ANSWER: Name this socialist

[Rakesh Bhandari]

The struggle over access to abortion as less serious seems to me a great
blunder. To be forced to carry to term against one's will either due to
restrictive law or lack of means is a form of torture--no more, no less
(too bad Max does not understand this); moreover, to treat women's health
as less serious only says quite loudly that the labor movement is willing
to treat women in all their concerns--from health to workplace
concerns--less seriously in order to fry bigger fish.  The fight for free
access to abortion thus cannot be marginalized as a merely cultural or non
labor concern; it reveals how one values the freedom and autonomy of women.
Moreover, any labor movement that refuses to take a stand here on the
ground of tolerating religious authority simply cuts its own throat by
legitimising the invocation of that authority in political debate. If the
party says it's fine to invoke religion to silence feminists and dilute the
plaform, then the party can only be weakened in its response to those in
its ranks who will invoke religion or same papal authority to attenuate the
class struggle. Refusal to sanction religious appeals now  mean greater
hesitation by some to join the ranks of a secular and feminist party but it
lays the grounds for the kind of decision making process that will be
necessary if labor is serious about assaulting capitalism instead of
domesticating itself in some new corporatist arrangement from which only
the leaders of labor will benefit.

Yours, Rakesh