.
Seeing all this press coverage of Malala Yousafzai and the plight of women’s education in Taliban-controlled regions in Pakistan, and having recently revisited the sad history of the degradation of women’s rights in Afghanistan after the PDPA was defeated and the Red Army was driven out in 1989, I’ve been pondering the question of women’s liberation in “Oriental” (i.e., traditional non-Western) contexts. Lately I’m reminded of the revolutionary transformations that took place in Uzbekistan between 1920 and the early 1930s, especially with Zhenotdel‘s mass unveiling ceremonies, programs for women’s education, and anti-illiteracy campaigns in the region. All of these activities were carried out in tandem, as religious prejudices, domestic bondage, and illiteracy were to be combated both directly and indirectly — directly through propaganda work, and then indirectly through the removal of economic conditions that give rise to such social ills.
Education and domestic emancipation are more or less uncontroversial. Abolishing reactionary religious traditions is another matter, however. Despite the fact that Lenin was already insisting in 1922 that militant materialism necessarily implied “militant atheism” [воинÑтвующий атеизм, more literally “warlike” atheism], there’s been a great deal of distortion on this score. This has to do with efforts to reinterpret the past to suit the perceived political exigencies of the present. Making the past dance to the tune of the present is a fairly routine procedure amongst certain parts of the Left.
Tashkent before the reforms.
Dave Crouch, writing for the International Socialist Journal, would like to pin all of the blame for antireligious initiatives like the khudzhum [i.e., the mass unveiling campaigns] on “Stalinist bureaucracy.” The fact of the matter is that the women’s division [Zhenotdel] and the Union of Tatar Godless [Soiuz tatarskykh bezbozhnikov] already laid the groundwork for such measures in the early 1920s. Members of either organization cannot be fairly characterized as “Stalinist”; indeed, Stalin had both of these wings within the party disbanded by the end of the decade.
Luckily, Gerry Byrne has already gone through and written a point-by-point refutation of some of Crouch’s more obvious gaffes. A couple points are worth mentioning. In the footnotes, two passing remarks by Crouch are particularly revealing:
It is a pity that Richard Stites, one of the foremost historians of women’s liberation in Russia, fails to see the khudzhum as part of Stalin’s “sexual Thermidor.” Richard Stites, The Women’s Liberation Movement in Russia: Feminism, Nihilism and Bolshevism 1860-1930. (Princeton, 1978). Pg. 340.
Crouch only says it’s a pity because Stites’ judgment runs counter to the view he would like to promote. Whether or not the khudzhum was a wise policy, a botched and culturally “insensitive” attempt to liberate women from traditional roles and conventions, it cannot be considered even remotely equivalent to the stricter divorce policies, abortion ban, and recriminalization of homosexuality instituted under Stalin’s regime. Stites is here, as usual, a far better historian than pseudo-Trot revisionists.
Education.
A few footnotes later, Crouch writes:
In 1922 the 4th Congress of the Communist International corrected its policy adopted at the 2nd congress and endorsed temporary alliances with pan-Islamism against imperialism.
If this were actually the case, the Cliffites’ mechanistic anti-imperialism might appear grounded in longstanding revolutionary tradition. Unfortunately, no such “correction” ever took place. Lenin remained adamant to the end that Marxists’ position toward anti-imperialist movements abroad should stress “the need for a struggle against the clergy and other influential reactionary and medieval elements in backward countries,” as well as “the need to combat Pan-Islamism and similar trends, which strive to combine the liberation movement against European and American imperialism with an attempt to strengthen the positions of the khans, landowners, mullahs, etc.” Of course, as Lenin’s injunction directly contradicts the ISO’s general line toward political struggles in the Middle East, it’s omitted. E.H. Carr’s book indicates nothing of the sort, either. See pgs. 254-255 of his book on The Bolshevik Revolution.
For this post, I’ve assembled three excerpts. The first is excerpted from an article in Kommunistka [Communist Woman] by Marie Vaillant-Couturier (mother of the famous French Resistance fighter Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier, who testified at Nuremberg) on women delegates publicly casting off their veils [chadry] and burqas [parandzhi] at the Second International Women’s Congress in 1922. The second is from Louis Bryant, the wife of John Reid and a famous leftist journalist in her own right, in which she records some of Aleksandra Kollontai’s thoughts on women’s liberation, along with a couple of mild criticisms. Finally, I’ve translated an article Kollontai herself wrote about the conference with communist women and labor organizers of the East in April 1921. Moreover, there are some documentary photographs by the extraordinary Constructivist photographer Max Penson, who captured these revolutionary social shifts upon moving to Tashkent, Uzbekistan in 1920 (he was Jewish-Belarusian in origin). Penson stayed in Tashkent for the next twenty years. These photos show Uzbek women going from full-body veils (women caught without them were often threatened by men with blades, burning water, and acid, even having dogs sicced on them) to brandishing rifles within ten years.
Unveilings at the Second International Women’s Congress
Marie Vaillant-Couturier
.
A commotion took place. Black coverings, bright fabrics, headdresses sewn with silk and gold…the women of the East in a narrow line poured into the hall where there were representatives of women workers of the whole world.
Exactingly locked up in gray, stifled with heavy black fabric, the women of the East, mysteriously, came out in front of their western sisters. Their eyes glanced down shyly, unused to bright light; their weak shoulders stooped beneath the triple yoke of the prejudice of sex, patriarchal mores, and the oppression of imperialism. Some of them with uncovered faces were so young and had such surprising eagerness in their whole appearance that they seemed, really, to have come out of another world…
We felt in them the incarnation of the Tales of a Thousand and One Nights, the melancholy of the harem, the magical tale of Perrault, and the fascinating stories of travels in Mongolia, the Caucasus, Bukhara, and Persia. We met them as pioneers who were tearing themselves from their difficult, barbaric slavery. The chains still bound them: their veils were not yet thrown off.
The applause did not fall silent. No one could speak; everyone wept with joy. The West opened its embrace to the working women of the East…Would there be sufficient strength to tear away so many sacrifices of age-long oppression?
The veils began to rise, and one of the women in a small, embroidered cap with a haughty profile and blue-black hair braided in two plaits, stepped up to the tribunal. Without doubt, the gesture was purely symbolic. Out of millions of women sentenced to a life of total submission and unchanging labor, a few women had torn themselves away and come to us…But it is important that the movement has begun, and soon from one Muslim countryside to another news of this will be told…the veils were lifted and the women began to see.
Communist Woman
[Kommunistka],
May 1921
Madame Aleksandra Kollontai and the women’s movement
Louise Bryant
.
Madame Kollontai proclaimed:
Cast off your chains! Do not be slaves to religion, to marriage, to children. Break these old ties: the state is your home, the world is your country! We must build a new society in which women are not expected to drudge all day in kitchens. We must have, in Russia, community restaurants, central kitchens, central laundries — institutions which leave the working woman free to devote her evenings to instructive reading or recreation. Only by breaking the domestic yoke will we give women a chance to live a richer, happier, and more complete life.
“Women’s congresses,†she told me, “are absolutely necessary in the present state of development. And these congresses are not confined by any means to politics. I have been bringing peasant women to Moscow from all over Russia and we have told them how to take care of babies and how to prevent disease. We have also instructed them in local, national and international politics. A woman who has gone to Moscow from some remote village is more or less of a personality when she returns and you can be sure that her journey is an event to the whole village. She always goes back well supplied with literature and educational posters. She, naturally, stimulates an interest in the whole community in politics and hygiene, especially among the women. Such congresses are the only ones I know that have a far-reaching effect.â€
“I have been laughed at,†she said, “because so far I have brought here only a few women from the harems of Turkestan. These women have thrown aside their veils. Everybody stares at them, they are a curiosity which gives the congresses a theatrical atmosphere. Yet all pioneering work is theatrical. It was distinctly theatrical when the audiences used to throw eggs at your pioneer suffragists…How else would we get in touch with Mohammedan women except through women?â€
Louise Bryant offering her own, decidedly less radical, opinion: How else, indeed? Other Russian educators have answered the question this way: Through Mohammedan men. It was by educating the Tartar men that the Tartar women became free. The Tartars are mostly all Mohammedans but their women no longer wear veils. Whereas the brave women Kollontai has induced to come to her congresses have been divorced by their husbands and have lost their homes and children.
Mirrors of Moscow, 1923
Conference of communist women and organizers of the East
Aleksandra Kollontai
.
For the first time — not just in Soviet Russia, but in the whole world — a meeting was held between the communist women [kommunistok] of Eastern nations and labor organizers from the Soviet republics and regions of the East. The meeting, convened by the Division [for work among women within the Central Committee of the CPSU(b)], was held from April 5th through 7th in a mostly businesslike spirit. Questions such as the economic and legal status of women in the East, work among the handicraft enterprises, forms and methods of organization, as well as agitation, propaganda, and training for the First All-Russian meeting of workers and peasants from Eastern nations. On the first day a general political report was briefly delivered.
Forty-five organizers gathered for work among women of Eastern nations. Present were the republics of Tatariia [Tatarstan], Bashkiriia [Bashkortostan], Turkestan, Azerbaijan, Crimea, Kirgiziia [Kyrgyzstan], mountain nations from the Caucasus region, Siberia, and provinces with a number of Turkic or mountain populations.
This conference clearly demonstrated that the influence of our party, led by zhenotdel [the women’s division], now extends to the outermost regions of Soviet Russia — places where, until recently, the enslavement of women prevailed for centuries. Presently, a deep-seated unrest takes shape within the masses of women themselves, expressed not only in the woman of the East removing her veil, but also by the fact she joins in Soviet construction.
The conference demonstrated that the basic principles our party applied to involve broad masses of women in the construction of communism remain vital, and are applicable in the East. Only the particulars need to be modified with respect to local conditions. For example, proceeding from the everyday domestic slavery of female workers, zhenotdel usually begins educating rank-and-file workers in the task of Soviet construction by involving them, first of all, in the provision of maternity care, catering services, and so on. Among the nations of the East, where a woman is primarily enslaved by religious superstitions and vestiges of bridewealth [literally “matrimonial forfeiture of rightsâ€], and attachment to the customs and mores of the past, the focus of work naturally shifts from the outset. On the one hand, it lifts her out of this state through the assistance of clubs, schools, and in fact broader Enlightenment and cultural standards in the development of knowledge. On the other, it brings living custom into line with increased liberties [svobodnymi], protecting women’s interests with Soviet laws. From here, following the example of the Bashkir Republic, the introduction of female deputies [delegatok] among the nations’ judges, involving women’s departments [zhenotdelov] in the reworking of local laws and practices.
Productive labor.
One of the primary forms of participation by the most backward masses of women in public and political life in the East, the conference recognized, consists in the organization of clubs, including charter schools overgrown with crèches, canteens, and all those facilities that can serve as an object lesson in what Soviet power can give women of the East if female workers and peasants from Turkish and mountain populations themselves show initiative. Clubs were acknowledged by the conference as the primary form of gathering masses of women around women’s divisions [zhenotdelov], quite feasible even for nomadic peoples: Kyrgyz, Uzbeks, etc.
The conference also established the principle that women’s divisions [zhenotdelov] should not look for support primarily among housewives, but rather among those elements of Eastern women whose class and living conditions are more able to accept communism — i.e., among wage-laborers and craftswomen. The latter are especially numerous in Turkestan. All campaigning [agitatsiia] by women’s divisions [zhenotdelov] must proceed from the basic position that the legal and domestic emancipation of women can only come  through the emancipation of the entire populace from the remnants of feudalism and organization of the economy on communist principles. The conference devoted plenty of discussion to the involvement of craftswomen in organizing individual workshops.
The lively exchange of ideas prompted the question of convening an All-Russian Congress of Women of the East. The conference determined [that this] would convene on June 20 in Moscow. Much of the preparatory work for the Congress has already been done. And communist women [kommunistki] of the East, even in the distant outskirts, have already held a series of conferences and congresses in connection with this throughout the region, as well as the cantons. The conference passed with surprising cheer and camaraderie; despite all the different nationalities represented, there reigned the spirit of internationalism. The conference sent a telegram in response to the warm greeting it received from V.I. Lenin and working women of the West through the Communist International and International Women’s Secretariat.
This small but orderly meeting is almost certain to yield good results. Not only will it help with preparations for the Russian Congress; it will also become one of the building blocks from which the new, communist society will eventually be established and given shape by combined efforts of communist men and women [kommunistov i kommunistok] East and West, implemented through the dictatorship of the working class.
 Pravda, 4.10.1921
Совешание коммуниÑток-организаторов женщин ВоÑтока
ÐлекÑандра Коллонтай
.
Впервые не только в СоветÑкой РоÑÑии, но впервые в мире ÑоÑтоÑлоÑÑŒ Ñовещание коммуниÑток воÑточных наро дов и организаторов работниц ВоÑтока СоветÑких реÑпублик и облаÑтей. Совещание, Ñозванное центральным Отделом [по работе Ñреди женщин при ЦК ВКП(б)], ÑоÑтоÑлоÑÑŒ Ñ 5 по 7 Ð°Ð¿Ñ€ÐµÐ»Ñ Ð²ÐºÐ»ÑŽÑ‡Ð¸Ñ‚ÐµÐ»ÑŒÐ½Ð¾ и прошло под знаком большой деловитоÑти. Разобраны были вопроÑÑ‹ ÑкономичеÑкого и правового Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ñ‰Ð¸Ð½ ВоÑтока, работа Ñреди куÑтарниц, формы и методы организации, Ð°Ð³Ð¸Ñ‚Ð°Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð¸ пропаганда и подготовка к Первому Ð’ÑероÑÑийÑкому Ñовещанию работниц и креÑÑ‚ÑŒÑнок воÑточных народноÑтей. Ð’ первый день Ñделан был краткий общеполитичеÑкий доклад.
СъехалоÑÑŒ 45 организаторов по работе Ñреди женщин воÑточных народов. ПредÑтавлены были реÑпублики: ТатариÑ, БашкириÑ, ТуркеÑтан, Ðзербайджан, КрымÑÐºÐ°Ñ Ð ÐµÑпублика, КиргизиÑ, облаÑти Кавказа Ñ Ð³Ð¾Ñ€Ñкими народноÑÑ‚Ñми, Сибирь и Ñ€Ñд губерниий Ñ Ñ‚ÑŽÑ€ÐºÑким или горÑким наÑелением.
Совещание Ñто наглÑдно показало, что влиÑние нашей партии, проводимое через женотделы, ÑÐµÐ¹Ñ‡Ð°Ñ ÑƒÐ¶Ðµ раÑпроÑтранÑетÑÑ Ð½Ð° Ñамые дальние облаÑти СоветÑкой РоÑÑии и что в тех меÑтноÑÑ‚ÑÑ…, где еще недавно царила Ð²ÐµÐºÐ¾Ð²Ð°Ñ Ð·Ð°ÐºÐ°Ð±Ð°Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾ÑÑ‚ÑŒ женщины, теперь идет глубокое брожение в Ñамих женÑких маÑÑах, не только выражающееÑÑ Ð² том, что женщина ВоÑтока ÑбраÑывает чадру, но и в том, что она приобщаетÑÑ Ðº ÑоветÑкому ÑтроительÑтву.
Совещание показало, что оÑновные принципы работы, применÑемые нашей партией в целÑÑ… Ð²Ð¾Ð²Ð»ÐµÑ‡ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÑˆÐ¸Ñ€Ð¾ÐºÐ¾Ð¹ маÑÑÑ‹ женщин в ÑтроительÑтво коммунизма, оÑтаютÑÑ Ð¶Ð¸Ð·Ð½ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ‹Ð¼Ð¸ и вполне применимыми и на ВоÑтоке. ВидоизменÑÑ‚ÑŒ, ÑчитаÑÑÑŒ Ñ Ð¼ÐµÑтными оÑобенноÑÑ‚Ñми, приходитÑÑ Ð»Ð¸ÑˆÑŒ чаÑтноÑти. Так, например, иÑÑ…Ð¾Ð´Ñ Ð¸Ð· Ñемейно-бытовой закабаленноÑти работниц, женотделы начинают обычно воÑпитание широких маÑÑ Ñ€Ð°Ð±Ð¾Ñ‚Ð½Ð¸Ñ† в деле ÑоветÑкого ÑтроительÑтва вовлечением их в первую очередь в работу по охране материнÑтва, по общеÑтвенному питанию и Ñ‚. д. Среди народноÑтей ВоÑтока, где женщину в первую очередь закабалÑÑŽÑ‚ религиозные предраÑÑудки, оÑтатки брачного беÑправиÑ, подчинение ее обычаÑм и нравам прошлого, центр работы, еÑтеÑтвенно, переноÑитÑÑ Ñ Ð¿ÐµÑ€Ð²Ñ‹Ñ… шагов на поднÑтие Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ð¼Ð¾Ñ‰ÑŒÑŽ клубов, школ и вообще широкого проÑвещениÑ, культурного уровнÑ, на развитие знаниÑ, Ñ Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð¾Ð¹ Ñтороны, Ñ Ð´Ñ€ÑƒÐ³Ð¾Ð¹ — на приведение в ÑоответÑтвие жизненного обихода Ñ Ð±Ð¾Ð»ÐµÐµ Ñвободными, защищающими интереÑÑ‹ женщины ÑоветÑкими законами. ОтÑюда введение, по примеру БашкирÑкой РеÑпублики, делегаток в чиÑло народных Ñудей, учаÑтие женотделов в переработке меÑтных законов и их практики и Ñ‚. д.
Sports.
Как одну из первоначальных форм Ð²Ð¾Ð²Ð»ÐµÑ‡ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ñамых отÑталых женÑких маÑÑ Ð’Ð¾Ñтока в общеÑтвенную и политичеÑкую жизнь Ñовещание признало организацию клубов, включающих школу грамоты и обраÑтающих ÑÑлÑми, Ñтоловыми и вÑеми теми учреждениÑми, которые могут Ñлужить наглÑдным примером того, что может дать СоветÑÐºÐ°Ñ Ð²Ð»Ð°ÑÑ‚ÑŒ женщине ВоÑтока, еÑли Ñами работницы и креÑÑ‚ÑŒÑнки тюркÑких и горÑких народов проÑвÑÑ‚ ÑамодеÑтельноÑÑ‚ÑŒ. Клубы признаны Ñовещанием первоначальной формой ÑÐ¾Ð±Ð¸Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ñких маÑÑ Ð²Ð¾ÐºÑ€ÑƒÐ³ женотделов, вполне оÑущеÑтвимой даже Ð´Ð»Ñ ÐºÐ¾Ñ‡ÑƒÑŽÑ‰Ð¸Ñ… народноÑтей: киргизов, узбеков и др.
Совещание также уÑтановило принцип, что опору женотделы должны иÑкать прежде вÑего не Ñреди домохозÑек, а Ñреди того Ñлемента женщин ВоÑтока, которые по Ñвое клаÑÑовой принадлежноÑти и уÑловиÑм жизни более ÑпоÑобны воÑпринÑÑ‚ÑŒ коммунизм, Ñ‚. е. Ñреди наемных работниц и куÑтарниц. ПоÑледних оÑобенно много в ТуркеÑтане. Ð’ÑÑ Ð°Ð³Ð¸Ñ‚Ð°Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¾Ñ‚Ð´ÐµÐ»Ð¾Ð² должна иÑходить из оÑновного положениÑ, что только путем ÑкономичеÑкого раÑÐºÑ€ÐµÐ¿Ð¾Ñ‰ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð²Ñего наÑÐµÐ»ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¾Ñ‚ оÑтатков феодализма и организации хозÑйÑтва на началах коммунизма возможно бытовое, правовое и Ñемейное раÑкрепощение женщины. Совещание уделило много меÑта обÑуждению вопроÑа о вовлечении куÑтарниц в организацию отдельных маÑтерÑких.
Живой обмен мнений вызвал Ð²Ð¾Ð¿Ñ€Ð¾Ñ Ð¾ Ñозыве Ð’ÑероÑÑийÑкого Ñъезда женщин ВоÑтока. Совещание поÑтановило Ñозвать [его] 20 Ð¸ÑŽÐ½Ñ Ð² МоÑкве 100. Ð‘Ð¾Ð»ÑŒÑˆÐ°Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ð´Ð³Ð¾Ñ‚Ð¾Ð²Ð¸Ñ‚ÐµÐ»ÑŒÐ½Ð°Ñ Ñ€Ð°Ð±Ð¾Ñ‚Ð° к Ñъезду уже Ñделана. И коммуниÑтки ВоÑтока, даже в далеких окраинах, уже провели в ÑвÑзи Ñ Ð½Ð¸Ð¼ Ñ€Ñд конференций и Ñъездов как по облаÑти, так и по кантонам. Совещание прошло удивительно бодро и дружно; на Ñове щании, неÑÐ¼Ð¾Ñ‚Ñ€Ñ Ð½Ð° различие предÑтавленных народноÑтей, царил дух интернационализма. Совещание поÑлало в ответ на полученную телеграмму приветÑтвие Ð’.И. Ленину и приветÑтвие работницам Запада через Коминтерн и Международный женÑкий Ñекретариат.
Ðто небольшое, но деловитое Ñовещание, неÑомненно, даÑÑ‚ Ñвои хорошие плоды и не только поможет подготовке Ð’ÑероÑÑийÑкого Ñъезда, но и Ñтанет одним из тех кирпичиков, из которых дружными уÑилиÑми коммуниÑтов и коммуниÑток Запада и ВоÑтока поÑтепенно ÑкладываютÑÑ Ð¸ утверждаютÑÑ Ð½Ð°Ñ‡Ð°Ð»Ð° нового, коммуниÑтичеÑкого общеÑтва, оÑущеÑтвлÑемого диктатурой рабочего клаÑÑа.
«Правда», 10 Ð°Ð¿Ñ€ÐµÐ»Ñ 1921 г.
Those were the days! And what a contrast with the modern left’s all too frequent dhimmitude!
Pingback: Women’s liberation in non-Western contexts | Research Material
Pingback: Know your enemy | The Charnel-House
Pingback: Against religious fanaticism, against the state | The Charnel-House
Pingback: A black man in Turkmenistan: Langston Hughes’ 1932 account of Soviet Central Asia | The Charnel-House
Reblogged this on OMG! News Africa.
Pingback: Against Religious Fanaticism, Against the State | A Matéria Humana - Pedro Mota
Pingback: Against Religious Fanaticism, Against the State | Matéria Humana - Pedro Mota