Dictatorship of the Proletariat

[DisIllusion]

I know that there is another thread about this, but I want to know more of the basics of Marx's ideal of "Dictatorship by the Proletariat". He states that it is necessary on the path to true and free Communism, but is it really that important? Does Marx mean Dictatorship of the Proletariat as a real Dictatorship with only one sole leader with one sole party as demonstrated in the U.S.S.R after Lenin's death?

[Ownthink]

I believe that the "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat" means the supposed transitional phase between Capitalism and Communism, which is Socialism.

[Zingu]

1891 Introduction by Frederick Engels
On the 20th Anniversary of the Paris Commune

Against this transformation of the state and the organs of the state from servants of society into masters of society — an inevitable transformation in all previous states — the Commune made use of two infallible expedients. In this first place, it filled all posts — administrative, judicial, and educational — by election on the basis of universal suffrage of all concerned, with the right of the same electors to recall their delegate at any time. And in the second place, all officials, high or low, were paid only the wages received by other workers. The highest salary paid by the Commune to anyone was 6,000 francs. In this way an effective barrier to place-hunting and careerism was set up, even apart from the binding mandates to delegates to representative bodies which were also added in profusion.

This shattering of the former state power and its replacement by a new and really democratic state is described in detail in the third section of The Civil War. But it was necessary to dwell briefly here once more on some of its features, because in Germany particularly the superstitious belief in the state has been carried over from philosophy into the general consciousness of the bourgeoisie and even to many workers. According to the philosophical notion, the state is the "realization of the idea" or the Kingdom of God on earth, translated into philosophical terms, the sphere in which eternal truth and justice is or should be realized. And from this follows a superstitious reverence for the state and everything connected with it, which takes roots the more readily as people from their childhood are accustomed to imagine that the affairs and interests common to the whole of society could not be looked after otherwise than as they have been looked after in the past, that is, through the state and its well-paid officials. And people think they have taken quite an extraordinary bold step forward when they have rid themselves of belief in hereditary monarchy and swear by the democratic republic. In reality, however, the state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another, and indeed in the democratic republic no less than in the monarchy; and at best an evil inherited by the proletariat after its victorious struggle for class supremacy, whose worst sides the proletariat, just like the Commune, cannot avoid having to lop off at the earliest possible moment, until such time as a new generation, reared in new and free social conditions, will be able to throw the entire lumber of the state on the scrap-heap.

Of late, the Social-Democratic philistine has once more been filled with wholesome terror at the words: Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Well and good, gentlemen, do you want to know what this dictatorship looks like? Look at the Paris Commune. That was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

[DisIllusion]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 06:51 PM
I believe that the "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat" means the supposed transitional phase between Capitalism and Communism, which is Socialism.
Where the worker is lifted up and all social classes are dissolved, but how would the actualy "dictatorship" come by?

[Vanguard1917]

Where the worker is lifted up and all social classes are dissolved, but how would the actualy "dictatorship" come by?

The dictatorship of the proletariat is the working class organising itself into a ruling class, with its own state apparatus.

Lenin discusses this is in great detail. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/index.htm)

[JKP]

What Lenin considered to be the the dictatorship of the proletariat, is something else entirely from what Marx and Engels concieved it to be.

Read the quote that Zingu posted.

[red_che]

Here are the three features of Dictatorship of the Proletariat as described in great detail by Comrade Stalin.

This is the link for the full text of it: The Foundations of Leninism (http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/FL24.html#c4)

"a) the dictatorship of the proletariat as the instrument of the proletarian revolution;

b) the dictatorship of the proletariat as the rule of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie;

c) Soviet power as the state form of the dictatorship of the proletariat."

[ReD_ReBeL]

hmm im not to sure bout Stalin RED_CHE , can you tell me some acomplishments the country made under his power without a huge loss of life plz?

[red_che]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 02:41 AM
hmm im not to sure bout Stalin RED_CHE , can you tell me some acomplishments the country made under his power without a huge loss of life plz?
There goes again the bourgeois propaganda being re-echoed here, read my other posts, my answer was there...

Or here it is, just to satisfy you...

www.philippinerevolution.org (http://www.philippinerevolution.org/cgi-bin/cpp/pdocs.pl?id=stane;page=06)

In that link were Stalin's achievements and contributions as summed-up by Comrade Armando Liwanag, Chairman, Central Committee, Communist Party of the Philippines.

Read it and then tell me your thoughts on that... :)

[ReD_ReBeL]

thanks for the info Comrade, yes that sounds good i know he had good ideas but what where the actions he used to get there? and does tht 20million dead against the Nazi's count in went he imperialists clame he killed millions?
btw ive got a book called Stalin:the court of the red tsar, which is very detailed in his personal life as well as political very good book, only read first chapter tho coz i as reading autobiography of Nelson Mandela, just thought i would tell u if u hadnt already read it lol

[red_che]

I'll read it soon as I'll have time, then I'll let you know, I was just taking time out for this forum. You know, lots of work to do.... :cool:

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 06:33 PM
Here are the three features of Dictatorship of the Proletariat as described in great detail by Comrade Stalin.

This is the link for the full text of it: The Foundations of Leninism (http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/FL24.html#c4)

"a) the dictatorship of the proletariat as the instrument of the proletarian revolution;

b) the dictatorship of the proletariat as the rule of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie;

c) Soviet power as the state form of the dictatorship of the proletariat."
Why did the Bolsheviks render the soviets useless shortly after October? The workers weren't "falling in line"?

[red_che]

Why did the Bolsheviks render the soviets useless shortly after October? The workers weren't "falling in line"?

Can you please elaborate this further? It's vague

[KC]

Power was taken from the soviets and transferred to the bolsheviks (i.e. the bureaucracy).

[red_che]

Give some data, facts.

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 11:16 PM

Why did the Bolsheviks render the soviets useless shortly after October? The workers weren't "falling in line"?

Can you please elaborate this further? It's vague
It's not vague at all. Everytime the bolsheviks lost a majority in a soviet, they closed it down. Most of this happened before the full outbreak of civil war.

But, I guess we're expected to "trust" in Bob. He won't do that this time, right?

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 07:28 AM
Give some data, facts.
Is industrial militarization a fact good enough for you?

What about centralization of power in the hands of the Party and military control over the Soviets?


Any history book would do you good. :lol:

[red_che]

But, I guess we're expected to "trust" in Bob. He won't do that this time, right?

Who's Bob? Don't know him at all.

I supposed you are referring to Bob Avakian of the RCP? Heh, I'm not in any way connected with that pseudo-Maoist organization.


It's not vague at all. Everytime the bolsheviks lost a majority in a soviet, they closed it down. Most of this happened before the full outbreak of civil war.

It isn't that way as you described it. The proletariat already gained power, but the class struggle remains. Within the proletariat state, the bourgeoisie fiercelessly try to get back to power.

[KC]

It isn't that way as you described it. The proletariat already gained power, but the class struggle remains. Within the proletariat state, the bourgeoisie fiercelessly try to get back to power.


Within the proletarian state, the bourgeoisie do get back in power.

[Spirit of '94]

The word "dictatorship" seems to be what's throwing you off. The quote by Zingu is great, but here's a quick and dirty of my view.

Dictatorship is a term describing complete political, economic and social control in the hands of the proletariat through democratic participation. It's only a "dictatorship" because the ONLY authority rests in the hands of the proletariat and it will NEVER return to the bourgeoisie.

It can be confusing, because the language is contradictory to people attuned to modern political language.

[KC]

See this Blog entry (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=blog&id=10051&entry=301&action2=perma) for more information on this subject.

[DisIllusion]

Originally posted by Spirit of '[email protected] 6 2005, 01:11 AM
The word "dictatorship" seems to be what's throwing you off. The quote by Zingu is great, but here's a quick and dirty of my view.

Dictatorship is a term describing complete political, economic and social control in the hands of the proletariat through democratic participation. It's only a "dictatorship" because the ONLY authority rests in the hands of the proletariat and it will NEVER return to the bourgeoisie.

It can be confusing, because the language is contradictory to people attuned to modern political language.
Yeah, that's what was really confusing me, thanks comrades.

[red_che]

Originally posted by DisIllusion+Dec 7 2005, 01:21 AM--> (DisIllusion @ Dec 7 2005, 01:21 AM)
Spirit of '[email protected] 6 2005, 01:11 AM
The word "dictatorship" seems to be what's throwing you off. The quote by Zingu is great, but here's a quick and dirty of my view.

Dictatorship is a term describing complete political, economic and social control in the hands of the proletariat through democratic participation. It's only a "dictatorship" because the ONLY authority rests in the hands of the proletariat and it will NEVER return to the bourgeoisie.

It can be confusing, because the language is contradictory to people attuned to modern political language.
Yeah, that's what was really confusing me, thanks comrades. [/b]
To add up (which I hope will not confuse you more), that authority by the proletariat is expressed through the proletarian State led by the communist party with the only objective of smashing all bourgeois property and exploitation and abolition of bourgeois class and state.

[KC]

To add up (which I hope will not confuse you more), that authority by the proletariat is expressed through the proletarian State led by the communist party with the only objective of smashing all bourgeois property and exploitation and abolition of bourgeois class and state.


Authority of the proletariat is expressed through the proletarian "state" led by a democratic proletarian government.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 05:04 AM
The dictatorship of the proletariat is the working class organising itself into a ruling class, with its own state apparatus.
Structured how?

[More Fire for the People]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension+Dec 8 2005, 08:34 AM--> (The Anarchist Tension @ Dec 8 2005, 08:34 AM)
[email protected] 2 2005, 05:04 AM
The dictatorship of the proletariat is the working class organising itself into a ruling class, with its own state apparatus.
Structured how? [/b]
Well that is quite the interesting question isn't it?
Engels on the dictatorship of the proletariat...

..look at the Paris Commune. That was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
However, society has changed since 1891 and the international proletariat has learned quite a few lessons.


Proudhon... regarded association with positive hatred. He said of it that there was more bad than good in it; that it was by nature sterile, even harmful, because it was a fetter on the freedom of the workers;...

By 1871, even in Paris, the centre of handicrafts,large-scale industry had already so much ceased to be an exceptional case that by far the most important decree of the Commune instituted an organization of large-scale industry and even of manufacture which was not based only on the association of workers in each factor, but also aimed at combining all these associations in one great union;


That is all of the industries had been organized into (for the sake of the inefficiency of English to express organization without some connotation) syndicates. These syndicates united into one great union. Presumably they coordinates the economy togethor, in essence it was a form of non-Leninist central planning.

However, what is the purpose of the "great union"? Can an organization both be the representative of the workers and the 'boss'? Here is the contradiction within the Paris Commune's economic planning — it was an organization opposed to its own existence. We now know what an economy must be based upon for planning — workers' councils. Every industry, big and small, is to be organized into adminstration under workers' councils and assemblies. Each of these councils would send a delegate to the local and national planning assembly.

If the workers' councils become oppressive or rubber stamps *cough, soviets* then the workers must organize them into dissenting organizations, or unions, as well as leadership organizations.