So, what are the possible feminist objections to capitalism?
The two that I was able to find easily – outside of some ecofeminists whose beliefs are tantamount to religion – were:
1. Capitalism encourages racial discrimination, and
2. Capitalism is inherently exploitive, leading to oppression.
These objections depend, of course, on the assumption that feminists should be anti-racist and anti-oppression. An excellent explanation of this concept, called intersectionality, can be found in the Feministe post linked in the first part of this series.
The first objection is utterly groundless. Given a world in which people of different races are treated equally, I am utterly at a loss as to a mechanism by which the existence of capitalism could cause an imbalance in racial treatment. Now, of course, if there is existing racial oppression, people can always attempt to use their power within capitalism to further their dislike of another race, but that is true in any system. If fact, I would like to posit that capitalism, which encourages individualism and self-dependence, is actually less racist than any other system. The other two economic systems given in the first part encourage dependence of the group. This in turn leads to seeing oneself as part of the group, and to seeing those in other group as outsiders, and therefore as inferior to the group. This feeling – dislike of those who are different – is the root of racism.
The second objection is more serious. I have seen no specifically feminist explanation equating capitalism with exploitation. (I am sure they exist – I simply do not have time to do the needed library research, and such information seems rare on the internet.) The basic argument, given by Marx and many others, is well known.
Essentially, in the course of capitalistic exchange, some people obtain an advantage over others, either by luck or skill. They use this advantage to obtain possession of a greater share of capital, allowing them to attain even more wealth. They then force (by economic means) others to work for them, using their capital, and are able to increase their wealth completely out of proportion to their labor. In the end, a few people own nearly all the capital, while the rest are exploited into working for a small portion of their labor’s true worth.
I shall attempt to discuss this objection in the next part.
(Read the next part in this series, or jump back to the first part)