How common ownership comes about

[Kropotkin93]

Hi, i was reading about marx and anarcho-communist theories of a stateless society, but i couldn't find that much about how private property comes into common ownership.

obviously under the USSR, massive nationalization took place. Did marx envisage this in his transitionary state, that private property would have to be taken over by the dictatorship of the proletariat before being converted to free associations of individuals? or did he think it would happen naturally?

also, as anarchists believe in spontaneous revolution, how would private property be converted into commonly owned property in their society?

thanks

[Blake's Baby]

OK, I think you're kinda confused at to your categories there. The Dictatorship of the Proletariat is no the same as nationalisation; and I don't what your distinction is between 'the dictatorship of the proletariat' and 'naturally' either, because I think the dictatorship of the proletariat is natural.

So; how did Marx see the process of the collectivisation of property? Early on he saw it as coming from nationalisation (there is a section in the Manifesto of the Communist Party that mentions nationalisations); later I think he believed that more like straight expropriation would occur, and workers would just take over industry and organise to stop the bosses disrupting it.

The dictatorship of the proletariat is when the working class organises itself to expropriate the capitalists and establish control over society.

There are different anarchist opinions on the revolutionary process; but the one I'm most familiar with is I think essentially similar to the Marxist perspective. Workers will seize control of industry (and all other private property) and administer it collectively, through the workers' councils.

Not all anarchists agree with that though. But some differences are semantic rather than actual in my opinion. For instance you refer to Marx and 'his' transitionary state, as if he were advocating such a thing. I don't think that's accurate, I think Marx theorised the existence of a transitory state (I don't think 'state' is the right word either, because it's not static) rather than advocating a transitory statge. I don't think it's an 'optional extra' that can be created, I think it will exist, and the working class needs to be able to deal with that.

In practice, some anarchists agree that there will be a period of time before full-on socialism is possible; they don't generally call this period 'the dictatorship of the proletariat' though.

Anyway that's enough from me, I'll give someone else a go.