this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
95 points (78.8% liked)

Memes

50395 readers
835 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lucien@mander.xyz 22 points 2 days ago (56 children)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

LEFT UNITY!

(in all caps this time)

load more comments (55 replies)

If the communists and state Socialists are willing to work alongside anarchists like me than I would gladly accept their help in the fight for liberation. However left unity cannot come through coercion or force.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

Communism stateless anti authoritarian? Are we not confused with Anarchism?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 24 points 2 days ago (9 children)

The distinction between Marxists and the anarchists is this: (1) The former, while aiming at the complete abolition of the state, recognize that this aim can only be achieved after classes have been abolished by the socialist revolution, as the result of the establishment of socialism, which leads to the withering away of the state. The latter want to abolish the state completely overnight, not understanding the conditions under which the state can be abolished. (2) The former recognize that after the proletariat has won political power it must completely destroy the old state machine and replace it by a new one consisting of an organization of the armed workers, after the type of the Commune. The latter, while insisting on the destruction of the state machine, have a very vague idea of what the proletariat will put in its place and how it will use its revolutionary power. The anarchists even deny that the revolutionary proletariat should use the state power, they reject its revolutionary dictatorship. (3) The former demand that the proletariat be trained for revolution by utilizing the present state. The anarchists reject this.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch06.htm

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What does "Commune" entail in this context?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

A Commune, in Marxist-Leninist theory, is a revolutionary political-economic structure where the proletariat collectively owns and democratically controls the means of production, abolishing capitalist hierarchies and bourgeois state machinery. It is rooted in the analysis of the Paris Commune of 1871 by Marx and Engels who saw it as a prototype of proletarian dictatorship. The key aspect of a commune is that it embodies direct workers' democracy, dismantling the separation between state and society. Lenin further expanded this as a transitional framework where a decentralized network of soviets composed of laborers self-govern, eroding class distinctions and advancing toward a stateless, classless communism.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Are there any examples of this 'late stage Communism'? I thought it was more about the central planning aspect. And if not are the USSR/China/Russia even Communist?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Late-Stage Communism must be global, so no, it hasn't existed yet. The USSR and PRC are examples of Socialist countries governed by Communist parties trying to bring about Communism.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Does a global expansion require imperialism? Getting the entire world to sign up before dissolving sounds pretty mission impossible.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

If by Imperialism you mean millitant expansionism, no. If by Imperialism you mean the form of economic extraction practiced by countries like the US, also no. The basis for the abolition of borders isn't one of legalistic matters, but economic redundancy. Borders become more and more unnecessary in more and more interconnected economies, and even become a barrier on progress, ergo they will wither over time much the same way the state would.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's an ideological competition between different ways of organizing society. We have a western model of capitalist organization and the socialist model advanced by China. The western model is visibly failing in every regard right now, so there is every reason to expect that more and more countries will look to Chinese model as a result.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I feel like the Chinese model is already way too far into pragmatism to ever idealistically flip the switch to abolishing their state at the endgame.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (12 children)

The abolition of the state isn't a legalistic choice, but a result of the abolition of class. The abolition of class is an economic result, not a legalistic choice either.

I think you're confusing the state with all government and structure, which isn't what Marxists are talking about when we speak of the withering of the state.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 days ago (5 children)

You better not be sending me into recursion when I click this

[–] comfy@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 days ago

I'm clicking all the "read my other comment" links until I've basically read Capital Vol. 1 in its entirety through Lemmy posts.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 days ago

Lmao, I've tried to minimize my copy-pasting of comments over time so there's more links in my comments now, haha.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] NewDark 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Plenty of communists see a form of Anarchism as the goal endpoint, but realize the need for strong state power in the hands of workers to get there.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Do you have any examples? I'm not aware of this, Marxists generally advocate for a centralized stateless society while Anarchists advocate for horizontalist structures, generally.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›