Dictatorship of the Proletariat - In the 21st Century

[Gman]

From what I understand this is theoretical transitional stage between Communism and Capitalism. This is the stage when the Proletariat takes complete control (dictatorship) over the state.

Now, I am curious to how this will look in a modern day, highly developed, capitalist nation. We have seen the Paris Commune and Anarchist Spain and Russia (At some points arguably, but keep that for any one of the million other threads) that have had a supposed Socialist/Proletarian character. But what about today? In the 21st century?

Lets take the United States of America, just for this instance(it's easy because I live here). I am curious as to how the working class can simply oust the management, take over production, and pave the way to a utopia. Will there be money in this new nation? What form will trade take between communities? What about exports and imports(it is well known that the US imports tons of Chinese goods)? What political form will it take? Perhaps some mass council of regional delegates (somehow I think the early 1900's Russia vanguardist approach is a tad defunct)? How will we prevent counter revolution? A new army?

We understand why Capitalism sucks. We have an idea on how we can build a new society. But what are the specifications, today?

[Psy]

The dictatorship part is to deny capitalists a say while the workers would have a say democratically. In your example in a US workers state bourgeoisie parties would be banned and bourgeoisie media censored while worker parties and media would be left alone. The means of production would secured by the military might of armed workers crushing the hired guns of bourgeoisie, for example imagine if in Paris May 1968 autoworkers started producing armored cars and tractor tanks to defend the territory workers controlled.

[white picket fence]

dunno I think this is the big question that nobody can answer with any certainty today, we can only speculate. I haven't seen a convincing model of revolution contemporary to our time, It is difficult to think of change in terms of working class struggle, proletariat, class conciousness, I don't see the people around me being sympathetic as even the idea of a critique of capitalism is foreign to them.

I think the change of the methods of production via technology, and catastrophic consequences of today's capitalism will eventually force a change in the next century, tragedy will necessitate change, but I think the moment for a real change in our time based on conciousness has passed due to the catastrophe of communism in the 20th century via the soviet union and the momentum of privatization currently undergoing in places like china and nearly all of the west.

capitalism - transition - communism is a bit simplistic don't you think? i wouldnt' take that as a starting point to think about stuff like this

[Comrade #138672]

I think that the conflict would become very intense in the US. The bourgeoisie would (and could) invest a lot in suppressing the revolution. With patriotism dominating and their guns a lot of blood will probably be shed.

[Questionable]

A revolution in a first-world nation like America would be very different from semi-feudal nations like Russia or China.

America is the capitalist capital of the world. If a revolution succeeded there, it's likely that it would be the death signal for capitalism across the globe. Businesses across the globe would wither away without their biggest benefactor, and the workers in other first-world nations would likely be inspired to revolt if they weren't already.

So let's say it happens. Most likely things would go much smoother than in the USSR or anywhere else that had a revolution. America is one of the most advanced nations on earth and its workers are for the most part technically proficient. They wouldn't need to learn how to run an industry like the Russians or the Chinese. We'd already know what we're doing, and given the right organization (DotP) we could likely go right into eliminating poverty, hunger, homelessness, and other social ills.

So to answer your question, a revolution in the US would be much, much smoother once it succeeded because the means of production are already maximized, and the work force is experienced enough to handle them on their own.

[Taverner]

A revolution in the US would have to be state by state. No way you could pull that off in one fell swoop.

[RedMaterialist]

We understand why Capitalism sucks. We have an idea on how we can build a new society. But what are the specifications, today?

Here is a possible example, from an actually existing condition: In the 1920s when the National Football League was formed, the fans of the Green Bay Packers (apologies to non-U.S. footballers) were allowed to maintain their ownership of the team with the additional condition that any new owner could have no more than 10-15% ownership. Green Bay was the only team allowed to do this. The result is that a corporate, capitalist enterprise is owned by the people (i.e., the fans), who elect management and make all major decisions.

This, I would say, is the social ownership (by the Green Bay fans) of the means of production (a football team.)

It works pretty well; no change in location of the team, no new stadium financed by taxpayer bonds, and the most successful team in NFL history. The employees have pretty decent labor representation, although employee injury is still a bourgeois holdover.

It's not surprising to me that the owners of the NFL demanded that no other team could have this arrangement.

[RedMaterialist]

.

capitalism - transition - communism is a bit simplistic don't you think? i wouldnt' take that as a starting point to think about stuff like this

Marx simplified things even further back: pre-historic communistic societies - transition - patriarchy/slavery - transition - feudalism - transition - capitalism.

[Blake's Baby]

Capitalism - transition - communism is a perfect description.

In the same way that Earth - travel - Moon is a perfect description of the Apollo 11 mission. Absolutely accurate but a bit short on detail.

A revolution in the US couldn't happen in isolation. The analogy I like to use is that your foot doesn't wake up in the morning and go and make coffee while waiting for the rest of you to get out of bed. Nor, in the 'state by state' comment above, do your big toe and your heel do it, while waiting for the rest of your foot to wake up.

The working class is oppressed by capitalism the world over, and the capitalist class exists the world over, the economic crisis exists the world over, the catastrophe of envirnomental destruction exists the world over... all of these things require the solution of humanity's manifold probelems the world over. 'Revolution' isolated in one country would be a disaster.

So in short, when American workers begin to respond to the attacks on them, and join their struggles to the other resistance to the crisis etc that is happening across the world, then the possibility of a revolution in the US becomes real. Not as a 'second American Revolution' but as the world revolution, in America.

[Le Socialiste]

From what I understand this is theoretical transitional stage between Communism and Capitalism. This is the stage when the Proletariat takes complete control (dictatorship) over the state. Now, I am curious to how this will look in a modern day, highly developed, capitalist nation. We have seen the Paris Commune and Anarchist Spain and Russia (At some points arguably, but keep that for any one of the million other threads) that have had a supposed Socialist/Proletarian character. But what about today? In the 21st century?

In such an event as this, conditions necessitate a reassessment of the balance of forces in power, how that power is to be wielded (in theory and practice), who is to exercise it, and to what purpose. The DotP is, insofar as transitional interests are adequately met and class forces properly mobilized, a period wherein proletarian hegemony over the political and economic means of society supplant those of the bourgeoisie's, overtaking and eventually dismantling the latter's predominance over class society. Such a dictatorship isn't merely theoretical; it too, like much of what has been thought and postulated over through Marxism, finds its practical application through historical precedence and praxis. It places working peoples at the forefront of struggle, integrating them into this vast framework who's roots originate from below. The proletariat won't be idle in such periods, it will be humming with activity and movement.

Power isn't seized by an insulated minority, but by the most experienced and theoretically advanced sections of the working-class. These elements do not trap power, they liberate it, incorporating the workers through their own self-activity and organizational strength (major prerequisites for any successful revolution I might add). The latter then, isn't an auxiliary appendage of the dictatorship, but its head, body, arms and legs. It is the dictatorship, carrying out its suppression of the former ruling-class and those interests to which it is diametrically opposed. This developmental stage involves strengthening the workers as a class while simultaneously weakening sources of privilege, centralized wealth, the last bastions where the ruling-class seeks shelter. The dictatorship paves the way for the next phase in its development by coercively and, at times, violently, suppressing and integrating resisting bourgeois elements, while preparing the proletariat for a deepening and widening of its power as a class. Thus the DotP contains within it the fundamental basics of working-class self-governance; it is the fruition of embryonic organizational forms, the prelude to full workers' emancipation.


Now, I am curious to how this will look in a modern day, highly developed, capitalist nation. We have seen the Paris Commune and Anarchist Spain and Russia (At some points arguably, but keep that for any one of the million other threads) that have had a supposed Socialist/Proletarian character. But what about today? In the 21st century?

Let's get into the nitty gritty aspects of some of the immediate changes the DotP would possibly seek to make:

1) Communalization of family structures and child rearing, through the formation and cultivation of free childcare centers organized according to neighborhood, district (where large cities are concerned), or by other means, essentially freeing up mothers to pursue their own academic, creative, or career pursuits. Establishment of communal housing (not the blockish, gray, imposing Soviet housing), built vertically as opposed to horizontally in order to house as many people as structurally and architecturally possible without taking up enormous amounts of unnecessary space. Communities such as these could incorporate free recreation centers, gyms, bathhouses and spas, communal kitchens and dining spaces (though I wouldn't begrudge anyone their own kitchen and dining rooms in the privacy of their own homes), medical centers, and outdoor spaces/plazas. Creation of democratic and representative bodies reflecting the needs of the community.

2) Removal of profit from the production, transport, and distribution process, as well as unnecessary management - including CEOs, boards (if not elected by the rank-and-file or unaccountable to their workplaces and neighboring sectors), unelected managers, etc. Full democratization of the workplace, to be implemented and tried through assorted workers' assemblies communicating needs to faraway colleagues as to what goods or resources they need to complete production or aid in the distributive process. Shortening of the workday to that which is absolutely necessary to meet the present needs of the community and extended societies. Creation of representative bodies.

3) Greater emphasis on new and alternative resources and environmentally-friendly technologies (which we possess the ability to make and expand on, but haven't due to constraints imposed by the market and lack of profits seen in these sectors). Greater emphasis on technologies in general. Research on how to make products last longer, as opposed to producing them in such a way so that they break down as soon as they're acquired. Creation of democratic and representative bodies reflecting the needs of doctors, nurses, engineers, technicians, industrial, medical, and environmental specialists, etc.

4) Dismantlement of the existing police force and military. Democratically elected and/or voluntarily-joined workers' and community security "militias" for the protection of communities, or organized in such a manner as to respond if the safety of the community is in question. Military to be decentralized, but organized in such a manner as to retain a hierarchical structure - albeit one democratically accountable and responsible to the rank-and-file. Creation of soldiers' assemblies and representative bodies. Elections held for higher and upper ranks.

I'm going to have to end it here, because I have class in 20 minutes. But if you have more questions, or if anyone here finds my (barely fleshed out) answer wrong or unsatisfactory, don't hesitate to say so.

Edit - A couple other key specifics I'd consider:

5) Appropriation and democratization of the banks and similar financial institutions - along w/ all other relevant sectors. While the banking system (and the commodification of money - indeed, money itself) will be phased out, made irrelevant, it will have to be temporarily taken over by the DotP and used/manipulated for its own ends. Along these lines, expropriation and massive process of redistribution of wealth from the ruling-class towards struggling communities, sectors, and other similar bodies.

6) Withdrawal from international military and financial bodies, such as the IMF or NATO. End of any possible military interventions, invasions, or destabilization efforts abroad, with reparations paid in full to the invaded country/ies and is people. Support and aid to similarly struggling peoples, movements, and struggles abroad in the interests of solidarity. Foreign and domestic policies independent of prior international agreements, pacts, or alliances, which serve the needs and demands of the consenting dictatorship.

7) Removal of profit from the education system. Education free, universal, and accessible to all - regardless of sex, sexuality, gender, race, ethnicity, career/job (if applicable), etc. Emphasis on a fostering of critical thought processes, complete overhaul of teaching methods and priorities. Abolition of standardized testing, SATs, etc. Education centers (high schools, community colleges, universities, etc.) and all matters pertaining to its maintenance to be managed collectively by coordinating bodies composed of teachers, staff, and students.

[Psy]

A revolution in a first-world nation like America would be very different from semi-feudal nations like Russia or China.

America is the capitalist capital of the world. If a revolution succeeded there, it's likely that it would be the death signal for capitalism across the globe. Businesses across the globe would wither away without their biggest benefactor, and the workers in other first-world nations would likely be inspired to revolt if they weren't already.

So let's say it happens. Most likely things would go much smoother than in the USSR or anywhere else that had a revolution. America is one of the most advanced nations on earth and its workers are for the most part technically proficient. They wouldn't need to learn how to run an industry like the Russians or the Chinese. We'd already know what we're doing, and given the right organization (DotP) we could likely go right into eliminating poverty, hunger, homelessness, and other social ills.

So to answer your question, a revolution in the US would be much, much smoother once it succeeded because the means of production are already maximized, and the work force is experienced enough to handle them on their own.
Except a revolution in the USA would be in the centre of the capitalist world rather then its periphery like Russia and China, meaning the bourgeoisie will get very desperate with a US workers state. Historically when a bourgeoisie state acted from a position of weakness it restored to barbarism to cling to power and used the army to terrorize the proletariat into compliance.

So a successful US revolution may lead to all the bourgeoisie states declaring total war up on the US workers state and World War III being kicked off unless the revolution can spread beyond the USA into the other imperial powers so a US workers state can defend itself because the bourgeoisie states are too busy dealing with their own revolutions to conduct any military operations against worker states.

[Questionable]

Except a revolution in the USA would be in the centre of the capitalist world rather then its periphery like Russia and China, meaning the bourgeoisie will get very desperate with a US workers state. Historically when a bourgeoisie state acted from a position of weakness it restored to barbarism to cling to power and used the army to terrorize the proletariat into compliance.

So a successful US revolution may lead to all the bourgeoisie states declaring total war up on the US workers state and World War III being kicked off unless the revolution can spread beyond the USA into the other imperial powers so a US workers state can defend itself because the bourgeoisie states are too busy dealing with their own revolutions to conduct any military operations against worker states.

If a socialist revolution takes place in America, the heart of capitalism, then I think it's safe to say things will be REALLY fucking bad, so I would hope that the bourgeoisie would be too disorganized to mount a counter-strike. But I could be wrong, who knows.

[Камо́ Зэд]

The prospect of a proletarian socialist revolution taking place right in the heart of capitalist-imperialism while the majority of the world (if not its entirety) remains capitalist strikes me as highly improbable. Historically, world powers are overthrown when they've been severely eroded from the inside and suffered nigh continuous conflict with armed forces at their borders and within their other territorial interests. The material conditions engendering such erosion would include severe economic turmoil, resulting in extreme political conflict. The same can be said for the United States' various territorial (colonial) interests. This would probably take the form of a massive economic crisis the likes of which North America has not yet seen, which would necessarily shake the economies of the world to their cores. This is all just speculation, though, and, while it is important to maintain a materialist theoretical framework when addressing this issue, we must not give ourselves permission to await some hypothetical doomsday before we can be expected to act. When the quantifiable material conditions have accumulated change in such a way as to facilitate a proletarian socialist revolution, we must have done our work to prepare the working people for the revolutionary qualitative change in which they play the key role. As for the specific form of the dictatorship of the proletariat in 21st Century North America, it's quite impossible to predict with any accuracy at this time.

[Psy]

If a socialist revolution takes place in America, the heart of capitalism, then I think it's safe to say things will be REALLY fucking bad, so I would hope that the bourgeoisie would be too disorganized to mount a counter-strike. But I could be wrong, who knows.
Look at WWII, capitalist markets melted down while around the world workers were becoming more militant, the bourgeoisie reaction was Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, not just in Germany and Japan as the bourgeoisie world backed Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany while they were containing Bolshevism.