I'm fine with the complaint about experiences not being hereditary though I really don't think that rural people have an inherent drive towards high birthrates which thereby makes them incapable of revolutionary thought... Not to mention I am pretty sure that just because the proletariat do not own property somehow makes them immune to sexism....
The only reason even the partial degree of women's, sexual-gender, and youth emancipation exists is because the extended family of pre-capitalist social formations broadly has been overthrown by capitalism and then joint resistance to both capitalism and pre-capitalist relict relations
It's just a matter of empirical fact that the most substantial independent variable in trending toward women taking control over their fertility and personal freedom as well as sexual freedom:
is development and raising of lower quartiles of household incomes, which itself is most obviously associated
with the emptying of the countryside
traditional peasantries are not really nuclear families, they are the
familia of the
paterfamilias (the Latin word instructively meant the patriarch then all his junior antecedents who had not formed their own + women + slaves)
the youth and women in traditional petty family-organized production are regarded as property of the patriarch (patriarchy in the properly specific sense, truly)
hence the not accidental traditionalist right wing being invariably associated with fantasist / illusory throwback or reimagining of the restoration of patriarchal power with its communitarian backbones in the clerical or akin village forces
this is an obvious continuity over historical time and the exceptions prove the rule
the truth is the Russian muzhik patriarch routinely in historical record was renown for helping himself to stepdaughters and even young son's teenaged wives
this is soaked through the historical record
the rightist incel youth today apotheosize capitalist 'big-men' insofar as they reproduce a facsimile of what rights were traditionally claimed by "a man with his house and land"
more kids mean more farmhands, more kids mean more leftover for old age care and lineage perpetuation, and the evidence is rife it ain't values and vibes that lead to transition out of the gravitational pull social-materially in favor of those baleful tendencies
sorry, truth hurts
Also that is similar to what I was suggesting, though using an approach that would be more carrot heavy then stick to make them okay with revolutionary actions. It's not as if rural populations are secretly waiting for a revolution but that by treating them as a social group with goals,wants and necessities who could be bargained with rather than a unruly population that needs to be beaten/ignored until their way of life can be removed would provide a less violent and more productive result.
Peasant traditional household heads, and their 'community associations' have been historically been renown for supporting left-populist reforms
provided that concrete & real labor standards enforced on child labor, for women's emancipation and education, and on things that undermine this such as anything besides land and tool giveaways
Why? Because if you can't work your giant family as unpaid household labor, then it reduces the reproducibility of your headmanship of a traditional farmstead property
Presumably if promised something besides landless vagabondry or capitalist proletarianization, then you might wean them off
But obshchina councils hate to break it to you were more treehouses of grapy grandpas and not Rojava gender balanced committees
Let's be setting ourselves on solid ground here
Also this I'm not sure if you mean made into proper proletarians or if you just want to get rid of rural culture completely.
Besides people having their own head canon of stuff and wanting to imagine "the people" writ large of liberal fame now cast with red paint as a happy family I don't understand the emotional commitment to this so often found on the left today
I think it comes from fundamentally superficial self education and like I said truly subterranean liberal suppositions that people don't want to discard
Look at so-called breadtube which is largely red-drag by KKKamala lesser evil drones
The peasantry today is already extirpated globally apart from truly marginal survivals
The question is truly academic-speculative since the hypotheticals here are only important in "what could have been" circa an imagined 1910s-50s and to ensure we have clarity in class politics based on material analysis today [ eg., "the workers" not "the people" ]
