Content deleted Content added
m Bot: link syntax and minor changes |
m link [cC]apital accumulation |
||
Line 54:
From the mid-1980s, Mies published her most important works which explored the links between patriarchy, capitalism and [[colonialism]] in the exploitation and subjugation of women.<ref name="Bauer" />
In the book ''Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale Women in the International Division of Labour'' (1986), Mies evaluated the development of feminism, the sexual division of labour, and how violence shaped politics in Africa, Asia, and [[Latin America]].<ref name="Léveillé" /> In her analysis, the process of "housewifisation" was based on the Western ideals of [[capital accumulation]]. In other words, by destroying women's autonomy and making them possessions, men were able to acquire productive capital and amass wealth. She saw family violence, not as a remnant of ancient society, but as a part of the processes to modernise. In the work, she found that socialist development had created similar social structures exploiting women and argued for creation of a utopian feminist society.<ref name="Léveillé" />{{rp|150}} In Mies's vision, the basis for labour would be usefulness rather than accumulation. She theorised that if consumers in overdeveloped places fulfilled their needs to sustain life from producers in underdeveloped countries, it would give worldwide relief from exploitation.<ref name="Léveillé" />{{rp|150–151}} Léveillé noted that while such a plan might work, its drawback was that it devalued things like music, flowers, and art, which while not essential or necessary to support human life provided therapeutic benefits.<ref name="Léveillé" />{{rp|151}}
Picking up themes of domination from ''Patriarchy and Accumulation'', Mies's 1988 book ''Women: The Last Colony'', written with social scientists Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen and [[Claudia von Werlhof]], brought colonised people into the analysis. They explained that just as women were rendered invisible, subjugated people were isolated from mainstream society and were treated as a natural resource to be exploited.<ref name="Meintel" />{{rp|388}} Departing from a strict [[Marxist feminism|Marxist feminist]] argument, the central theme of the work was that the exploitation and oppression of women and colonised people were not secondary results caused by capitalism, but fundamental to creating the mechanisms of global production.<ref name="Meintel" />{{rp|388–389}}<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wilkinson-Weber |first1=Clare M. |title=Skill, Dependency, and Differentiation: Artisans and Agents in the Lucknow Embroidery Industry |journal=[[Ethnology (journal)|Ethnology]] |date=Winter 1997 |volume=36 |issue=1 |pages=49–65 |url=https://archive.org/details/sim_ethnology_winter-1997_36_1/page/n53/mode/1up |access-date=21 May 2023 |publisher=[[University of Pittsburgh Press]] |location=Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania |doi=10.2307/3773935 |jstor=3773935 |issn=0014-1828 |oclc=7781060900}}</ref>{{rp|50}} {{Lang|fr|[[Université de Montréal]]|italic=no}} anthropology professor, {{ill|Deirdre Meintel|wikidata|Q55626697}}, noted that Mies argued that labour exploitation was a primary factor in developing both social classes and economic divisions.<ref name="Meintel" />{{rp|390}} Meintel also said that Mies's chapter 7, "Class Struggles and Women's Struggles in India", was "worth the price of the book", as it told of the successful resistance by women in [[Andhra Pradesh]], who aligned with male peasants' fight to protect their rights.<ref name="Meintel" />{{rp|390}}
| |||