I walked away from my first semester of women’s studies curriculum understanding there was one clear and present danger: corporate, global power. Across Feminist Pedagogy (520), Political Sociology (661), Environmental Justice (530), and Gender and Development in Latin America (551), the message I received over and over again was corporate interest reigns supreme.
Again and again I was appalled to read about the corporatizing of the commons. Water particularly stands out to me. For example, a state supreme court granting Nestle rights to a brook a community in Maine had drawn spring water from for, well, ever, before they came, literally destroying the landscape with mudslides and erosion from drawing down on the water at such an unnatural rate, and then trucking bottled Poland Springs back into the community for purchase (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIj_LPNw48g). Or the great seed debate: farmers having to PURCHASE seed from Cargill and Monsanto each and every season, as if that weren’t the biggest oxymoron that could ever exist (http://www.hulu.com/watch/67878/the-future-of-food – if you haven’t seen The Future of Food, watch it.) Everywhere I seemed to look, there was a corporation capitalizing and depriving what was once commonly believed and held to be invaluable, priceless, a basic necessity available to all, given to us by mother nature, not by your latest and greatest corporate sponsor.
I absolutely love Vandana Shiva and all she has to say, and was overjoyed to read Mohanty’s scathing critique of globalization as it stands today, and was hearing Shiva echoing before her name was even mentioned. While some of “‘Under Western Eyes’ Revisited: Feminist Solidarity through Anticapitalist Struggles” (2003) intent was to address critiques of her original piece, what I took away from it was a call to action for our generation of feminists. “[M]y focus now is on what I have chosen to call an anticapitalist transnational feminist practice – and on the possibilities, indeed on the necessities, of cross-national feminist solidarity and organizing against capitalism.” (509). She goes on to state quite clearly, “[A]t this time I believe the theory, critique, and activism around antiglobalization has to be a key focus for feminists” (510). YES!!!
Tying the two articles and the shifting concern in the 80s from colonizing agency to globalization in the new millennium, Mohanty quotes Shiva: “Patents are a replay of colonialism, which is now called globalization and free trade” (512). Corporations, companies, CEOs and CFOs with their armies of litigation attorneys, have become the new nation-state, the new imperialist force the world over, with relatively little resistance from those with the most buying power. “Corporate capitalism has redefined citizens as consumers – and global markets replace the commitments to economic, sexual, and racial equality” (514).
While we’re all, men and women alike, subject to globalization and its far reaching forces and unforeseen consequences, globalization is in no way gender-blind and capitalizes on sexism inherent in societies and businesses everywhere it travels. “It is especially on the bodies and lives of women and girls from the Third World/South – the Two-Thirds World – that global capitalism writes its script, and it is by paying attention to and theorizing the experiences of these communities of women and girls that we demystify capitalism as a system of debilitating sexism and racism and envision anticapitalist resistance” (514).
To reiterate the politics of globalization on womens bodies, I again quote Mohanty: “The rise of religious fundamentalisms in conjunction with conservative nationalisms, which are also in part reactions to global capital and its cultural demands, has led to the policing of women’s bodies in the streets and in the workplaces” (526). She uses the veil and practice of veiling as an example, which is something I’d rather delve into further in class discussion than here, but is most definitely the most readily available example of this global politicizing of women’s bodies.
In a global age, how do we as feminist and as consumers, make our capitalist voices heard without seeming like heretics or moving to Montana to live on the land away from all that’s corporate? We touched on this a bit last class, but in trying to resist and boycott every corporation that doesn’t represent your interests, you would in most fairness, go mad. What’s the balance? I write this as I look out over the ocean and can see the comparison between globalization’s mighty force and intricate depths of power and control. How do we turn this oppressive, corporate tide? How do we get others to take notice they’re drowning in this ocean too?
Confessions of a Bleeding Heart 
How DO we live with integrity without boycotting the companies we, as a nation, seem so dependent on? This is an absolutely key question, especially for Women’s Studies, if we want to think about our commitment to intersectionality. I, also, have only questions regarding this, and those occur to me often. I own a good deal of possessions, and though I by primarily from second-hand stores, I still struggle with the idea of how many resources I and the people around me consume. Thank you for raising the question, as it is an interesting and appropriate post about the reading.
For many years I’ve felt it impossible to resist all of the corporations, or that my individual resistance would matter. Perhaps one of the first and best things we can do is simply to resist consumerist impulses and just consume less. I would recommend the awesome blog http://rowdykittens.com/ as a great resource for minimizing our possessions and simplifying our lives.
Also, for second hand clothes, I’d recommend Plato’s Closet and Clothes Mentor up on Central (they have younger styles than Goodwill). They may also buy back or accept your old clothes for donations. Removing all of the excess clothes and shoes and accessories we don’t ever wear from our homes is one way we can release the hold capitalist consumerism has on us.
p.s. I meant to write after the first sentence that reading about other people who simplified their lives altered my understanding of how I could resist consumerism! I don’t actually believe that my individual stance doesn’t matter – just that it is blowing wind through a straw against a hurricane.