Is Socialism Needed?

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Personally, socialism seems dangerous. Marxist theory, as demonstrated through Stalin, leaves room open for corruption. Centralizing power only to decentralize it later seems like an unnecessary risk. Unfortunately, I am not well read on this matter.

What are the arguments for a socialist state? How can it be controlled? What are the arguments against it? I feel that the state and capitalism are interconnected and need to be abolished in a parallel fashion.

[More Fire for the People]

Well for one, Stalin's socialism was quite democratic but in my opinion erroneous as it was based on democratic centralism. What should a socialist state look like? A federation of Paris Commune-style local governments (regions of 300,000 people or so in rural areas, union of smaller communal governments in urban areas).

[bolshevik butcher]

This would probably be better placed in theory and the anarchists and marxists can thrash it out there.

Anyway, I would argue that the socilaist state is a neccesitiy. As long as there are classes fighting for power there will always be a state, and the working class must take control of the state apparatus to fight agianst any beugorise counter reovlution.

On your other poinit, I agree to an extent, I am not for a vastyl centralized beauracratic dictatorhsip like the USSR. FOr a state to describe itself as socialist I feel power has to be put directly into the hands of workers via soviets.

[Entrails Konfetti]

My problem with Socialism is that historcally it has been lead by unaccountable party bureaucrats with the intent of a monetary system, and doesn't really take into the account of material conditions.