• @dandelion
    link
    English
    10
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    It helps if you look at it from the perspective of the capitalist class. Workers are a form of free capital. Capitalists don’t have to assume any of the burdens involved in creating life, raising a child, acculturating them to social standards that make them suitable workers, etc. They don’t even have to pay for the education or training that makes them capable as human capital in various industrial contexts.

    All those costs are dumped onto the working classes, not just as parents (usually the woman) who are expected to deliver a baby, nurse the baby, raise the resulting child until they are the age of the majority all without any wages, access to benefits like retirement plans or health insurance, etc. but also onto taxpayers who subsidize the rest of the costs outside of the home such as their schooling and transportation to the schools.

    There is a huge leverage here that the working class does not take by organizing the production of themselves. If we all agreed to not have children and demanded fair compensation for any new production of human capital, society would be much more just and the capitalist class would have less room to exploit us.

    • @umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      i think this is also the reason the far right pushes so hard against contraception and abortion.

      also the marxist concept of reserve army of labour: the more imporvished and desperate workers are lining up for shitty jobs to survive, the less then can get away with paying.

      • @dandelion
        link
        English
        13 months ago

        It certainly does benefit the right to some extent, but I wouldn’t ignore the strategy that the right uses of exploiting Christians, and that’s where contraception and abortion come in as issues (stemming from theological convictions).