Yugoslav
Jugoslaven
I already gave on what a Fabianite is. A British revisionist that calls for social democracy.
On Marxism-Leninism
- Thread starter Yugoslav
- Start date
PTK
Paul Kegan
And I remember him creating a state based on workers militias that elected their own officers.
PTK
Paul Kegan
Fabians are not revisionists. They are not "revising" Marixism, because they never claimed to be Marxists, unlike Bernstein.
PTK
Paul Kegan
Let us assume for the moment that in Yugoslavia, the USSR, et cetera, there was an economy based on proletarian property forms, in other words, collective ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. If the state in those countries was actually the dictatorship of the proletariat, then it would defend these property forms against the expropriation of the means of production, et cetera, by a bourgeoisie, or potential bourgeoisie. It would simply not be possible for an elected official to sell means of production to individuals.
If there were “elites” who can become a new bourgeoisie, the dictatorship of the proletariat, as Marx and Engels defined it, would not exist. Whether or not a state is a workers state (the dictatorship of the proletariat) is dependent upon the structure and nature of the state, not on the class origins of someone who holds high office.
The state apparatus in the USSR, Yugoslavia, et cetera, was similar in form to the state apparatus of capitalist countries. It was centralised and hierarchical, and repressed the majority of the people in society. This is why most of these countries could restore capitalism without a civil war. A centralised hierarchical state can switch from state ownership to private ownership without a violent counter-revolution.
If there were “elites” who can become a new bourgeoisie, the dictatorship of the proletariat, as Marx and Engels defined it, would not exist. Whether or not a state is a workers state (the dictatorship of the proletariat) is dependent upon the structure and nature of the state, not on the class origins of someone who holds high office.
The state apparatus in the USSR, Yugoslavia, et cetera, was similar in form to the state apparatus of capitalist countries. It was centralised and hierarchical, and repressed the majority of the people in society. This is why most of these countries could restore capitalism without a civil war. A centralised hierarchical state can switch from state ownership to private ownership without a violent counter-revolution.
PTK
Paul Kegan
The Paris Commune of 1871 established, briefly and in one city, what could be called the first workers state.
There was a proletarian revolution in Russia in 1917. Councils of workers held power for a time.
There was a Soviet Republic in Hungary for a short period in 1919.
There was an unsuccessful series of attempts at proletarian revolution in Germany in the period 1918-1923.
There was never a proletarian revolution in Yugoslavia. The working class did not come to power. An insurgent army led by members of the petty bourgeoisie came to power and established a new state. A similar thing happened in Albania, China, and Cuba.
There was an attempt at revolution in Vietnam in 1945, that was crushed by British military forces, with the collaboration of the Stalinist party. The military defeat of US imperialism in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia was national liberation – the overthrow of puppet regimes and the establishment of independent states – but it was not proletarian revolution.
To claim that the success of an insurgent army is working class revolution is to grossly misrepresent Marxism.
There was a proletarian revolution in Russia in 1917. Councils of workers held power for a time.
There was a Soviet Republic in Hungary for a short period in 1919.
There was an unsuccessful series of attempts at proletarian revolution in Germany in the period 1918-1923.
There was never a proletarian revolution in Yugoslavia. The working class did not come to power. An insurgent army led by members of the petty bourgeoisie came to power and established a new state. A similar thing happened in Albania, China, and Cuba.
There was an attempt at revolution in Vietnam in 1945, that was crushed by British military forces, with the collaboration of the Stalinist party. The military defeat of US imperialism in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia was national liberation – the overthrow of puppet regimes and the establishment of independent states – but it was not proletarian revolution.
To claim that the success of an insurgent army is working class revolution is to grossly misrepresent Marxism.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
"To claim that the success of an insurgent army is working class revolution is to grossly misrepresent Marxism."
Absolutely. The self-emancipation of the working class was central to Marx’s thought from the Communist Manifesto onwards. Whatever differences one may have with Lenin, Luxemburg, Trotsky and Gramsci this notion also defined their writings on revolution.
Absolutely. The self-emancipation of the working class was central to Marx’s thought from the Communist Manifesto onwards. Whatever differences one may have with Lenin, Luxemburg, Trotsky and Gramsci this notion also defined their writings on revolution.
hitmouse
music obfuscation technology
What about Starmer, did anyone ever manage to find out what his dad did in the end?
PTK
Paul Kegan
The funny thing is, many of the people commenting on this on X (before I deactivated my two accounts) in the past few years do not seem to know what a toolmaker actually is.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
It's a complete mystery. My guess is that he was a Marxism-Leninist.
PTK
Paul Kegan
Did Keir Starmer actually have a material existance ten years ago?It's a complete mystery. My guess is that he was a Marxism-Leninist.
Suddenly, we turned around, and he was standing there, blotting out the Sunlight and sucking in the air.
PTK
Paul Kegan
I wrote "most of" the countries had a peaceful transition. Actually, the wars in Yugoslavia were surely a product of peaceful transition? Serbia was surely capitalist when it engaged in the wars, was it not?
Yugoslav
Jugoslaven
Indeed. But it was not a peaceful transition of a society as a whole for there was separatism, genocide in Srebrenica, massacres against many non-Serbs is the transition three decades ago that has traumatized Bosnia the most of them all. Also, the "peaceful transition" never existed. Ante Markovic's "shock therapy" led to Serbian chauvinist Milosevic to rob the Yugoslav bank and sabotage the economy further for non-Serb Yugoslav states so he can wage a mass extermination campaign to establish the "Greater Serbia".
PTK
Paul Kegan
The state in Yugoslavia enabled a transition to market capitalism; it did not prevent it. Therefore, it was not the dictatorship of the proletariat. State assets were not seized by potential bourgeois forces in a violent counter-revolution, they were given them by the state. A workers state, also known as the dictatorship of proletariat, does not hand means of production to private individuals.
PTK
Paul Kegan
You do not understand Marxism if you think that the class nature of a state can change simply when new officials come to office. That is like saying that if Keir Starmer because a communist today then the British state would be a workers state.
Last edited:
InArduisFouette
Well-Known Member
Yugoslav
Jugoslaven
You do not understand how communism worked in practice. When workers are in power, there will be a revolution of the law itself to fit the interests of the workers and bring down capitalism completely. Workers and Employees do not have the same nature. Workers want to live better, Employees want to live by themselves better. The state formed at first to suppress workers' revolutions. Now, the dictatorship of the proletariat means the state run by the workers, for the state, despite expectations of "withering away" must not be disregarded for it is a tool of a workers' revolution and defending the socialist cause.
PTK
Paul Kegan
You have not at all addressed the points that I made.
PTK
Paul Kegan
You claim that the class nature of a state can change without the state being destroyed. You are supporting reformism.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
and other myths to gull the credulous
PTK
Paul Kegan
No, you think that the class nature of the state can be changed through reforming it. You think that a proletarian state can become a capitalist state by reforming it.
seventh bullet
sovietwave
Pol Pot wasn't a 'revisionist.' He was a try-hard and in his decades-long relationship with the Vietnamese Communists was more profoundly formulaic in his understanding of Marxism-Leninism (as filtered to him through their Party influence and early leadership) than other M-Ls want to admit, because it all rapidly turned into a horrific mess.
Yugoslav
Jugoslaven
Glorious Chairman Pol Pot has never killed any Vietnamese, I don't know why Vietnam invaded Cambodia. /s
seventh bullet
sovietwave
I think that 'I don't know 'should be said more often by you, tbh.
PTK
Paul Kegan
According to original poster, the state will either wither away, or become a capitalist state. It could go either way, and it depends on having the right person in charge.
For, as Marx and Engels did write “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of the right person being in charge. Freeman, patrician, lord, guild-master, capitalist, Party Secretary, in a word, the person in charge.”
