What I think some people here need to understand

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Hey guys. I've noticed a lot of people here have been attacking revolutionaries and people that wanna overthrow the system because they say the result will be something "authoritarian" and will oppress the people. However hear me out on this - not all the revolutionaries here support the dictatorship of the proleteriat, support dictatorship at all, support violence on innocent people or support repressing those that they disagree with.

I am of this view and I know many anarchists and revolutionaries that have this view as well. I understand it does not get stated often enough but you dudes gotta realize that Leninists and Stalininsts and Maoists don't represent everyone here.

There is a strong libertararion revolutionary following in the left and I hope you guys can keep an open mind with us and realize not all of us are about oppression and leadership to keep the people down.

[LoneRed]

Like i said in another thread, it seems that you dont understand what is meant by the dictatorship of the proletariat

Marx used the word to describe each society

Capitalism- Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie (the minority,Upper Class)

Socialism- Dictatorship Of The Proletariat (Great Majority, the entire working class)

[black magick hustla]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 01:46 AM
Like i said in another thread, it seems that you dont understand what is meant by the dictatorship of the proletariat

Marx used the word to describe each society

Capitalism- Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie (the minority,Upper Class)

Socialism- Dictatorship Of The Proletariat (Great Majority, the entire working class)
This.

Considering even left communists (like me lol) use the term.

[Fitzy]

LOL. Youre so naive. How old are you?


However hear me out on this - not all the revolutionaries here support the dictatorship of the proleteriat, support dictatorship at all
You dont even know what the DOP is. You are using the word dictatorship in two different ways in the same sentence.


support violence on innocent people or support repressing those that they disagree with.
So the bourgeoise is innocent?

Im telling you right now, you would rather have the proletariat oppressed then use violence and oppression against the small insignificant minority/the bourgeoise. Thats how much of a liberal you are. Not even an anarchist, dont pretend you are.

[colonelguppy]

you don't have to have a dictator to have an authoratarian society.

[KC]

The dictatorship of the proletariat is a class dictatorship not a one-man dictatorship.

[MrDoom]

you don't have to have a dictator to have an authoratarian society.

You don't have to neccessarily have an authoritarian society to have a dictatorship.

State control is dictatorship no matter how you slice it. The things to ask are: who are the dictators, what are they dictating, and to whom?

In a democratic dictatorship of the proletariat, it is the workers who dictate over the minority of capitalists.

[black magick hustla]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 02:00 AM
you don't have to have a dictator to have an authoratarian society.
As opposed to what, 19th century american minarchism? :lol:

[izquierda80]

The original Marxist concept of DoP, when contrasted with the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie, is clearly a desirable goal. It might not be the best possible choice of words, but the idea is sound.

The problem is exactly what rules are going to determine the day to day functioning of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, and whether those rules and the framework that they sustain will stagnate and/or degenerate into a system that applies excessive authoritarism to the workers and even to other revolutionaries, not merely to counterrevolutionaries.

[MrDoom]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 04:14 AM
The problem is exactly what rules are going to determine the day to day functioning of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, and whether those rules and the framework that they sustain will stagnate and/or degenerate into a system that applies excessive authoritarism to the workers and even to other revolutionaries, not merely to counterrevolutionaries.
Thus direct and aggregated democracy must rigidly be held up by the very workers the DotP is composed of.

[D_Bokk]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 03:39 AM
Hey guys. I've noticed a lot of people here have been attacking revolutionaries and people that wanna overthrow the system because they say the result will be something "authoritarian" and will oppress the people. However hear me out on this - not all the revolutionaries here support the dictatorship of the proleteriat, support dictatorship at all, support violence on innocent people or support repressing those that they disagree with.

I am of this view and I know many anarchists and revolutionaries that have this view as well. I understand it does not get stated often enough but you dudes gotta realize that Leninists and Stalininsts and Maoists don't represent everyone here.

There is a strong libertararion revolutionary following in the left and I hope you guys can keep an open mind with us and realize not all of us are about oppression and leadership to keep the people down.
You might as well polish the capitalist's shoes while you're down there. What would possibly make you want to appeal to the opinions of the bourgeois?

And if an Anarchist knows their ideology, they would be supporting violence.

[KC]

You might as well polish the capitalist's shoes while you're down there.

Oh, cmon; you could've told a way better "while you're down there" joke than that. :P

[Marsella]

People often confuse what Marxists define 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat'- thinking that we support the enslavement of the working class.

What is a better term is Dictatorship BY the Proletariat

[colonelguppy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 11:36 PM
What would possibly make you want to appeal to the opinions of the bourgeois?
maybe they're right every once in awhile so killing them off is a bad idea.

[Zero]

No. What I think people confuse is that they come to this board, have a large discussion with one or two people, and think they understand the drives, goals, and abitions, of a Communist revolutionary.

Take a stroll anywhere while your logged out and you'll quickly see that we are all different. There is just as much arguement here as there is on other subjects in other topics in other sections between leftist and leftist.

[D_Bokk]

Originally posted by Khayembii Communique+--> (Khayembii Communique)Oh, cmon; you could've told a way better "while you're down there" joke than that.[/b]
Yeah, I really fucked that one up...

colonelguppy
maybe they're right every once in awhile so killing them off is a bad idea.
They were right when they overthrew the feudal rulers. They've served their purpose in developing the proletariat and it's about time they take their leave; it's up to them how many people need to get "killed off."

[BurnTheOliveTree]

Authoritarianism is a necessary evil, PA. I think I probably share your gut reaction against it, but you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the reactionaries will just go away. You need to burst your bubble.

-Alex

[MrDoom]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 12:07 PM
Authoritarianism is a necessary evil, PA. I think I probably share your gut reaction against it, but you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the reactionaries will just go away. You need to burst your bubble.

-Alex
You're right, reactionaries won't simply go away. But does this require central control by a few individuals over the masses? Why not let them deal with their own enemies on their own terms?

Unless you're talking about class authoritarianism...

[BurnTheOliveTree]

Yeah, I was. I think PA argues against violent revolution on the basis that it's an authoritarian act. I just meant to say that peaceful revolution is not going to happen unless like, 99.99 percent of people support it, which obviously includes a lot of reactionaries. Thus, authoritarianism, class authoritarianism, is the grim alternative.

-Alex

[Orion999]

People often confuse what Marxists define 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat'- thinking that we support the enslavement of the working class.

What is a better term is Dictatorship BY the Proletariat

What exactly is a "Dictatorship of the porletariat" ? How do you have a dictatiorship made up of millions of people? "A Dictatorship made up of all it's working class citizens is impossible, and is just a way of justifying the rule of the few over the many. When the revolution comes I guess will just have to hope that after the smoke clears whoever happens to gain power does'nt decide to enslave all of us.

Is this Dictatorship really going to be any different than all the other horrible dictatorships around the world? How will it be structured to ensure that one man or group of men can't take control and start commiting atrocities?

[KC]

Dictatorship of the proletariat is just the form of society in which the proletariat is the ruling class. Right now we are living under the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie".

[Fitzy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 04:42 PM

People often confuse what Marxists define 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat'- thinking that we support the enslavement of the working class.

What is a better term is Dictatorship BY the Proletariat

What exactly is a "Dictatorship of the porletariat" ? How do you have a dictatiorship made up of millions of people? "A Dictatorship made up of all it's working class citizens is impossible, and is just a way of justifying the rule of the few over the many. When the revolution comes I guess will just have to hope that after the smoke clears whoever happens to gain power does'nt decide to enslave all of us.

Is this Dictatorship really going to be any different than all the other horrible dictatorships around the world? How will it be structured to ensure that one man or group of men can't take control and start commiting atrocities?
You do not understand what the word dictatorship meens in that context. It has nothing to do with what you usually call a dictatorship.

[bezdomni]

Revolution is violent. If you can't embrace that, if you aren't ready to kill or die in a revolution...then take the goddamed word out of your vocabulary!

Futhermore, Leninism is not authoritarian. We all seek the abolition of the state and a popular worker's revolution that sets up democratic worker's control. In fact, many anarchists that I personally know and many on this site are quite authoritarian. Just because they call themselves an anarchist and say Lenin was an authoritarian despot, they think they have the right to be as authoritarian as they please...as long as they keep this "libertarian" rhetoric.

Tell me, what gives you the right to tell me what authoritarianism is and who is an authoritarian? Where do you get that authority?


Read State and Revolution and grow up.

[ZX3]

Originally posted by Khayembii [email protected] 17 2006, 04:03 AM
The dictatorship of the proletariat is a class dictatorship not a one-man dictatorship.
Yes. And the unwarranted assumption is that the proleteriat will all agree on a course of action. And even if you allow for various shades of "red" to exist you are still having to deal with those who oppose the system. Not to mention the problem that socialists TODAY, when they are out of power, can't even agree on what to do. What will happen once they are in power?

[bezdomni]

So there needs to be consensus for democracy to work?

o_O

[ZX3]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 04:42 PM

People often confuse what Marxists define 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat'- thinking that we support the enslavement of the working class.

What is a better term is Dictatorship BY the Proletariat

What exactly is a "Dictatorship of the porletariat" ? How do you have a dictatiorship made up of millions of people? "A Dictatorship made up of all it's working class citizens is impossible, and is just a way of justifying the rule of the few over the many. When the revolution comes I guess will just have to hope that after the smoke clears whoever happens to gain power does'nt decide to enslave all of us.

Is this Dictatorship really going to be any different than all the other horrible dictatorships around the world? How will it be structured to ensure that one man or group of men can't take control and start commiting atrocities?
The theory is that the proleteriat will rule as a group, and thus will dictate the terms and condition of society. They claim it will be democratic because the workers will work together and decide what to do, and it will be based upon their interests. When the decision is made, they can "dictate" to the rest of the community. Thus Marx could talk about democracy and dictatorship without missinga beat.

The errors in this thinking are legion. They call it the "dictatorship of the proleteriat" because they erroneously believe capitalism represents the "dicatorship of the bourgeoise (that error compunds itself when socialists start talking economics). So they see themselves as simply replacing one dictatorship with another. But since the "bougeoise" supposed dicatorship represents the minority over the majority, the "proleteriat" dictatorship is of the majority over the minority. Such a dicatarship is much purer and better, goes the reasoning. Revolutionary Lefters who would argue that the USSR and its satelites were NOT true communist or socialist states, are probably unaware that the proleteriat in those states had the choices between legal political parties. Not all elected reps (and they were elected), or those who ran for election were Communists. The "opposition" parties were of course various shades of "red." So the theory has been tried, and failed, at least from the perspective of thinking socialism brings about a new age of human freedom.

[colonelguppy]

So there needs to be consensus for democracy to work?

o_O

well depending on what kind of democracy you have, then yeah.

[Fitzy]

Its called democratic centralism.

[ZX3]

there will always need to be a base level of consensus in a democracy. Everyone has to agree on the "big issues." Else nothing can get done. Democracy is about compromise. Can't compromise if there is no common frame of reference. The dispute occurs on the details.