hpwombat writes:

"Nihilism and Women"
High Priest Wombat, KSC

The practice of nihilism is to attack the totality without hope that progress will occur. We are not advancing into a better society, despite the rhetoric from the left. What are our options? Do nothing and accept the conditions that are given to us from one ideology or another? Pretend that working for reforms and creating social services will somehow make a difference as the present order recuperates our struggles? Wrap ourselves into roles of the victim or the martyr and push ourselves into the service of suffering and misery?

The present order is a failure, we cannot escape its totality, there is no where to hide. We have no hope in changing society as it is, so it must be destroyed. We must free ourselves from its perpetuation, it is in our interest to do so. All other options are acceptance, critical or not. We need not be limited in our struggle and our actions must expand to all aspects of life.Nihilism vs. Feminism and the Left

The history of nihilism in Russia began as a student movement, counter-culture and soon grew into a potent force in liberating the 'new women' of Russia. The actions of the nihilists helped to make nihilist women a part of almost every major undertaking by the nihilists in general. But how does it compare to feminism? After all, feminism is often seen as having a monopoly on women's liberation and having women's interests at heart. As a whole, feminism has not only made women's issues a priority of the left, but helped change the role of women throughout the world. Feminism helped get women the right to vote, took them out of the kitchen and put them to work next to men and helped promote contraceptives and abortions so that women can choose to have a family or live a life without such a relationship.

However, this project is a failure as it wraps itself into the conundrums of the left. Voting legitimatizes the state as an agent of change and progress, but the left will only go so far, even where the left is dominant. Specifically for women voting creates false security in thinking their vote changes anything and it puts women's personal lives up for the morality of politics to judge. Issues like abortion polarize the political landscape while women hardly realize that the changing times affects the laws rather than the laws affecting the changing times.

The battle of ideologies is played out through the political landscape of nations and throughout the globe and these battles happen both in and outside of legislative buildings. The most conservative and laissez faire of states will eventually grant its citizenship reforms and/or social services, either to trump an ideology not in the consensus of the current regime or to keep the populous from getting to the point of insurrection. We see socialists and welfare liberals dismantling social programs now despite their rhetoric to the contrary. After world war one we saw conservatives and fascists attempt to push forward or maintain programs of state controlled social services. Statecraft is politics if nothing else.

Radical and anarcha feminism are two positions that are either weary of voting or reject voting outright. They challenge the social paradigms of patriarchy, with anarcha feminism linking the struggle against patriarchy to the struggle against capitalism and the state. These often militant leftists fail because they often force the woman into the role of the victim, often making feminist meetings into therapy sessions, quelling the hatred of domination and attacking the role of the male in relation to the role of female without stepping outside this false dichotomy to see that the roles themselves must be attacked.

Not all women through history have turned to feminism. The nihilists of Russia have a strong history in acting for the liberation of women without separating this struggle from the other struggles of nihilism. As we shall see, the Russian nihilist women pushed forward the nihilist strategy throughout their personal lives and later often taking a leading role in the destruction that the Russian nihilists have become infamous for.

The Foundational Period

Deeming it 'the woman problem' the nihilists had different conditions in Russia than the socialists of Western Europe and even the feminists of the new left. First off, voting wasn't even on the list of priorities, after all the men had no vote except in certain minor local elections. They didn't struggle for rights either, there was no constitution to appeal to, the autocracy of tzardom was absolute. Also avoided was agitating for property rights, something that just about every liberal feminist would demand. What the women did care about was being able to be educated, have a career and enjoy a level of sexual freedom given the conditions.

In the late 1850s tzarist Russia began making provisions for women such as letting women attend universities with open minded professors on private premises. This had its own problems with facilities limited and they varied from place to place, time to time. Also, higher education for women was often the first to go during gusts of political reaction, making life precarious for university women.

This problem is also linked to the control that men had over women's passports. Passports in Russia were slightly misleading, people needed them to move town to town, let alone go to another country. Fathers or husbands could refuse a daughter or wife her passport, which in turn prevented her from being able to legally leave the area. Limiting her passport could then also prevent the woman from going to a university city, such as St. Petersburg. With limited facilities for education it made the passport a near requirement to even attempt an educated life and even if the woman managed to get a passport finding comfortable lodgings could prove to be difficult.

The way many women got around this passport problem was through marriage. Certainly this sounds like a reversal from the radical feminist position which often sees marriage as enslavement. But given the passport situation, it was the only way out. What Russian women would often do is find some open minded man to have a 'fictitious marriage'. The marriage itself wasn't fake, as every marriage had to be a church wedding according to Russian law. However, once married the bride might briefly thank her groom for his services and then goto a foreign university and get instruction in chemistry, mathematics, medicine or other form of higher education.

These fictitious marriages were complimented by the practice of non-monogamy. In practice the woman would often engage in a real marriage for a time but then would move onto other lovers as time progressed. Though this practice seems to promote a hedonistic lifestyle, the women often behaved more reserved than promiscuous with these choices. Another feature of non-monogamy was giving the woman a room of her own. With this practice, women were granted more privacy and strengthened their ability for sexual freedom.

This practice obviously would lead to the formation of families outside of marriage. Called 'new families' (as the nihilists of Russia were often call new people) these families began to appear as families based on marriage broke up and formed families based more on the real social relations that the new people maintained. These new families were illegal and could very well be divided again should they be found out by the authorities, but this often wasn't the case and the question of whether a woman was someone's legal wife or not became impossible or meaningless.

The Rational Egoism of Chernyshevsky

The practice of non-monogamy was put to word by the revolutionary literature of the time. Chernyshevsky's 'What is to be Done?' was the major influence, not just on nihilist women, but is often attributed as one of the largest influences on all Russian revolutionaries. 'What is to be Done?' or 'a Vital Question' was influenced by a female friend of Chernyshevsky's who put much of her life into the book.

Chernyshevsky's approach on the women problem was also along the same tract as the rest of nihilism and had a different style than that of feminism. No scenes in university halls, no struggling female students, no petitions. Instead Chernyshevsky promoted individual efforts. Reading books, tutoring by friends and forming circles to discuss and learn from each other.

'What is to be Done?' didn't just challenge the role of monogamy, it also challenged women's economic independence. Taking a note from Proudon and other pre-Marx socialists as well as the practice of Russian artels, Chernyshevsky constructs a fictional sewing cooperative where Vera makes partners with her employees, shares profits with them, draws them into the administration of the business and educates them towards self-reliance through 'progressive' literature.

The views of Chernyshevsky thought that men ought to submit to their wives because the scales had swayed too far in the direction of men. The man should have complete fidelity while the woman should be free to act as she wished. This was considered a part of the 'rational egoism' that Chernyshevsky held dear. The pain it caused the individual male was significantly less than the inferior position women were held in.

The rational egoism of Chernyshevsky steps to the forefront by exposing that it is the individual that must stand against domination. This is best seen when Vera says to her husband 'If a person thinks to himself 'I can't' then he can't. It has been suggested to women they are weak, so they feel weak and then actually become weak.'

A weakness of Chernyshevsky's thoughts are how women relate to men. The practice of non-monogamy becomes romanticized and women are put on a pedestal of superiority despite the desires of the male. Sex for its own carnal sake is dismissed as unsatisfying and I would attribute Chernyshevsky's prudish manner an aspect of his times. Indeed, even with the romance that he puts into his thoughts on sex, his book received heavy polemics accusing the characters of committing abduction, bigamy, pimping and fornication, among other things. These criticisms were expanded to nihilists in general for decades after.

Chernyshevsky also fetishes work with Lopukhov, one of his characters, by saying 'Unless work precedes them, diversion, relaxation, fun and festivity have no reality.' These views on work show the influences from the French socialists where cooperative building was considered a way to avoid the worst savagings by the rise of industrialism and some even elevated these cooperatives as a method that could peacefully progress society to a work based socialism free of state control.

I find his thinking flawed, almost as if hard work made free time more pleasurable. This view is pushed even further by Vera's forth dream. The fourth dream is filled with futuristic visions of golden fields, fertile valleys, workers singing in the sun and returning to their glass and crystal communal homes to receive bountious meals prepared by children and old people. This utopia is laughable and though I conflict with many of the socialist ideas that Chernyshevsky held, I find his nihilism to be refreshing given the times.

The End of the Foundational Period and the Beginning of the Revolutionary Period

Foundational nihilism, as was suggested, wasn't limited to answering the woman problem and other problems, such as the poverty of the newly freed serfs took the attention of the nihilists. Attempts at propaganda and agitation of the serfs only resulted in more arrests, more exiles to Siberia and more deaths in failed insurrection. This climate only could go so far before the final conclusions of the nihilists were brought forward and the end of the foundational period begins with the first attempted assassination of the Tzar in 1866, followed by what is known as the white terror. Nihilist magazines were banned, reforms pushed aside often as an afterthought and the educational system was changed to stifle the spirit of revolt that was nurtured there.

Enter Nechayev, his imaginary secret societies bringing about a murder in one of his real secret societies. More importantly, Nechayev's infamy granted much attention to 'Catechism of a Revolutionist' and helped to spark the fire of the revolutionary period of nihilism.

The revolutionary period was open up by the nihilist woman Vera Zasulich. Disaffected workers had decided to show students and intellectuals that others too could demonstrate and held their demonstration in the Square of Our Lady in Kazan in 1876. Of course the police broke up the demonstration and they made arrests. One of the arrestees was a fellow named Bogolyubov, who only showed up to the protest as it was dispersing, but still received heavy sentence of fifteen years penal servitude. While Bogolyubov was at Remand Prison in St. Petersburg after his sentence, General Trepov, the City Perfect, arrived to look into the growing lack of discipline of the inmates. It seemed that the prison had many other nihilists still awaiting their trial, known as the '193', who participated in insurrectionary activities in attempting to agitate peasants. Trepov was there to prevent the inevitable. While Trepov was inspecting the situation he ran across Bogolyubov, who happened to be wearing a hat in front of a notability at the wrong time. Trepov ripped the hat from his head, attacked him with his fists and then ordered him to be flogged. And flogged he was, into insanity and in front of other prisoners as an example.

This event caused a prison mutiny and though perhaps many desired to, Vera Zasulich was the one who took initiative shortly afterward, finding, shooting and wounding General Trepov. Thinking that this was an open and shut case, Zasulich was given a fair trial. After all, Zasulich admitted to firing the shot, there were plenty of witnesses, the weapon was in evidence so why not make a gesture of good will by offering a trial by jury. Thankfully for Zasulich and despite the judge not being easily bullied, the jury found Zasulich not guilty. As she left the trial a minor riot occurred and Zasulich was spirited off to prevent any attempt at rearresting her after her trial.

Conspiracy dominated the revolutionary landscape and the fictitious marriage was given a revolutionary form through the conspiratorial apartment. Posing as a married couple and using forged passports, an illegal man and woman would rent an apartment at some point of vantage. Once the host and hostess were settled, other illegals could come and go without the danger and trouble of registering. Sometimes they were simply centers for communal living, other times they were full-out terrorist headquarters.

These conspiracies obviously lead to the historic event which called an end to the nihilists, the assassination of Tzar Alexander II. Many women played a part in these attempts. Vera Finger participated in a plot to mine below a railway, setting up bombs to blow the passing train of the Tzar, but this plot was foiled by bad weather. Sophia Perovsky, who had escaped exile made another attempt along with others at mining the railway, but they blew the wrong train and again the Tzar made it away without a hitch. Sophia Perovsky made her second attempt at mining, but this time below a street, but again the Tzar had changed his travel arrangements and this plot too failed. After Perovsky's lover Alexander Zhelyabov was arrested, Perovsky lead the final attempt against the Tzar, again mining the street, but also positioning four bomb-throwers around the street to finish the job. Lucky for her that she had the four bombers, as again the Tzar had changed routes, but she expected this and with a blow of her nose they changed positions. What followed is now history, one bomber threw their bomb underneath the axle of the Tzar's carriage. The Tzar, unhurt by the explosion and with the carriage still intact, made his fatal decision to pull up, hop out and examine the scene. That's when the second bomb was thrown and the Tzar was fatally wounded. Though successful, Sophia Perovsky was eventually caught and became the first woman to be executed for a political offense.

Conclusion

In today's landscape, the left is in decline, its projects and ideologies discredited as functionaries towards the greater totality of the present order. Feminism's answers only reify revolt and fail to find real remedies to answer today's woman problems. Though today no one questions the woman's franchise, abortion and contraceptives are still debated as a matter of politics, domestic abuse cannot be stemmed off no matter how many therapy sessions and support groups are created. Workshops on women's liberation even when given a large allotment of time never move beyond the questioning of patriarchy. Women's sexuality has become an expansive commodity, corrupting ideas like free love by removing any real emotional attachment to sex, making sexual prowess and a quantity of sex partners the goal at the sake of a lasting relationship, separating sexual partners even when they are joined at the hip. On the flip side, marriage has weakened significantly to where divorce is more a matter of affording lawyers and paying court costs. This hasn't stopped the traditional family picture from being thrown at us by the media and the values attached to the traditional family pushed forward by the religious. New questions have also entered the picture, shaping the woman problems of the 21st century by exposing the problems with gender roles as transgendered people gain wider re known and the varieties of sexuality that one can engage in. Feminism must be discarded as a failed project if these questions are to be properly answered. We cannot demand change because it only mediates us. We must destroy.

Sources
Nihilists by Ronald Hingley
The Women's Liberation Movement in Russia by Richard Stites
What Is To Be Done? by Nicolas Chernyshevsky
Anarchy, Nihilism and the 21st Century by Aragorn!
Underground Russia by Stepniak
Against the Logic of Submission and other essays by Wolfi Landstreicher
At Daggers Drawn by Anon
Ideals and Ideologies by Terence Ball and Richard Dagger