[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / colombia / general / india / kc / loomis / magali / polska / travis2k ]

/marx/ - Marxism

It makes you smart
Winner of the 75nd Attention-Hungry Games
/caco/ - Azarath Metrion Zinthos

March 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Comment *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

File: 7b259fe64be25c0⋯.jpg (72.15 KB, 475x708, 475:708, DH6d2tTUIAMGhxW.jpg)


"Power to the people"

Yet, any form of Marxism requires a totalitarian state..

Is Marxism inherently contradictory?


The primary purpose of every state is to allow one class to wield power and to suppress attempts by rival classes to overthrow it.

A workers' state is a dictatorship of the proletariat, ready to oppress a tiny minority of exploiters who resist expropriation, while this same state promotes democracy for the overwhelming majority of the population.

As Lenin pointed out, "Bourgeois democracy, although a great historical advance in comparison with medievalism, always remains, and under capitalism is bound to remain, restricted, truncated, false and hypocritical, a paradise for the rich and a snare and deception for the exploited, for the poor."

Lenin also noted that under bourgeois democracy "the majority of the population is debarred from participation in public and political life."

The basis of Soviet democracy was mass participation and of educating workers and peasants in how to administer a whole country on a voluntary, unpaid basis. Here is a good read on that subject: https://archive.org/details/WorkingVersusTalkingDemocracy

Once class distinctions are done away with on a world scale, the primary purpose of the state no longer applies, and "the state" as a distinct entity from society will completely wither away.

Post last edited at



>"the state" as a distinct entity from society will completely wither away.

yeah nah this sounds like "the wealth will trickle down", you know what I mean? :^)


File: 48876957514b735⋯.jpg (64.01 KB, 611x404, 611:404, 2e99mh.jpg)

ebin mene :DDDDD



Not really. If you want to abolish the state, you have to get rid of the material conditions that make states necessary. If you tried to abolish the state tomorrow, you would fail.

You don't see movements in Europe or the US (or anywhere, really) to reinstate feudalism, and any attempt to recreate a feudal society would break down since it is so obviously inferior to capitalism.



Your mom is inherently contradictory. She's married to your dad but she's fucking me.



And who's to say that the state won't work towards the interest of itself continually existing and surviving?



Because it would have no basis on which to do so. "The state" has no interests apart from its ruling class. If a handful of officials wanted to maintain the state even after communism was reached, the workers would simply topple them and there would be no reason to bring back the apparatus thus done away with.

Again, it's similar to how you don't see feudalism reestablishing itself. The superstructure of capitalism (laws, culture, mass politics, etc.) is incompatible with pre-capitalist societies. Just as under capitalism we are expected to view history and life itself as intertwined with a competitive "survival of the fittest," in medieval times astronomers and theologians saw feudal relations operating in the universe, not just between human beings.

In a society that necessarily views the state as an amusing anachronism, there will be scarcely any room for the state to reassert itself.

[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / colombia / general / india / kc / loomis / magali / polska / travis2k ]