivist, project that is the social institution "science".
What we call "facts" are politically loaded notions, and what we accept as fact and fiction reflects the power imbalances of an already unequal and oppressive society. So, thinking that our knowledge is complete only through western, objectivist ways of knowing, is to tacitly accept the power structures that led to it being dominant in the first place.
What are "non-western forms of knowledge"? What are some examples of facts posited by these forms?
I'm not sure myself. Maybe they're referring to stuff like indigenous technical knowledge of environmental management. When you look into that, all the generations of accumulated knowledge gained by observation and experimentation, it really upends the traditional Western descriptions of indigenous peoples as lacking any scientific tradition.
It blew my mind when I learned about it, especially the major environmental impacts not maintaining those systems had on the western hemisphere post-Columbus.
First of all, how does materialism "dismiss and erase" indigenous knowledge? Most materialists (Marxists) are in favor of recording, recovering, and rejuvenating indigenous culture and knowledge. Those who aren't, are anti-Marxist and should not be taken seriously. That being said, a rejection of materialism and science like this is also completely nonsensical and is an attack on the very fabric of Marxism and Scientific Socialism.
Yes, I ageee - something being accepted as "fact" can be used to reinforce oppressive power structures, such as patriarchy, slavery, etc. - however, using this as justification to reject science, materialism, and "objectivism" makes no sense. Pseudoscience like eugenics and other forms of "scientific" racism were used (and are still being used) to reinforce horrible oppressive and colonial power structures. But using the horrors commited as a result of pseudoscience - which is a rejection of actual science in favor of theories that lack proper evidence and are not backed by any real science, as cause to reject science, is self-contradictory and oxymoronic.