After the Revolution, do we need a 'leader'?

[Rafiq]

Are we going to have a leader in our workers society? Like a leader, a ruler.

Thoughts?

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

What do you mean by "after the Revolution"? Different people are going to have different ideas as to what this means, depending on their tendency.

From your post, though, I gather that you mean once the state is gone. Then, no. At that point there would be no need. The "state" would have already become purely administrative.

[Kuppo Shakur]

Hello this is Kuppo.

After the Revolution
AAARRRGGGHHH

Thank you.

[Q]

Yes, me.

I don't understand the question really. "Leader" in what sense? In a sense of a boss that does no work but profits from yours? No. In a sense of a career politician that lies to you to stay in power? No. In a sense of organizing society for the needs of all? Yes, but with a twist.

I'd argue for a demarchy in which all representatives are selected by lottery, much like juries are in today's American juridical system. Instead of having single persons for a spot (ministers, peoples commissars...) we'd have councils on certain subjects (such as a council on Healthcare, Education, Infrastructure, etc) which consist of 25 or more people (to guarantee statistical representation). Such councils, in one form or another, would have to be formed on a city or local level, a regional level, national level and international level, as to organise the whole of society. Furthermore such representatives on sit for short terms, for example 1 year.

So yes, we would need "leaders", but it would be a collective form of leadership coming from society to govern itself. Any leaders in the sense that we understand them now, within a hierarchical state concept in which a bureaucratic apparatus governs, wouldn't exist.

[Magón]

A single leader that rules over all? No. Multiple leaders that can help keep things organized, and yet be taken from their power without any bureaucratic bullshit getting in the way? Yes.

[Steve_j]

I dont see any resons why you would need a leader before "the revolution" let alone afterwards.

[Widerstand]

I would vote for Q as supreme leader of the global classless community.

They would put little "Welcome :)" bumper stickers on the head of every newborn.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Are we going to need a leader in a stateless society? If there are no countries, what is the need for a leader?

What are your thoughts

I think you refer to a head of state-like figure. Communism will not facilitate an environment where this sort of power could become concentrated into a head of state position because the way society will be politically organised will mean each position is rotated and these delegates who take on these positions will be recallable.

I've heard this system been criticised with the argument that this allows for people to exploit the system, gaining power for their own ends because there is a vacuum of "leadership". Frankly if Communism is established then it is because it is the will of the working class and this idea accepts that under communism workers are so easily lead that they will follow anyone who professes to be a great leader.

How the system really works in practice is demonstrated in the Nestor Makhno book: Anarchy's Cossack. When Makhno's home village Gulyai-Polye is collectivised they send a delegate to speak at a national co-ordination meeting to collect goods. He is given a two week limit, when he doesn't return in that time two comrades go to take him home and replace him with someone else. Remember, the will of the rest of the working class will always be a massive boundary for anyone who has designs on becoming a leader.

[Amphictyonis]

My idea of pre and mid revolution is millions of people following a leader to the promise land. Like Moses in the bible. Once the revolution is complete we will name her/him god and worship the supreme being while setting up a new hierarchical society just like capitalism but better?

Sorry, forgot this was the learning section :) The point of advanced communism/anarchism is to have no leader or hierarchy.

[robbo203]

Only sheep need leaders - to fleece them!

[maskerade]

Yes, the technocratic supercomputer will be our master.

[Thirsty Crow]

Quasi-autocracy, coupled with a nasty pesonality cult, should become a distant memory from the past.
In other words, no, people will not need a "head of state", not in the period of transition, and especially not in communism.

[Magón]

My idea of pre and mid revolution is millions of people following a leader to the promise land. Like Moses in the bible. Once the revolution is complete we will name her/him god and worship the supreme being while setting up a new hierarchical society just like capitalism but better?

Sorry, forgot this was the learning section :) The point of advanced communism/anarchism is to have no leader or hierarchy.

Does it have to be human, or animate? Because I think an inanimate Golden Calf statue would do just fine. :lol:


Also, more on topic, there are some who think (not speaking about you Chapayev,) who think that we'd still need a proper single leader even into the most advanced stage of Communism. Why they think that, I don't know?