selective genocide

A selective genocide is consummated through women's bodies. A new market eugenics.

A selective genocide is consummated through women's bodies. A new market eugenics.

By Evald Manes.

Now, a time after going to the feminist strike on the International Working Women's Day, we are still waiting for data after the emergency rescue of the male group.- Nothing. It does not seem to mean any analysis with enough relevance.

Now, after waiting, one can affirm, once again, that the plundering of the public space made by man has been consummated, adding to any content of the mobilizations without the slightest exercise of reflection on their privileges and their daily mechanisms of subordination towards women: going to the demonstrations and not seconding the strike. An emergency exit facilitated by the strategic subtlety of the majority unions, which managed to minimize the conflict to a scenario of partial and shifted work stoppages.

Feminist women's collectives have seen how all the experience and social tension built during the last year in neighborhoods, workplaces, schools and universities, have been represented in a "media-cratic" way, thanks to the consent of the essentialist and declassed groups of the same gender and without too much resistance on the part of those who overlap themselves to anti-capitalist and/or anti-imperialist slogans; that they have left their partners aside, in an act of authentic, and little genuine, cowardice, abandoning firmness, perseverance and effort, allowing the social-fascist bourgeoisie to take the lead in the process of class fracture that leads the current historical moment, to reduce it from the stage of feminist struggle. When will we begin to identify ourselves as militant class feminists, comrades? When?

According to an INE (Spanish Statistics National Institute) study on the use of time, 91.9% of women perform domestic tasks and take care of children, the elderly and dependent people, dedicating an average of 4 hours and 29 minutes a day. This means around 97.8 million hours per day devoted to reproductive activities and domestic work, compared to 43.2 million man-hours dedicated. A ratio of 7 to 3 between them. This is altered by adding the time allocated to paid work: 37.5% of women, 8.9 million, do not seek employment because they can not afford adequate services for the care of minors, compared to 10.3% in men, 2.3 million. If we perform an estimate for the volume of hours not destined for paid work, we find that 37.5% of women fail to contribute 71.5 million hours a day, compared to 18.8 million in men; a ratio of 8 to 2. This allows us to think that this volume of reproductive work is consumed because the contribution of domestic work and care is subordinated to a male subject, exploited by a system that perpetuates him as a favorite animal, charging him with subjective privileges, immobilized, unable to change his condition. What's going on? Why are we unable to change this ontogeny? What do these privileges mean for us? What do they suppose to this system?

From here, it's an open bar to build the readings that encourage us to carry out demands for the improvement of our salary conditions and thus increase the value of reproductive work, that which keeps us alive. Why not; we already subcontract domestic and care activities as a mechanism of unloading for our structural accomplices in the family unit, the one to which we exploit and subordinate under our condition of misery. In short, we download the one that needs it, on which the need for a social group has been created.- What a good man! How caring we are! A discharge that subordinates others. That establishes the polarity of this class condition over others; now migrants, now alien to our reason, in an attempt to disintegrate ourselves from class identity.

It is time for the strategy to change. We need to build other experiences that allow us to generate new spaces of resistance against this genocidal system. We must leave our privileges aside. We must accompany the class feminists and avoid the rise of the social-fascist positions in which the contemporary social democracy has been constantly derived since the late twenties.

How is the most probable result made of an event, if not the only possible one? How are relations of exploitation and subordination maintained invariably over time? When a possible event becomes the most probable result, we must ask ourselves how the conditions have been related and ordered the consequences that generate the same event, permanently, always, predictably, as in the observation of a natural physical phenomenon, like rain or snow. It is a mistake to think that it is an exclusively sociological problem, that is, framed in the historical materiality of an event that is repeated in a cyclical way over time and that we can point out thanks to what happens, without adequately revealing its progression, deepening and maintenance.

We must begin to discover a dialectical materiality on the set of reproductive activities carried out by the bodies during the progress of evolution, through the hereditary processes throughout the generations. The systematized submission of working women to the systemic ordering of capitalism also affects, in the same time present to theirs, their offspring, although this is not in the process of gestation. The environment is a hereditary factor, as are many of the acquired vital conditions. Or did you think that our practices were a matter of 'Natural Selection', ahistorical developments that neither affect nor alter the functions of our descendants? Miners, Laborers, Shipyards, Professional Technicians, Artisans, Men.- They are killing us through the bodies of the female comrades. This genocide must be stopped now, taking whoever must be taken.

To rely on a mechanism of 'Natural Selection', congenital determinism subjected to the struggle for existence as a scenario and objective goal, to understand the logical consequences of some results over time, is the main attribute, along with the conversion of metaphysics in mechanics and political economy, of the idealistic structures of the illustration converted to the directional mechanicism in the modern age. As long as the working class does not stop to analyze the importance of this rational construction, we will not generate the material conditions necessary for social transformation through the construction of experiences far from idiotic essentialisms. Producing experiences is to produce products, social synthesis.

I will rescue a single case of very recent appearance to try to perform this analysis and objectively articulate the set of conceptual pieces with which it is intended to compose this small article, which places in the center the dialectics of nature played by bodies during the evolution.

In a new research published in the American Journal of Respiratory and American Thoracic Society, we analyzed data from 6,235 participants of the European Community respiratory health survey, with an average age of 34 years at the time of registration. During the follow-up carried out for more than 20 years, they concluded, in the words of the main author of the study, Cecile Svanes, MD, PhD, professor at the Center for International Health:

"While the short-term effects of cleaning chemicals on asthma are increasingly well documented, we lack the knowledge of long-term impact" ... "We were afraid that such chemicals, constantly causing small damage to the respiratory tract day after day, year after year, could accelerate the rate of decline in lung function that occurs with age."

The summary of the publication concludes "... that women who work as cleaners or regularly use cleaning sprays or other cleaning products at home seem to experience a greater decline in lung function over time than women that do not clean."

Although it is not the intention to point out each and every one of the links that exist between poverty and health, a simple search by scientific journals will bring us to dozens and dozens of results, including: reduction of the brain surface, shortening of the telomeres and of the life expectancy, more likely to develop obesity and propensity to take risks (

Yes, we are obliged, on the contrary, to choose the relevance, the place where we turn the focal point that allows us to build the logical framework to justify this story. Here, it is mandatory to rescue what JM Olarieta calls the old Lamarckist, Lysenkist, or the now-named epigenetic phenomenon, as a critical point to situate our conflict, that is, "the progressive construction of organisms in their process of development".

In JM Olarieta's own words: Epigenetics ... "is born to supply the inadequacies of genetics and links to the idea that not everything is already written in the genes but depends on the conditions in which the life of the organism develops. The way of life leaves its traces in the DNA in the form of sequences that are activated or inactivated. Hence, what is really important is not the composition of the genome, the DNA and its configuration, but what surrounds it. We are not what is written in our genes, but what we do with them, how we live, what we eat and what we breathe. Environmental influences regulate the expression of the genome even without the need to alter its basic configuration."

It would not be bad to review two essential texts: Darwin and Capital [Heredia Doval, Daniel. 2017], and The Science of Capital [González Martínez, Rubén. 2017 (], to establish the structural dependencies between Nature and Society and identify the relationships that exist between the mythical parts of the living structures, which in reactionary theories, such as Mendelism-Veysmanism-Morganism, determine the inheritance; in front of the Lamarckist and Lysenkist positions who faced all the thought of a time.

The heritability of pathological conditions associated with social class are now a reality with scientific support. Poverty can be seen as a disease, with symptoms branched throughout the body, and with a transgenerational reach.

If a pregnant woman is exposed to the stress derived from poverty, the fetus, and the gametes of this (the second generation) may be affected. The establishment of epigenetic marks during the first stages of life, as a result of highly stressful environments (including physical abuse and low socioeconomic level) can have very long effects; they have been associated with a higher incidence of neurobiological conditions such as depression (Mol Psychiatry. 2017 February ; 22(2): 209-214. doi:10.1038/mp.2016.82). And there are some questions that we can not avoid, highlighting the huge differences between the different scientific paradigms that occurred during the development of the twentieth century. Why the theoretical hypotheses developed from the materialistic gnoseologies of the proletarian cultures have presented more capacity than others to dilate in the time from the observations of the natural phenomena, of the physical principles? Why does the Capital - Labor conflict not reflect these intellectual products developed in the historical stages highlighted by the nation states under the Eastern socialist regimes?

Surely this has much to do with the protagonism of the subjects in the models of social organization and the rationality that is shaped and developed through the construction of hypotheses and vital principles to be digested and metabolized. It is not the same to avoid the relationship between a first set of data: women, cleaners, home, decline, pulmonary, to establish the possible consequences if we observe it under a Lamarckian / Lysenckist paradigm that if we choose another neo-Darwinian. One will reveal an information about the devastation and eugenics of the market and the other will limit the reading to a process of naturalization and adaptation to a given environment.

Only a simple data crossing and a hypotheis could make us think if there are epigenetic effects that are incorporated into the hereditary mechanisms according to the first data set: women, cleaners, home, decline, pulmonary. Are we influencing the affection of new pathologies and disorders to our future generations? Is someone shutting it up? Does the exploitation of women determine the future of our generations? Is the subordination of reproductive work to productive work the main promoter of the disease? Does class structure have to do with the evolution of organisms, once the current hereditary mechanisms have been described? What should we say if we add to the first set of data the range of consequences assumed by our Lamarckian paradigm? The thing gets pretty bad for the woman, mainly for the one that is part of the world of reproductive work. Do we remember the figures?

Source: "Women and men, consumption and production throughout life. An unequal relationship." Elisenda Rentería, Center for Demographic Studies. Rosario Scandurra, UB. Guadalupe Souto, UAB. Concepció Patxot, UB.

"Our form of science has become a disease of the western spirit. They have taught us that by digging deeper and deeper we would reach the center of our world. But we only find rock and fire, and we confuse the stone with the heart and the fire with hope". Erwin Chargaff, 1979.

In the Dialectical Biologist, the authors of the book, R. Lewontin and R. Levins, warn us that science "... in all its senses, is a social process that causes and is caused by social organization".

Point out that people who do science are committed as political actors in the functions of a society, is to indicate that organized political activity is a practice, a vendor, that is not alien to the organization of knowledge, rather, consists in it . In the words of the authors: "The negation of the interpenetration of the scientific and the social is in itself a political act, which supports the social structures that hide behind scientific objectivity to perpetuate dependence, exploitation, racism, elitism, colonialism." To continue: "of course, the speed of light is the same in socialism and capitalism, and the apple that is said to have fallen in the Master of the Mint in 1664 would have beaten his Labor Party successor three hundred years later with equal force. But if it is said that the cause of tuberculosis is a bacillus or the capitalist exploitation of workers, if the death rate from cancer is better reduced by studying the oncogenes or taking control of the factories, these questions can be decided objectively only in the framework of certain socio-political assumptions".

To finish, as noted, just two days ago we find a revelation in a popular magazine: in times of war, 1943, Vannevar Bush, head of research in the F. Roosevelt administration, looking for ways to expand funds after the war, proposed through a document entitled "Science, the Endless Frontier" an argument about solids federal funding engines through the National Institutes of Health, the creation of the National Science Foundation and what would become an expanding network of research scientists throughout the United States. How do we find productive activity engines through the National Institutes of Health? This we will leave for a next entry.

The enemy does not wait. It continues to prosper in its rationality. 

Subscribe to Pravda.Ru Telegram channel, Facebook, RSS!

Author`s name Contributor submission