Pride & Communism

On the Indivisibility of Sexual Liberation and Class Struggle

Afternoon Comrades.

I know right, not something you were expecting from this end but after 5 years on here I figured why the hell not, or rather, it was a thing I saw on social media over the weekend that prompted me to say a few things on this subject. I have to paraphrase the text but it went something like: pride is still important because someone, somewhere is still out there believing to be better off dead than out. That stuck with me, made me think about the immense amounts of privilege I have, especially in this regard and that me want to say a few things on the subject and relevant topics as they pertain to this newsletter.

If it wasn’t abundantly clear I don’t pay much heed to these labels and associated identities, these last 3 decades of studying and working within anti-capitalist structures across too many countries here in the west have, for the time being, led me to understand the world in the materialist tradition and I try to act accordingly. Obviously, and it is without doubt that these identities outside of the heteronormative, race based and white-conceptually dominated spheres of reality in the west include multitudes outside of the demanded binarity of gender/sex/race. Aside from the emphatic logic inherent that demands that conclusion there is also a mountain range of scientific work on these subjects, it’s not up to debate unless you want to partake in losing sides cultural wars. Good luck with that and please leave if that is the case - as unlikely as that is after 5 years on here.

In regards to Marxism, Socialism, Communism and the logical revolutions that are demanded by these projects how then does a non-heteronormative reality fit into this discussion? Not surprisingly, there is another mountain range of academic and non-academic work on the subject and before I get into a pivotal one let’s make it extremely clear. Any existence, outside of the enforced and ideologically demanded / created heteronormative, nuclear family is in itself and by its sheer existence before it is even acted out a threat to the system of capitalism. Predominately, due to children or the lack of thereof, and then additionally as these existences, even before they are acted upon, refuse to allow themselves to serve the hyper-controllable, man-made existence of the nuclear family structure - a massive part of the core upon which capitalist exploitation exists - to varying degrees based on sex/gender/race.

Real simple. As a further, personal, point I do want to add that the inclusion of the above into the revolutionary struggle for a post-capitalist reality in no shape or form is an attack on heteronormative - it can be - but it is not. Inclusion never takes anything away from the struggle, but adds to it. This is a core, core principle to my understanding of our successful revolution and it has to be it for its entirety. That is a bigger than in itself that is worth taking time to think about.

Furthermore, whatever which way you float and feel has no impact on our revolution. Yes, capitalism and its boot lickers fucks us all differently and some more than others, but that is where the other central tenant of our revolution comes into play: Each according to their ability and each according to their needs. Object to the anti-communist propaganda that everyone is equal -please, it is anything but.

In any case, one book that at the start of studies at University back in 1997/98 I think that introduced the reality of non-heteronormativity into the struggle for communism was Mario Mieli's "Towards a Gay Communism" - so let’s get into it.

It emerged in the fervent socio-political landscape of the 1970s, a period characterized by profound upheavals and transformations across the globe. The book is a seminal work that integrates Marxist theory with LGBTQ+ liberation, advocating for a radical restructuring of society that includes the emancipation of sexual minorities.

Mieli's work aligns closely with the feminist and materialist Marxist literature of the 1970s, which critiqued the intersections of capitalism, patriarchy, and heteronormativity. Authors such as Shulamith Firestone in "The Dialectic of Sex" (1970) and Juliet Mitchell in "Women's Estate" (1971) paved the way for understanding how the capitalist system exploits both women and sexual minorities. Firestone, for example, argued that the liberation of women necessitated the end of biological family structures imposed by capitalism, a notion that Mieli extends to include the liberation of all sexual identities.

Mieli's argument for the liberation of desire and the abolishment of heteronormative structures resonates with contemporary feminist theory, which emphasizes the deconstruction of binary gender roles and the fluidity of sexuality. His assertion that sexual liberation is inherently linked to the overthrow of capitalist exploitation is a profound contribution to Marxist thought. Mieli contends that capitalism thrives on the repression of sexual freedom, maintaining control through rigid gender norms and the nuclear family structure, which mirrors the feminist critique of the period.

Moreover, Mieli’s work can be seen in dialogue with later feminist theorists like bell hooks and Judith Butler. Hooks’ "Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center" (1984) emphasized the importance of intersectionality in understanding the complexities of oppression, while Butler’s "Gender Trouble" (1990) deconstructed the performativity of gender. Mieli’s insistence on the fluidity and multiplicity of sexual desires prefigures Butler’s arguments and expands the conversation to include not just gender performance but the liberation of all sexualities from capitalist constraints.

Upon its release, "Towards a Gay Communism" received a mixed reception. Some Marxist circles critiqued it for what they saw as an overemphasis on sexual politics at the expense of class struggle. However, this critique itself underscores the very necessity of Mieli’s argument: the indivisibility of sexual liberation and class struggle.

Notable authors such as Michel Foucault and Guy Hocquenghem praised Mieli’s work for its radical approach. Foucault, in particular, saw value in Mieli’s challenge to the traditional Marxist focus, arguing that sexual repression is a fundamental aspect of societal control, a theme Foucault explores in "The History of Sexuality" (1976).

In contemporary discourse, "Towards a Gay Communism" remains strikingly relevant. The ongoing struggle for LGBTQ+ rights, particularly in the face of rising conservatism and neoliberal co-option, echoes Mieli’s call for a more profound and systemic change. Today, queer theory and intersectional feminism continue to draw from Mieli’s insights, recognizing the need to dismantle not just the overt structures of oppression but the subtle, pervasive systems that regulate desire and identity.

Current authors like Sarah Ahmed and Jasbir Puar build on Mieli’s legacy. Ahmed’s work on affect theory and queer phenomenology, and Puar’s intersectional analysis of homonationalism in "Terrorist Assemblages" (2007), both reflect the enduring influence of Mieli’s vision of a society where sexual and economic liberation are inseparable.

Mario Mieli’s "Towards a Gay Communism" is a groundbreaking text that bridges Marxist theory and LGBTQ+ liberation. By situating sexual freedom within the broader struggle against capitalist exploitation, Mieli provides a radical framework that challenges both historical and contemporary socio-political norms. His work not only complements but also enhances feminist and materialist Marxist literature, offering valuable insights for the ongoing fight for a truly emancipated society.

As always, thank you for your time and attention,

Yours, warmly,

V