• Akasazh@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    You hexbears and gradists are so bent on this autocratic ‘dictatorship of the prolitariat’ idea that you could almost replace all energy needs by just hooking up a dynamo to Marx turning around in his grave.

    • AlfredoBonannoFofana [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We’re fully aware that DoTP is a transitory step in the path to full stateless classless communism, I’m just engaging with conceit the meme makes to dispute the point those who make ‘cOmMuNiSm oNlY wOrKs On PaPeR’ arguments think they’re making

      • Akasazh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I get it. My point is different. Communism has never been realized, therefore there’s nothing to say about it’s functionality.

          • Akasazh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s fine if you think that, but it’s not really communism, as defined by Marx.

            That’s the point, they are not communist states, just people misusing the name communism

              • Akasazh@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well in the full extend you could read das Kapital, or an abridged version of it.

                But the remedy that he seeks is an international uprising against the possessive class and the dissolution of the power of capital. Unfortunately every ‘communist’ state is just an autocratic state role-playing communism. Sometimes with their own monarchy (north Korea) some more oppressive, some outright capitalist (China).

                • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You realize that it’s called Marxism-Leninism correct? Because Lenin and by extension other writers expanded on this topic to clown on “communism purists” like you.

                  • Akasazh@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    That’s what it’s called because Stalin enthusiasts somehow dislike the term stalinism, which it is. Marx has nothing to do with it.

                  • Akasazh@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    For one all ‘communist’ fiefdoms around the world could unite, instead of ruling their own pseudo monarchies. Not a single one of them would set aside their power in favor of a true revolution.

        • AlfredoBonannoFofana [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Communism has never been realized,

          Exactly, hence why those making ‘cOmMuNiSm oNlY wOrKs On PaPeR’ arguments and this meme are actually about socialist states which is what I am defending in my first comment, that is blatantly clear from context

          • Akasazh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nah not really. I mean China is clearly blatantly capitalist since Deng Xiaoping. And there was little ownership of the means of production by the prolitariat in Soviet Russia.

            So not really communist.

            • AlfredoBonannoFofana [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              24
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’m not going to get into a pedantic debate with you about the exact labelling of the ideology of these states, what is important and you’re intentionally being obtuse about is that these systems differ(ed) from bourgeois western liberal ‘democracy’ and is the subject of the meme being discussed

            • ☭CommieWolf☆@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              23
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              And there was little ownership of the means of production by the prolitariat in Soviet Russia.

              What? What’s your source for this?

        • MCU_H8ER@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We’re all aware of that. The transitionary step of socialism has had many well documented successes, along with setbacks and things to learn from.

          The issues with capitalism are also well known. Industrial capitalism does a good job at developing the productive forces, but neoliberal (financial) capitalism serves no purpose other than to funnell money to the very top of the economic elite.

          • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            1 year ago

            The problem with those transitory step countries is that it has a ruling class with very different class interests and the same money funneling just like in a capitalist state which basically guarantees that they will never be socialist.

            • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              You see no difference in a government made to be a mediating entity between private interests where the source of power lies, and a government that’s self interested and is where power lies? You see nothing but a flattened “they both did taxes and the leadership class has privileges”?

              • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                No, taxes are quite helpful to maintain public infrastructure for example. What I’m saying is that every time one of those transitory governments have popped up the leadership ends up ruling the population with an iron fist and horrible corruption that has benefitted mostly the ruling party and rarely anyone else. Pretty much exactly like a capitalist state but with gulags and no voting.

                • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  the leadership ends up ruling the population with an iron fist and horrible corruption that has benefitted mostly the ruling party and rarely anyone else

                  On the second point you’re so wrong it requires no discussion. In the 20th and 21st centuries the countries that had the greatest reduction of poverty in the world are the USSR and the PRC respectively. Whatever definition of ‘corruption’ you have, the fact that those governments not only benefited their people but benefited them more than any other nation on the planet is not a debatable point.

                  So what exactly do you mean “iron fist”? Are you from the US? Because if you’re saying it from the perspective of the most intrusive surveillance state in history and the largest police state in history, I feel like we’re going to have to sort our semantics.

                  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’m from one of the countries the USSR did their imperialism on so I’m definitely going to take issue with your assertion that they benefitted their people more than any other country. They benefitted the people in Russia by draining resources from satellite states. By iron fist I mean the people who spoke out against their regime were either executed outright, worked to death or near death. And by corruption I mean any wealth went straight into the pockets of party leaders and members.

                    Also why does everyone who defend the USSR go into US bad dialogue tree instantly? Like I really don’t give shit about the US and I’m sure it’s bad too, but that completely irrelevant. At least the US doesn’t generally outright annex countries to do imperialism.

                • MCU_H8ER@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Pretty much exactly like a capitalist state but with gulags and no voting

                  That is a childlike (and false) understanding of the world. Please educate yourself.

                • rarely anyone else

                  Like, the “iron fist” rule as you call it can be debated till the end of time, both the degree to which the characterization is true versus western propaganda/idealism as well as the degree to which it might be necessary to survive the omnipresent fascist and capitalist counterevolutionary movements, both external and internal.

                  Buuuuuut literacy rates, cost of living, infant mortality, income equality, life expectancy, gender equality, etc, these all tended to drastically improve in socialist states, compared to pre-socialism (and especially post-socialism when looking at the many states that were violently overthrown and liberalized).

    • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Loling at the idea that “99.9 percent of the population should be able to participate in democracy but the class that’s been oppressing us shouldn’t for a decade or two during the transition” is “autocracy”