http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadeo_...a#On_Communism http://www.revleft.com/vb/law-uneven...803/index.html http://www.revleft.com/vb/trots-and-...296/index.html http://www.revleft.com/vb/scientific...293/index.html http://www.revleft.com/vb/does-mean-...43/index3.html I am shocked to find that Bordiga's post-revolution views are similar to mine (at least in some aspects), on top of what I said regarding the need for an international social-proletocratic party proper. Here it goes: 1) The global post-revolution mode of production is still capitalist, hence the need to aggravate the class struggle further (I know I sound a bit Stalinist here, but this is what Lenin said in Economics and Politics - the proletariat "crushes the increasingly stubborn resistance of the exploiters" - and it's just that Stalin had the wrong mode of production in mind). 2) Within the post-revolution "multi-economy," there emerges a socialist "economy" based on labour-time vouchers, which is what Bordiga said. The only difference between his position and mine is that it doesn't monopolize economic relations immediately (Lenin's "Left-Wing Childishness"). [Yes, I read Alf's rebuttal on co-existence of different economic relations in my "uneven development" thread, and I'm still thinking on this.] Given my particular interpretation, could it be possible for a socialist mode of production to be classless from the outset (after all the aggravation and liquidation of other classes)? Of course, under the communist mode of production neither labour-time vouchers nor the state would be needed.
