• kool_newt@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think the only real difference in our views is the classic one. I simply don’t see the dictatorship of the proletariat as not having the same tendencies toward corruption as every other. I can’t imagine an organization powerful enough to defeat capitalism willfully giving up it’s own power after it’s job is done.

    It will attract psychopaths like flies to shit like every other power structure.

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I would strongly suggest reading State and Revolution to understand the reasoning on the function of the DotP. It is fundamentally oriented towards the tendencies of power and people following self-interested motivations in aggregate over time. No one is talking about “giving up” anything. The proletariat is to oppress the bourgeoisie by means of more genuinely democratic governance (that obstructs the power of capital that is exerted in liberal democracies) and erode the bourgeois class over time until it no longer exists. No power is surrendered at any point in that process, but the people who need to be oppressed are decided on class lines that cease to exist by the very same process as the class is oppressed.

      You can find both text and audiobook versions online pretty easily, and hopefully the most famous work of the founder of the first Marxist state is not on the same level as QAnon manifestos to you.