Communizing Care 共产主义护理

The demand to abolish the family has served as a way of imagining life beyond compulsory heterosexuality, misogynistic subjugation and familial violence.¹ It brings up profoundly personal anxiety for many who believe that the family is the only protection against the violence of the state, white supremacy, or poverty. Opponents equate abolishing the family with childhood neglect and a prohibition on affection and care.
废除家庭的呼声为想象超越强制异性恋、性别歧视和家庭暴力的生活方式提供了一种途径。这对许多人来说，触及了极其个人的焦虑，他们认为家庭是抵御国家暴力、白人至上主义或贫困的唯一保护。反对者将废除家庭等同于忽视儿童和禁止情感和关怀。

Marx and Engels were known for avoiding speculative depictions of communist life, objecting to imaginaries that lacked a strategy for how such a society could emerge from the contradictions of capitalism. In Anti-Dühring and its excerpted form in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Engels laid out the division Marxists would use to fend off any threat they may inadvertently become science fiction novelists. Though I agree that concrete descriptions of communist life cannot easily serve the programmatic function imagined by utopian socialists, I also believe that a return to speculative visions of communism can again serve us today. The horror of 20th century Soviet states calling their class- and wage-labor based societies “communist” calls on us to do what Marx and Engels avoided: write science fiction on futures we want to create. Such visions may provoke or enrich, but their utility is not in reading them as proposals to be implemented by the convinced. Their power lies in making visible the tenuousness and horror of the present, and in supporting an unfolding process of exploration and discovery in the midst of struggle.
马克思和恩格斯以避免对共产主义生活的推测性描绘而闻名，反对那些缺乏如何从资本主义的矛盾中产生这种社会策略的想象。在《反对杜林》以及《社会主义：乌托邦与科学》的摘录中，恩格斯阐述了马克思主义者用来抵御任何可能无意中成为科幻小说家的威胁所使用的划分。虽然我同意对共产主义生活的具体描述很难实现乌托邦社会主义者所想象的程序功能，但我也相信，回到对共产主义的推测性愿景，今天仍然可以为我们服务。20 世纪苏联国家的恐怖，它们将基于阶级和工资劳动的社会称为“共产主义”，迫使我们去做马克思和恩格斯避免做的事情：为我们要创造的未来编写科幻小说。这些愿景可能会引发或丰富，但它们的用途不在于将其作为被确信者实施的提案来阅读。它们的力量在于使当前的脆弱性和恐怖变得可见，并在斗争中支持一个不断展开的探索和发现过程。

When evoking the abolition of the family, Marx and Engels use the word Aufhebung for abolish. A Hegelian concept sometimes translated as “a positive supersession,” Aufhebung is to preserve, uplift and radically transform. This meaning is largely unlike the American legacy of anti-slavery abolitionists. Demands to abolish the family are not efforts to destroy people’s ability to form caring, romantic, or parental ties, nor to celebrate the pressures market economies put on domestic life. Instead, to abolish the family is to free our capacity to care for each other into more humane forms. Here I offer one speculative sketch of social reproduction to replace the family, specifically the commune as initially suggested by the early 19th century French socialist Charles Fourier.
当提到废除家庭时，马克思和恩格斯使用了 Aufhebung 这个词来表示废除。这是一个黑格尔的概念，有时被翻译为“积极的超越”，Aufhebung 意味着保存、提升和彻底转变。这个含义与美国反奴隶制废除主义者的历史遗产大相径庭。要求废除家庭并非旨在破坏人们形成关爱、浪漫或父母关系的能力，也不是为了庆祝市场经济对家庭生活施加的压力。相反，废除家庭是为了释放我们彼此关爱的能力，使其以更人性化的方式发展。在这里，我提供了一个关于社会再生产的推测性草图，以取代家庭，特别是最初由 19 世纪初的法国社会主义者查尔斯·傅立叶提出的公社。

Qualities of Communist Social Reproduction
共产主义社会再生产的特点

The family serves as the main institution that mediates proletarian dependency on the wage. Along with the wage, welfare programs and the carceral system, we depend on those we call family to survive. For many proletarians unable to work, including infants, small children, people who are disabled and the very old, the main means of securing resources are from personal, familial relationships of dependence on a wage laborer. The growing systems of market-based reproductive care are no escape from this dual dependency on the family or the wage, as they are paid for from one’s own wage or that of a family member.
家庭作为主要机构，调解着无产阶级对工资的依赖。与工资、福利计划和监禁系统一起，我们依赖所谓的家庭来生存。对于许多无法工作的无产阶级，包括婴儿、幼儿、残疾人和非常年长的人，确保资源的主要手段是依赖与工资劳动者之间的个人、家庭依赖关系。随着基于市场的生殖护理系统的增长，这并不是从家庭或工资的双重依赖中解脱出来的方式，因为这些服务的费用是从自己的工资或家庭成员的工资中支付的。

In our society, love and care are bound within the dependency and obligation of the family, and with them much of the labor of social reproduction. The family, therefore, takes a contradictory form in our world, both the means of love in the midst of a harsh and dangerous world, and a space of private dependency with little protection from the risk of internal abuse, violence, and heteronormativity. However good some families may be, their privacy and insularity buffers them from the necessary process of struggle. For those unable to live well under this gender regime, the gamble of who your family happens to be is a matter of life and death. The state, the wage, and the family: each oppose gender and sexual freedom, and each are incompatible with a full, free expression of human flourishing through gender and sexual diversity. The abolition of the family must be the positive creation of new institutions and practices of love, reproduction and erotic life.
在我们的社会中，爱与关怀被家庭的依赖和义务所束缚，其中包含了社会再生产的大量劳动。因此，在我们的世界中，家庭采取了一种矛盾的形式，既是严酷危险世界中的爱的手段，也是缺乏对内部虐待、暴力和异性恋规范风险保护的私人依赖空间。尽管一些家庭可能很好，但它们的隐私和孤立使它们脱离了必要的斗争过程。对于那些在这一性别制度下无法过上好生活的群体而言，家庭的偶然性是生死攸关的。国家、工资和家庭：每一项都反对性别和性自由，每一项都与通过性别和性多样性充分、自由地表达人类繁荣的机构和实践不兼容。家庭的废除必须是创造新的爱、繁殖和情欲生活的机构和实践的积极构建。

In place of the coercive system of atomized family units, the abolition of the family would generalize what we now call care. Care of mutual love and support; care of the labor of raising children and caring for the ill; care of erotic connection and pleasure; care of aiding each other in fulfilling the vast possibilities of our humanity, expressed in countless ways, including forms of self-expression we now call gender. Care in our capitalist society is a commodified, subjugating, and alienated act, but in it we can see the kernel of a non-alienating interdependence.
取代原子化的家庭单位的强制系统，废除家庭将普及我们现在所说的关怀。相互的关爱和支援的关怀；养育子女和照顾病人的劳动的关怀；情欲联系和愉悦的关怀；帮助彼此实现人类的无限可能性的关怀，以无数种方式表达，包括我们现在称为性别的自我表达形式。在我们的资本主义社会中，关怀是一种商品化、压迫性和异化的行为，但在其中我们可以看到非异化的相互依存的核心。

Around the People’s Kitchen
人民厨房周围

People spontaneously form self-organized communities based on collectivizing reproduction during periods of prolonged insurgency. I call these communes, and consider them early forms of social reproduction that could come to dominate under communism. When large numbers of people directly confront the state and capital in forms that bring them into a shared location for multiple days, they often develop practices for collectively procuring food, cooking, and shared eating; for sleeping arrangements in proximity to each other; for sharing child rearing responsibilities and aiding disabled comrades. All work to share the work of care, to enable diverse participation, and to protect each other against harm.
在长期的反叛期间，人们自发地根据集体繁殖的原则形成自我组织的社区。我称这些为公社，认为它们是共产主义下可能占主导地位的早期社会再生产形式。当大量的人以将他们带到同一地点共度多日的形式直接与国家和资本对抗时，他们往往会发展出集体获取食物、烹饪和共享饮食的实践；为彼此就近安排住宿；分担育儿责任和帮助残疾战友。所有的工作都是为了共享照顾工作，促进多样化的参与，并保护彼此免受伤害。

We see some variation of this wherever prolonged occupations take root: in rural, direct-action protest camps like Standing Rock in the Dakotas or the ZAD in France, or in movement of the squares. In the Oaxaca Commune of 2006, women created collective reproductive activities on the barricades as a means of sustaining the protests and resisting the gender domination of home life:
无论长期占领活动在何处生根，我们都能看到这种变化：在像达科他州的圣岩或法国的 ZAD 这样的农村直接行动抗议营地，或者在广场运动中。在 2006 年的奥阿哈卡公社中，女性在防线上创建了集体生殖活动，作为维持抗议活动和抵抗家庭生活中的性别统治的手段：

The barricades were places where the people of Oaxaca slept, cooked and shared food, had sex, shared news, and came together at the end of the day. Resources such as food, water, gasoline and medical supplies were re-appropriated and redistributed, and in the same way, reproductive labor was re-appropriated from the specialized sphere of the home and became the underscoring way to reimagine social life and collective bonds.²
障碍物是奥哈卡人民睡觉、做饭、共享食物、进行性行为、分享新闻和每天结束时团聚的地方。食物、水、汽油和医疗用品等资源被重新分配和再利用，同样，生育劳动也被从家庭的专业领域重新分配，成为重新想象社会生活和集体联系的主要方式。 ²

These arrangements serve immediate needs as part of an ongoing struggle. They collectivize reproductive labor, create new shared forms of intimacy and friendship, open new avenues for contesting gender and sexual relations, and can work to directly challenge the atomized, household structure of the nuclear family. Though misogyny, homophobia and sexual violence have often been the horror of such shared protest sites, their collective and political character provides a better forum to contest and challenge such dynamics than the isolated family. The protest camps we need must combine emergent forms of communist reproduction with feminist and queer practice, and ultimately, perhaps, better sex.
这些安排满足了持续斗争中的即时需求。它们集体化了生殖劳动，创造了新的共享亲密和友谊形式，开辟了挑战性别和性关系的新途径，并能直接挑战原子化的、家庭结构的核家庭。尽管对这类共享抗议地点的恐怖往往源于对女性的歧视、同性恋恐惧症和性暴力，但它们的集体性和政治性特征提供了比孤立的家庭更好的论坛，以对抗和挑战这些动态。我们需要的抗议营地必须结合出现的共产主义再生产形式、女权主义和酷儿实践，并最终，也许，提供更好的性体验。

Just as the communal kitchen arises in past insurgencies, the commune as the prevalent mode of social reproduction could arise under a wider condition of communization. Though we can’t know the conditions of future insurrections, a few features characterize communist measures: a critical mass of proletarians rapidly seizing, transforming and putting into use the infrastructure and land, to enable non-market human survival and human flourishing. The obligatory nuclear family relation and wage labor would operate as direct obstacles to such shared survival, freedom and the persistence of the insurrection. If the nuclear family is not radically challenged, its pernicious counterrevolutionary logics of property, misogyny, heteronormativity and domination remain untouched. The communist reproduction of material life must resist dependency on obligatory family relations and participation in wage labor. It would instead be pursued through the democratic, collective management and global circulation of productive activity without market mediation.
正如过去的起义中出现的公共厨房一样，公社作为社会再生产的主导模式，可以在更广泛的共产化条件下出现。尽管我们无法预知未来的起义条件，但共产主义措施有几个特点：大量无产阶级迅速夺取、改造和使用基础设施和土地，以实现非市场的生存和人类繁荣。强制性的核心家庭关系和工资劳动会直接阻碍这种共享生存、自由和起义的持续性。如果核心家庭不进行根本性的挑战，其对财产、性别歧视、异性恋规范和统治的反动逻辑将保持不变。物质生活的共产主义再生产必须抵抗对强制性家庭关系的依赖和参与工资劳动。相反，它将通过民主、集体管理和全球生产活动的全球流通来追求，而不受市场中介的影响。

In their 2016 article “Insurrection and Production,” Angry Workers imagine such a potential communizing revolutionary process in the UK, focusing on the essential industries that must be taken over for an insurrection to persist. Similar studies are necessary elsewhere, though much of their analysis parallels US conditions. They propose the formation of collective domestic units with each unit collectivizing food production and consumption. The commune here is not a prefiguration but necessitates the generalized condition of communism. They write:
在他们 2016 年的文章《叛乱与生产》中，愤怒的工人设想了英国这样一个可能的共产化革命过程，重点关注必须接管的至关重要的行业，以便叛乱能够持续。尽管他们的分析很大程度上与美国的条件相呼应，但类似的研究在其他地方也是必要的。他们提出建立集体家庭单位，每个单位集体化食品生产和消费。这里的公社不是预演，而是需要普遍的共产主义条件。他们写道：

The uprising and takeover of essential industries has to go hand in hand with the formation of domestic units comprising 200 to 250 people: communal spaces (former hotels, schools, office blocks, etc.) as central points for distribution, domestic work and local decision-making. The quick formation of such domestic units is as important as the takeover of the essential industries. Mainly in order to break the isolation of domestic work and gender hierarchies, but also to create a counter-dynamic to the centralisation in the essential industries: a decentralisation of certain social tasks and decision making.
起义和接管关键行业必须与组建由 200 至 250 人组成的国内单位同步进行：作为分发、家庭工作和地方决策中心的社区空间（前酒店、学校、办公楼等）作为核心点。快速组建这样的国内单位与接管关键行业同样重要。主要目的是打破家庭工作和性别等级的孤立状态，同时也为关键行业中的集中化创造一个反向动力：将某些社会任务和决策分散化。

This is very different from what were called communes in the 20th century: deliberate, small-scale countercultural communities attempting to survive under a market society. These 20th century communes include back-to-the-land collective farming communities in the 1960s and 1970s, group houses of hippies and punks, urban squats, queer families living together, and utopian planned communities. These are legitimate strategies for trying to live less alienated lives in the atomizing conditions of the market. Such practices are an admirable part of radical traditions, but as they operate within capitalist conditions, their limits are severe.
这与 20 世纪所称的公社大相径庭：这些是旨在在市场经济下生存的有意识的小规模反文化社区，试图过上不太疏离的生活。20 世纪的公社包括 1960 年代和 1970 年代的返璞归真集体农耕社区，嬉皮士和朋克的集体住宅，城市占领的房屋，同性恋家庭共同生活，以及乌托邦式规划社区。这些是试图在原子化的市场条件下过上不太疏离生活的合法策略。这样的实践是激进传统中值得赞赏的一部分，但作为在资本主义条件下运作，它们的局限性是严重的。

Communes in a capitalist society are forced into the shared poverty of economic self-sufficiency and isolation, or depend on significant contributions from wage labor or inherited wealth. The pressures of state policies, poverty, class contradictions among residents, or lack of mental health care inevitably exacerbate interpersonal conflict, and often lead to the eventual collapse of such deliberate communities. Only considerable class privilege offers long-term stability.
在资本主义社会中的公社被迫陷入经济自给自足和孤立的共同贫困中，或者依赖于工资劳动或继承财富的重大贡献。国家政策的压力、贫困、居民之间的阶级矛盾，或是缺乏心理健康护理，不可避免地加剧了人际冲突，往往导致这些有意建立的社区最终崩溃。只有显著的阶级特权才能提供长期的稳定性。

Further, many proponents of such planned communities mistakenly imagine that their very existence will inspire their gradual spreading in the shell of a capitalist society, providing the means of living anti-state communism in the present. Such thinking has produced the blossoming of isolated countercultures, but nothing suggests it could ever offer an exit from the rule of capital and the capitalist state. The structural conditions of proletarianization, market dependency and state violence make such a vision of a revolutionary transition impossible without generalized insurrection, and leave such communities inherently unstable, inaccessible and isolated.
进一步，许多这样的规划社区的支持者错误地认为，它们的存在本身将激发它们在资本主义社会的外壳中逐渐扩散，提供在当前实现反国家共产主义的手段。这样的思考产生了孤立反文化的繁荣，但没有任何迹象表明它能够提供摆脱资本和资本主义国家的出路。工人化、市场依赖和国家暴力的结构性条件使得这样的革命过渡愿景在没有普遍起义的情况下是不可能实现的，这样的社区本质上是不稳定的、不可达的和孤立的。

For Angry Workers, and the analysis here, the commune is instead the collectivization of reproductive labor and consumption, the abolition of the family, and the freeing of love, care and eroticism into a collective, democratic space of shared life. To survive as the basis of freedom, the commune must be a part of a broader and successful effort to destroy the coercive mechanisms of the racial state, to seize the means of production and collective survival, and to defeat the class enemies of the revolutionary struggle. The commune can only survive under the conditions of global communization.
对于愤怒的工人，以及这里的分析，公社实际上是生殖劳动和消费的集体化，家庭的废除，以及将爱、关怀和色情活动解放到共享生活的集体、民主空间中。为了作为自由的基础而生存，公社必须成为更广泛、更成功的努力的一部分，以摧毁种族国家的强制机制，夺取生产资料和集体生存的手段，并击败革命斗争的阶级敌人。只有在全球共产化条件下，公社才能生存。

On Charles Fourier 关于查尔斯·傅立叶

This vision of the commune as a collective, erotic and joyful site of reproductive labor most closely resembles the theories of Charles Fourier. Fourier was a French merchant, clerk, and writer, and a major figure in what has come to be called the utopian socialist tradition. He was born shortly before the French Revolution and published most of his work in the early 19th century, dying in 1837. Fourier’s writing on the evils of the market, the bourgeois family, and collective communes became tremendously influential on socialist politics of the 19th century. There is clear evidence that Marx closely read Fourier, and many of Marx’s greatest statements in support of women’s rights, gender equality and women’s freedom are near verbatim quotes of Fourier.
这个关于公社作为集体、充满性爱和欢乐的生殖劳动场所的愿景最接近于查尔斯·傅立叶的理论。傅立叶是一位法国商人、文员和作家，是所谓的乌托邦社会主义传统中的主要人物。他出生于法国大革命前夕，在 19 世纪初发表了大部分作品，于 1837 年去世。傅立叶关于市场恶行、资产阶级家庭和集体公社的著作对 19 世纪的社会主义政治产生了巨大影响。有明确的证据表明马克思仔细阅读了傅立叶的著作，马克思关于女性权利、性别平等和女性自由的许多最伟大的陈述几乎完全引用了傅立叶的观点。

Fourier is best known for three theoretical and political contributions: First, he identified early that the horrors of poverty were a result of the growing market economy, and that socialists needed to abolish markets and private property. This new society would guarantee all a “social minimum,” a concept of universal material provision that became central to new socialist thinking. Fourier defines it as essential to the shared well-being of the coming society: “Finally, in this new order the common people must enjoy a guarantee of well-being, a minimum income sufficient for present and future needs. This guarantee must free them from all anxiety either for their own welfare or that of their dependents.” (275)³ Second, Fourier was a major proponent of women’s rights, seeing the subjugation of women as a cornerstone of bourgeois society, the family, monogamous marriage, and the oppressive social order. He advocated extensively for the social, economic, and sexual rights of women, and is believed to have coined the word “feminism.” He generated a theory later adopted by Marx and others, that the degree of freedom in a society is best measured by the level of women’s emancipation.
傅里叶最著名的三大理论和政治贡献包括：首先，他早期认识到贫困的恐怖是不断增长的市场经济的结果，社会主义者需要废除市场和私有财产。这个新社会将为所有人提供“社会最低保障”，这一概念成为新社会主义思想的核心。傅里叶将其定义为即将到来社会共享福祉的必要条件：“最后，在这个新的秩序中，普通民众必须享有福祉的保障，足够的最低收入，足以满足当前和未来的需要。这种保障必须使他们免于对自己福祉或依赖者的焦虑。”（275） ³ 其次，傅里叶是女性权利的主要倡导者，他认为女性的屈从是资产阶级社会、家庭、一夫一妻制和压迫性社会秩序的基础。他广泛倡导女性的社会、经济和性权利，并被认为是“女权主义”一词的创造者。他提出了一种后来被马克思等人采纳的理论，即衡量一个社会自由度的最佳标准是女性解放的程度。

Third, Fourier proposed that the solution to the horrors of the market and monogamy was a form of commune he termed the phalanx, numbering 1,600 people in a vast building of the phalanstery. Fourier’s vision of the phalanx was embedded in his science of the human passions, a “theory of passionate attraction.” By carefully examining the natural instincts, proclivities, pleasures, and developmental capacities of humans, we could design deliberate communities that perfectly calibrate personality types. The phalanxes would be shared spaces of labor as productive centers exporting a particular foodstuff or manufactured product. They would collectivize all reproductive labor, designed to maximize serving the diverse pleasures of food and daily consumption by all residents. Fourierist communes were started throughout the US and Europe in the 1830s and 1840s.
第三，傅里叶提出了解决市场和一夫一妻制恐怖的方法，他称之为“法拉克斯”，一个由 1600 人在庞大的法拉克斯建筑中组成的集体。傅里叶对法拉克斯的设想嵌入了他的人类激情科学，一种“激情吸引理论”。通过仔细研究人类的自然本能、倾向、乐趣和发展能力，我们可以设计出精心规划的社区，使个性类型得到精确匹配。法拉克斯将是劳动共享的空间，作为生产中心，出口特定的农产品或制造产品。它们将集体化所有生殖劳动，旨在最大化满足所有居民的食物和日常消费的多样化乐趣。傅里叶主义集体在 19 世纪 30 年代和 40 年代在美国和欧洲广泛建立。

Rather than relying on compulsion to maintain social order or productive work, these communities could design “amorous work” to skillfully use pleasure, eroticism, and joy as incentives, so that collective and individual benefit align. “Useless as it is today,” he wrote, “love will thus become one of the most brilliant mainsprings of the social mechanism.” (176) Fourier’s theories of human passions were fundamental to his vision of social harmony. Love and attraction would replace domination as the central social bond of society.
这些社区可以设计“浪漫工作”，巧妙地利用乐趣、色情和快乐作为激励，使集体和个人利益相一致，而不是依靠强制来维持社会秩序或生产工作。他写道：“尽管它今天似乎无用，但爱将成为社会机制中最耀眼的驱动力之一。”（176）傅里叶对人类激情的理论是他对社会和谐愿景的基础。爱与吸引力将取代统治成为社会关系的核心纽带。

Though Fourier’s writing on the erotic were not as widely regarded, he saw his commitments to sexual freedom and fulfillment as essential to his social theory. As well as a social minimum, he advocated for a “sexual minimum,” where the physical, erotic needs of all were guaranteed by their community, allowing each person the freedom to pursue full, authentic love.
尽管傅里叶关于性爱的论述没有得到广泛的认可，但他认为对性自由和满足的承诺是其社会理论的核心。除了社会最低标准，他还提倡“性最低标准”，在这种情况下，社区保证了所有人的身体和性需求，让每个人都有自由追求完整、真实的爱情。

We are going to discuss a new amorous order in which sentiment, which is the noble side of love, will enjoy an unparalleled prestige and will endow all social relations with a unique charm. How will sentimental love maintain this dominion? Through the fact that the physical impulses, far from being fettered, will be fully satisfied. (340)
我们将讨论一个新的爱情秩序，在这个秩序中，情感，爱的高尚方面，将享有无与伦比的威望，并赋予所有社会关系独特的魅力。情感之爱如何维持这种统治？通过事实，身体的冲动，远离束缚，将得到充分满足。（340）

Fourier may have been fiercely critical of the misogyny of today’s incel movement, but he worried about the despair of those denied sexual pleasure: “The disorders caused by the fear of amorous deprivation are not, in fact, as obvious as those caused by hunger riots. But the mutiny of love is only the more effective for being hidden and concealed behind all sorts of masks.” (340) He was confident that humans are naturally polyamorous, bisexual, and erotically joyful. The free love of the phalanx would be among its greatest appeals, and soon no one would be drawn back to the hypocritical horror of the conjugal family.
傅里叶可能对当今“直男癌”运动中的性别歧视进行了激烈的批判，但他担心被剥夺性快感的人们的绝望：“对爱情匮乏的恐惧所引发的混乱，并不像饥饿暴动那样明显。但爱情的叛乱之所以更为有效，是因为它被隐藏在各种面具背后。”（340）他坚信人类天生是多情的、双性恋的、性欲快乐的。方阵中的自由恋爱将是其最大的吸引力之一，很快，没有人会被假正经的家庭关系的恐怖所吸引回来。

Fourier allowed himself a considerable degree of outlandish fancy in his writing on sexual freedom. He went to some length describing the integral role carefully choreographed orgies would play in future communes. As a parody of the Catholic Church, he described a new, voluntary clerical hierarchy based on sexual skill, sexual selflessness, and the capacity to bring sexual pleasure to the ugliest in society. As a replacement for the horrors of war, he imagined roving armies of amorous youth competitively demonstrating their erotic prowess on battlefields. Those who were sufficiently awed would signal their defeat by submitting themselves to voluntary erotic bondage and orchestrated sexual punishments for a limited duration. One such future encounter between traveling erotic armies and their hosts proceeds:
傅里叶在其关于性自由的著作中允许自己相当程度的离奇想象。他详细描述了精心编排的群交在未来公社中所起的至关重要的作用。作为对天主教会的讽刺，他描述了一个新的、自愿的神职阶层，基于性技巧、性无私和为社会上最丑陋的人带来性快乐的能力。作为战争恐怖的替代品，他设想了游荡的青春军队，在战场上竞争性地展示他们的性魅力。那些被足够震撼的人会通过自愿接受性束缚和由组织策划的性惩罚来表示他们的失败，为期有限的时间。以下是一次游荡的性军队与他们的东道主之间的一次未来相遇： 请注意，原始文本中包含的某些内容可能被视为不适当或不恰当，因此在翻译时可能需要进行调整以符合目标语言的文化和语言规范。

When the Head Fairy waves her wand a semi-bacchanalia gets underway. The members of both groups rush into each other’s arms, and in the ensuing scramble caresses are liberally given and received. Everyone strokes and investigates whatever comes to hand and surrenders himself or herself to the unfettered impulses of simple nature. Each participant flits from one person to another, bestowing kisses everywhere with as much eagerness as rapidity. (389)
当仙女挥动魔杖时，半狂欢开始。两组成员冲向对方的怀抱，在随后的混乱中，自由地给予和接受抚触。每个人都抚摸和探索手边的一切，任由原始本能不受约束地释放。每位参与者从一个人跳到另一个人，以同样的热情和速度在每个人身上给予亲吻。（389）

This initial orgy is disrupted by the intervention of same-sex desire: “To break up the skirmish, use should be made of a divisive agent. Since everything is done by attraction in Harmony, mixed or homosexual attractions should be employed. Groups of Sapphists and Spartites should therefore be thrown into the fray to attack people of their own kind.” (390) This allows the sexual priesthood to issue their recommendations for the most compatible romantic pairings, as “the goal of Harmony is to establish compound amorous relationships based on both physical and spiritual affinities. Thus while the opening sensual skirmish is indispensable, it is only a prelude.” (390)
初始的狂欢被同性恋欲望的介入所打断：“为了打破冲突，应该使用一个分裂的媒介。由于和谐中的一切都是通过吸引力完成的，因此应该使用混合或同性恋的吸引力。因此，应该将萨福派和斯巴达派的团体投入战斗，攻击同类的人。”（390）这使得性祭司能够提出最兼容的浪漫配对建议，因为“和谐的目标是建立基于身体和精神亲和力的复合爱情关系。因此，虽然最初的感官冲突是必不可少的，但它只是一种前奏。”（390）

After one such dry erotic exposition, Fourier teases us, “Yet the minor details I have touched on will already have been enough to let you see how the new order will open the way to love affairs of such splendour and variety that all Civilisation’s tales of love will evoke nothing but pity.” (179)
在这样的干涩性描述之后，傅里叶戏弄我们说，“然而，我提到的次要细节已经足以让你看到，新的秩序将为如此辉煌和多样的爱情关系铺平道路，以至于文明的所有爱情故事只会引发同情。”（179）

Fourier, in short, was a delightfully kinky science fiction writer, and an inspiration to imagining pro-queer communes of the future. Fourier’s work can provoke in us not only a concrete alternative to the family as a unit of social reproduction, but an open-ended erotic desire for a better mode of life we have yet to discover.
傅里叶，简而言之，是一位令人愉快的古怪科幻作家，是想象未来亲-酷儿公社的灵感来源。傅里叶的作品不仅能够激发我们对家庭作为社会再生产的单位的替代方案的具体设想，还能激发我们对尚未发现的更好生活方式的开放性性欲。

Communes to Come 社区即将到来

Rather than as the implementation of a plan, the commune could arise spontaneously out of insurrection. As masses of proletarians directly confront state, capital and oppression in their personal lives, they will need to turn to strategies of collective survival beyond the family. During an insurrectionary period, people would initially appropriate large buildings as centers of social reproduction, with collective canteens, shelter, childcare centers, medical care, and halls for democratic assemblies. Parents joining in the insurrection would likely come to share the labor of childcare to enable their full participation. These new institutions could offer both shared survival, and new forms of joy and belonging.
不如说是实施计划，公社可能在起义中自发产生。当大量的无产阶级直接在个人生活中面对国家、资本和压迫时，他们将需要转向家庭之外的集体生存策略。在起义期间，人们最初会将大型建筑作为社会再生产的中心，设有集体食堂、避难所、托儿所、医疗设施和民主集会大厅。参与起义的父母很可能会分担育儿劳动，以使他们能够全身心参与。这些新机构可以提供共享生存，以及新的快乐和归属感形式。

As an insurrection unfolds and consumes larger parts of society, collectivizing domestic, social reproductive labor offers a strategy of survival and community. There would be a spontaneous, overall tendency towards the formation of the commune as a primary unit of domestic life. Isolated households would lack the means of materially reproducing themselves without access to the market and market-based systems of distribution like supermarkets and box stores and their associated supply chains. Disrupting capitalist production, the state and the family would necessitate their rapid replacement with new institutions, chiefly the collective life of the commune. Communes are answers to the essential question that will arise in a revolutionary process: “How can we take care of each other?”
当叛乱蔓延并消耗社会的更大部分时，集体化家庭、社会再生产劳动提供了一种生存和社区的战略。自发的、总体趋势会倾向于将公社作为家庭生活的基本单位形成。孤立的家庭在没有进入市场和基于市场的分发系统（如超市和大卖场及其相关供应链）的情况下，缺乏物质再生产自己的手段。破坏资本主义生产，国家和家庭将需要迅速用新的机构取代它们，主要的是公社的集体生活。公社是对革命过程中将出现的基本问题的回答：“我们如何照顾彼此？”

As the communes begin to offer material stability and supportive community, many less-normative families would choose to self-abolish, joining communes and dissolving their economic and social insularity into the broader community. Much recent debate has contrasted family abolition with forms of alternative, loving and non-normative families forged by some people of color and queers against white supremacist heteronormativity. Rather than a retrenchment of the family, such chosen forms may be the particular strategy that the yearning towards family abolition and shared care often takes in our world now. In a revolutionary process, queer-chosen family, women-headed families of color impacted by migration and mass incarceration, families living in poverty, and those surviving through other non-heteronormative working-class kinship relations would be the most likely to pursue the commune.
随着公社开始提供物质稳定性和支持性的社区环境，许多非传统家庭可能会选择自我解散，加入公社，将他们的经济和社会孤立融入更广泛的社区。近期的许多辩论将家庭废除与一些有色人种和酷儿对抗白人至上主义异性恋规范所建立的爱的、非传统家庭形式进行了对比。这种废除家庭的诉求并非是对家庭的倒退，而是我们当今世界中追求家庭废除和共享关怀的特定策略。在革命过程中，选择的酷儿家庭、受移民和大规模监禁影响的有色人种家庭、生活在贫困中的家庭以及通过非异性恋的工薪阶层亲属关系生存的家庭，最有可能追求公社。

Family abolition is not the destruction of kinship ties that currently serve as protection against white supremacy, poverty, and state violence, but instead the expansion of that protection into broader communities of struggle. Those family householders most resistant to self-abolition—white property owners, abusive patriarchs, homophobes and others most invested in the normative family—would need to be challenged through feminist, queer and communist struggle both within their families and in the broader society. The more loving and chosen the family, the more amenable it may be to self-abolishing by joining a large, well-functioning commune.
家庭废除并不是摧毁目前作为对抗白人至上主义、贫困和国家暴力的保护纽带，而是将其扩展到更广泛的斗争社群中。在家庭中以及更广泛的社会中，对自我废除最持反对态度的家庭成员——如白人财产所有者、虐待性的家长、恐同者以及其他最依赖于规范家庭的人——需要通过女性主义、同性恋和共产主义的斗争来挑战。家庭越充满爱且是选择性的，就越可能通过加入一个大而运作良好的公社来实现自我废除。

The estimate of Angry Workers of around 200 people strikes me as reasonable, perhaps preferable to Fourier’s 1,600. Two hundred could be a sizable apartment building, the stand-alone homes clustered immediately around a school or other center, or a block of small apartment buildings. The shared kitchen would create a natural initial size, given the logistics of cooking for substantial groups. Other shared consumption and reproductive labor activities would quickly develop, and, depending on demographic distribution and concentration (of children, the elderly, and the disabled), may encompass multiple proximate communes in shared activity.
愤怒工人估计的约 200 人，我认为这个数字是合理的，可能比傅里叶的 1600 人更优。200 人可能是一个大型公寓楼，独立住宅群集在一所学校或其他中心附近，或者是一排小型公寓楼。共享厨房会自然地形成初始规模，考虑到为大量群体做饭的物流。其他共享消费和生殖劳动活动会迅速发展，根据人口分布和集中情况（包括儿童、老年人和残疾人）的不同，可能涵盖多个共享活动的邻近公社。

Establishing such free communities must be a part of an expanding, universalizing, and revolutionizing process that also develops fully communist modes for the production and circulation of material goods. These communes would not be self-sufficient agricultural communities or isolated units struggling to survive in a market society. A communist transition will take time and unfold unevenly in different places. But to survive, it must continue to expand, and ultimately destroy the means of reinstating the domination of the state or the market anywhere. Communist production, without wages, money or exchange, would be the democratic coordination of manufacturing of material goods, the provision of services and the sharing of culture, all managed through many layers of virtual and in-person assessments, surveys, debated algorithms, assemblies, meetings, and many other manifold deliberations to identify and sustainably meet human needs. These communes would be integrated with a communist production system expanding to a global reach, depending on the highest level of technology compatible with human decency and ecological sustainability.
建立这样的自由社区必须是扩大、普遍化和革命化过程的一部分，这个过程也发展完全的共产主义生产与流通模式的物质商品。这些公社不会是自给自足的农业社区或在市场经济中挣扎求存的孤立单位。共产主义过渡将需要时间，并在不同地方不均衡地展开。但为了生存，它必须继续扩大，并最终摧毁在任何地方重新确立国家或市场统治的手段。没有工资、货币或交换的共产主义生产将是民主协调的物质商品制造、服务提供和文化共享，所有这些都通过多层的虚拟和面对面评估、调查、辩论算法、集会、会议和许多其他形式的广泛讨论来管理和协调，以识别并持续满足人类需求。这些公社将与一个扩展到全球范围的共产主义生产系统相整合，依赖于与人类尊严和生态可持续性相兼容的最高技术水平。

These communes could consolidate within them collective reproductive services, including childcare and education; collective laundry, apartment cleaning, canteen food cooking and serving; repair and maintenance of household goods; mental health and regular medical care; and group entertainment activities. Collectivizing many forms of consumption would reduce the social resources and carbon consumption necessary for providing abundance to all. Advanced, high-skill services requiring substantial facilities and infrastructure could be organized regionally, such as surgical care or specialized education. All members could have full digital access to global networks of communication and collaboration, and could be encouraged to form a variety of networking relationships across other communities. These communes could provide the primary institutions for meeting human material needs while also being the center for new forms of communist sociality, art, expression, community, sex and love.
这些公社可以在其中整合集体生殖服务，包括托儿和教育；集体洗衣、公寓清洁、食堂餐饮烹饪与服务；家用物品的维修与维护；心理健康和定期医疗保健；以及团体娱乐活动。将许多消费形式集体化可以减少为所有人提供丰富所需的社会资源和碳消耗。需要大量设施和基础设施的高级、高技能服务可以按地区组织，如手术护理或专业教育。所有成员都可以全面接入全球通信和协作网络，并可以被鼓励与其他社区建立各种网络关系。这些公社可以提供满足人类物质需求的主要机构，同时也是新型共产主义社会性、艺术、表达、社区、性与爱的新形式的中心。

Direct-democratic governance and internal struggle would be essential for these communes to avoid internal class stratifications. Though some tasks could be delegated to elected bodies, the essential decisions of the community must be made through group assembly, deliberation in extended conversation, and weighing the concerns of all affected. Direct democracy could serve as a counterweight towards new forms of class rule and internal domination within the communes. Where world production would have to be organized through other, internet-based and networked mechanisms, decisions immediate to daily life could be made by each commune’s assembly. Two hundred people is about the maximum size of an in-person assembly where everyone is able to take part in decision making directly, and to have opportunities to speak to the entire group.
直接民主治理和内部斗争对于这些公社避免内部阶级分化至关重要。尽管一些任务可以委托给选举机构，但社区的基本决策必须通过集体会议、长时间讨论和考虑所有受影响方的关切来做出。直接民主可以作为对抗公社内新形式的阶级统治和内部压迫的制衡。在世界生产需要通过其他、基于互联网和网络的机制组织时，每个公社的会议可以立即做出与日常生活相关决策。大约 200 人是每个人都能直接参与决策并有机会向整个群体发言的面对面会议的最大规模。

Drawing on Fourier’s commitment to the harmony of different personality types, communes should be internally diverse, rather than communities of affinity. The free circulation and migration of people between communes could be an essential contribution to such heterogeneity. To avoid becoming centers of survivalism, ethnonationalism or gender fascism, such communes must also resist tendencies towards religious and social homogeneity. Though individuals can harbor whatever beliefs they choose, their relations with others would be subject to public challenge and political struggle, breaking down a rigid divide between private and public.
根据傅里叶对不同性格类型和谐的承诺，公社内部应具有多样性，而不是同质性的社区。公社之间人员的自由流通和迁徙可以是促进这种多样性的关键贡献。为了避免成为生存主义、民族主义或性别法西斯主义的中心，这样的公社也必须抵制宗教和社会同质化的倾向。尽管个人可以持有他们选择的任何信仰，但他们的关系与其他人的关系会受到公众的质疑和政治斗争，打破私人与公共之间的僵化界限。

Among the innumerable unresolved questions in imagining communism is preventing stratification between communes. What practices could assure the universality of “to each according to their need,” without the impersonal domination of a state removed from, and governing over, the social body? The lack of property, wage labor, and markets would limit communes’ capacity to dominate others, but communes may try to consolidate some forms of private production towards their own consumption internally. How could society prevent some communes from coming to enjoy significantly better living standards than others? Or negotiate conflicts over resources between communes? Or dismantle the existing distribution of geographic inequality, uneven development, and racial stratification that organizes capitalist space?
在想象共产主义时面临的无数未解决的问题之一是如何防止公社之间的阶层分化。什么实践可以确保“按需分配”的普遍性，而不让一个与社会身体脱节、对其施加统治的无个性化的国家占据主导地位？没有财产、工资劳动和市场的存在会限制公社对其他公社的支配能力，但公社可能会试图将某些形式的私人生产集中起来，以供内部消费。社会如何防止一些公社的生活水平显著优于其他公社？或者如何解决公社之间的资源冲突？或者如何打破地理不平等、不均衡发展和种族分层等组织资本主义空间的现有分布？

Those who imagine socialism as impersonal services through a state managing a market economy have intelligible and ready answers: they can outline policies that deliberately counter-weigh against inequality through bureaucratically investing in underdeveloped areas, taxing wealthier areas, and promoting policies of desegregation. But with decision-making dispersed throughout the society as a whole, and the communes functioning as a primary site of consumption, we would require new and currently unknown practices to mitigate against potential inequality in consumption between communes, and to assure basic material well-being for all. Here I support Fourier’s rare combination of calling for both dispersed non-market social infrastructures and a universal guaranteed social minimum.
将社会主义视为通过国家管理市场经济提供非个人化服务的人，有清晰且易于理解的答案：他们可以制定政策，故意抵消不平等，通过官僚主义投资于欠发达地区，对富裕地区征税，并推动去隔离政策。但如果决策分散在整个社会中，并且合作社作为消费的主要场所，我们需要新的且目前未知的实践来减轻合作社之间潜在的消费不平等，并确保所有人的基本物质福祉。在这里，我支持福雷特对分散的非市场社会基础设施和普遍的社会最低保障的罕见结合的呼吁。

As people encounter a free society, the numbers of people identifying with non-normative sexuality could grow, as we are now witnessing among young people increasingly not identifying as straight. Similarly, when Fourier treats standards of attractiveness and ugliness as transhistorical, I argue instead these will necessarily transform and broaden. Queer culture, queer leadership, and queer movements are an essential resource to communist struggles pursuing richer forms of human freedom. Combined with the collective character of the commune, such queer tendencies could unfold into new dynamics valuing consensual, positive, and healthy sexual relations.
随着人们接触到自由社会，认同非主流性取向的人数可能会增加，正如我们正在年轻人中看到的，越来越多的年轻人不再认同直性。同样，当傅里叶将美的标准和丑的标准视为跨历史的，我认为这些标准必然会发生变化并变得更加广泛。酷儿文化、酷儿领导力和酷儿运动是追求更丰富的人类自由的共产主义斗争的重要资源。结合公社的集体性质，这些酷儿倾向可以发展出新的动态，重视共识、积极和健康的性关系。

Sex and sexual pleasure could become collective concerns, both challenging sexual coercion and abuse, and supporting people to find paths towards sexual fulfillment. Unlike Fourier, I recognize that full sexual satisfaction and perfect harmony is not likely possible given psychoanalytic insights about human development; but the commune provides the opportunity to transform sexual practice and eroticism into something that could be collectively considered as a human need, a source of well-being, and a field of ethical care. This could occasionally take the form of Fourier’s imagined mass planned orgies; but more often it would look like supporting people in their sexual health and sexual satisfaction by incorporating it into mental and physical healthcare; polyamorous relationships could be more common; and a social acknowledgement that good sex is a source of human well-being could all help undo heteronormative misogyny.
性与性快感可以成为集体关注的焦点，既挑战性胁迫和虐待，又支持人们找到通往性满足的道路。与傅里叶不同，我认识到根据心理分析关于人类发展的见解，完全的性满足和完美的和谐不太可能实现；但是，公社提供了将性行为和色情转化为可以集体视为人类需求、福祉源泉和道德关怀领域的领域的机会。这有时可能会以傅里叶设想的大规模规划的集体性爱的形式出现；但更常见的是，它会表现为通过将其纳入心理健康和性健康护理中来支持人们在性健康和性满足方面的需求；多配偶关系可能会更加普遍；以及社会承认好的性行为是人类福祉的源泉，所有这些都有助于消除异性恋的性别歧视。

Successful communes must include those unable to work. Recent experiences of houseless people joining Occupy encampments make clear the strategic necessity of skillful, collective, and non-exclusionary strategies to deal with disability, drug abuse, and mental illness. Harm reduction, mental health support, and drug recovery would all be central concerns of those initially setting up the communes. The communist society will take many generations to heal from the traumas of capitalism and war, as well as complexities of human biological variation in the forms we now define as disability, neurodivergence, or mental illness.
成功的公社必须包括无法工作的人。无家可归者加入占领营地的近期经验清楚地表明，处理残疾、药物滥用和精神疾病的战略必要性，需要巧妙、集体和不排斥的策略。减少伤害、心理健康支持和药物康复将是最初建立公社的首要关注点。共产主义社会需要几代人的时间来治愈资本主义和战争带来的创伤，以及我们现在定义为残疾、神经多样性或精神疾病的人类生物变异的复杂性。

As the insurrection secures more stable, large-scale material conditions, there could be a countertendency towards the reassertion of the family. If these communes fail to become the generalized form of social reproduction, and the nuclear family again became the main unit of consumption, society would see the return of the capitalist family’s current logic of conservatism, whiteness, property-ownership, and self-isolation. The return of the family would contribute to counterrevolution, the reassertion of the state, and the failure of communism.
起义确保了更加稳定、大规模的物质条件后，可能会出现家庭重新主导的趋势。如果这些公社未能成为社会再生产的普遍形式，而核家庭再次成为消费的主要单位，社会将看到资本主义家庭当前保守、白人、财产拥有和自我隔离逻辑的回归。家庭的回归将促进反革命、国家的重新确立以及共产主义的失败。

To resist this countertendency, the contradictions of gender and sexuality could become central to resisting such a return to the family. Like Fourier, I imagine self-interest coupled to transformed consciousness would be essential to maintaining the collective commitment to the commune. Women and feminized partners could refuse the reimposition of the family, having witnessed the reduced domestic labor of the collective commune, and the opportunities the commune affords to contesting sexist relationship dynamics. Queer and trans people could recognize in the commune the means of resisting the abuse and domination of the family for themselves and future queer and trans children. Those who have experienced the insurrectionary commune could recognize in it the material basis for a freer gender and sexual order, and choose to defend and expand its reach. All those who come to realize what is at stake in winning communism could join queers, trans people, and feminists in resisting the return of the family, and instead fight for the family’s full replacement with the commune.
为了抵抗这种逆流，性别和性取向的矛盾可以成为抵抗家庭回归的核心。就像傅里叶一样，我认为个人利益与转变后的意识相结合，对于维持集体对公社的承诺至关重要。女性和女性化伴侣可以拒绝重新实施家庭，因为他们见证了集体公社中家务劳动的减少，以及公社提供的挑战性别歧视关系动态的机会。酷儿和跨性别者可以在公社中认识到抵抗家庭虐待和统治的手段，为自己和未来的酷儿和跨性别儿童。那些经历过起义公社的人可以认识到它为更自由的性别和性秩序提供了物质基础，并选择捍卫并扩大其影响力。所有意识到赢得共产主义所涉及的利害关系的人，可以加入酷儿、跨性别者和女权主义者，共同抵抗家庭的回归，而是为用公社全面取代家庭而斗争。

If the communes succeed, gradually new forms of architecture, design and construction would reflect the needs for both a combination of heterogeneous private living space for individuals and small chosen clusters, and shared space for reproductive labor and consumption. In the design of new physical spaces for communes, people could have sufficient private and personal space for themselves and their self-chosen kin. But many things now done in the private home could be far better done in shared space: canteens can replace most kitchens and dining rooms; crèches replacing a child’s individual play room; entertainment rooms could serve as places to watch television or hang out in groups; personal studies could instead be shared libraries and co-working areas; home maintenance and cleaning equipment could be available in common space; vehicles could be similarly shared. The commune of around 200 is small enough all of these things are close at-hand and easily accessible at any hour. On the other hand, the commune being much larger than currently existing households reduces the need for individualized consumption and isolated living space to a reasonable minimum. In most cases, private space could be limited to clusters of comfortable bedrooms for those opting to live in a family-like arrangement grouped around a single shared room, easily accessible to the commune as a whole.
如果公社成功，逐渐会出现新的建筑、设计和施工形式，以反映对结合异质的个人私有生活空间和小型选定群组的需求，以及共享空间用于生殖劳动和消费。在公社的新物理空间设计中，人们可以拥有足够的私人和个人空间，为自己和他们自选的亲属。但许多现在在私人住宅中完成的事情在共享空间中可以做得更好：食堂可以取代大多数厨房和餐厅；托儿所可以取代孩子的个人游戏室；娱乐室可以作为观看电视或集体聚会的地方；个人书房可以变成共享图书馆和协作工作区；家庭维护和清洁设备可以在公共空间提供；车辆也可以共享。大约 200 人的公社规模足够小，所有这些事情都在任何时间都近在咫尺，易于访问。另一方面，公社比目前存在的家庭大得多，减少了对个人化消费和隔离生活空间的需求到一个合理的最低限度。 在大多数情况下，私人空间可以限制为围绕一个共享房间的舒适卧室集群，适合选择以家庭式安排生活的人，整个社区都能轻松访问。

Within the commune, kinship ties could persist in many forms, but would be integrated with a broader, interdependent community. Individuals could opt into an arrangement of co-parenting with one or more adults, creating family-like arrangements for purposes of raising children. In recent decades, research into psychological development has established children do need the consistent attention of a small number of adults early in life. This challenges some historical family-abolitionist currents that have mistakenly seen mother-infant bonds as inherently oppressive and in need of complete prohibition. Among the heterogeneous arrangements of close relationships within a commune, people may choose to raise children they gestate or with whom they have a biological relationship; or they may choose other arrangements; or they, their child, or those immediately in the life may change those arrangements as a child ages. Similarly, a few may choose to form lifelong relationships with their biological family, or to partner romantically for the long term with one other person and incorporate child-rearing as a practice.
在公社内部，血缘关系可以以多种形式持续存在，但会与更广泛、相互依存的社区整合在一起。个人可以选择与一个或多个成年人共同抚养孩子的安排，为抚养儿童创造家庭般的安排。在近几十年中，对心理发展进行的研究已经确立了儿童在生命早期需要一小群成年人的持续关注。这挑战了一些历史上的家庭废除主义潮流，他们错误地认为母亲与婴儿之间的联系本质上是压迫性的，并需要完全禁止。在公社内多样化的紧密关系安排中，人们可以选择抚养他们孕育或与之有生物学关系的孩子；或者选择其他安排；或者随着孩子的成长，他们、他们的孩子或生活中直接相关的人可能会改变这些安排。同样，少数人可能会选择与他们的生物学家庭建立终生关系，或者与另一个人长期浪漫地合作，并将抚养子女作为一项实践纳入其中。

Yet these close parenting or familial units would not serve as an economic unit in any sense and would not organize material consumption. Instead, they would only act as a voluntary and personal arrangement to be entered into within a broader economic unit, within the ready availability of multiple alternatives for anyone to opt out. If a child found their living situation intolerable, there would be many other adults interdependent with them and in social proximity who could observe the situation, intervene collectively if needed, and offer easily accessible alternative housing arrangements, including other families the child could join, or crèches specializing in such tasks. Children could pass through multiple households and living arrangements as they grow up—including time in children-centered group housing—always within a building or short walk from the original group of adults who they may identify as their parents. When they come of age, as Fourier imagined, they could set out to travel across continents exploring the richness of the world, maintaining digital remote contact with their friends and many forms of familial relations. These alternatives allow parents as well to opt out, assuring their children’s material and social needs will be met by others.
然而，这些紧密的养育或家庭单位在任何意义上都不会作为一个经济单位运作，也不会组织物质消费。相反，它们只会作为在更广泛的经济单位内、在随时可供选择的多种替代方案中自愿和个人安排的一部分而存在，供任何人随时退出。如果一个孩子发现他们的生活环境不可忍受，他们周围有许多与他们相互依赖、社会关系密切的其他成年人可以观察情况，如果需要，集体干预，并提供易于访问的替代住房安排，包括孩子可以加入的其他家庭，或者专门从事此类任务的托儿所。随着孩子成长，他们可以经过多个家庭和生活安排，包括在以儿童为中心的集体住房中度过时间，始终在与他们可能认同为父母的最初一群成年人所在的建筑或短距离步行范围内。当他们成年后，如傅里叶所设想的，他们可以开始环游世界，探索世界的丰富性，同时通过数字远程联系与朋友和各种家庭关系保持联系。 这些替代方案也允许家长退出，确保他们的孩子的物质和社会需求将由其他人满足。

The commune could come to prioritize gender discovery, exploration, and expression in every person. New gender modalities could be integrated with child-rearing, with games and social spaces, with entertainment, and with medical care. Gender liberation is an essential feature of creating a new basis for communist human well-being. In the communization of society and the abolition of the family, gender would undergo massive transformations to no longer serve as a basis for the division of labor, interpersonal domination, or sexual violence. Instead, gender could become what is already prefigured in trans experience: a form of expressing subtle personal truth, the beauty and richness of human expression, and the wielding of aesthetics, eroticism and personal fulfillment.
集体可以将性别发现、探索和表达放在每个人的核心位置。新的性别模式可以融入育儿、游戏和社交空间、娱乐以及医疗保健中。性别解放是构建共产主义人类福祉新基础的关键特征。在社会共产化和家庭废除的过程中，性别将经历大规模的转变，不再作为劳动分工、人际支配或性暴力的基础。相反，性别可以成为跨性别经验中预示的形式：表达微妙个人真理、人类表达的美丽和丰富性，以及美学、色情和个人满足的运用。

Writing in 1808, Fourier describes the timeline of the complete revolution in all social relations. Though like all past revolutionaries he proved wrong in his timeline, he is right that communism is always immanent to the present, as the real movement to abolish the existing order of things:
1808 年时，傅里叶描述了社会关系全面革命的完整时间线。尽管像所有过去的革命者一样，他对时间线的预测被证明是错误的，但他正确地指出，共产主义总是存在于当前，作为废除现有秩序的真正运动：

Do not be misled by superficial people who think that the invention of the laws of Movement is just a theoretical calculation. Remember that it only requires four or five months to put it into practice over a square league, an attempt which could even be completed by next summer, with the result that the whole human race would move into universal harmony, so your behaviour should be governed from now on by the ease and proximity of this immense revolution. (306) ⊱
不要被那些肤浅的人所误导，他们认为运动定律的发明只是理论计算。记住，将其付诸实践只需要几个月的时间，覆盖一个平方英里，甚至可以在明年夏天完成这一尝试，结果是整个人类将进入普遍和谐，因此，从现在起，你的行为应该由这个巨大变革的轻松和接近性来指导。 (306) ⊱