Results 101 to 109 of 109
The ones which lead to the only successful implementations of a genuine dictatorship of the proletariat, ie: Paris Commune, October Revolution.
Now obviously they ended in tragic failure (for reasons those coming from an un-materialist paradigm are unable to grasp), so I personally wouldn't call them successful (I'm assuming he's an M-L); but I'm guessing you knew exactly what he meant and were just making an attempt at humor.
Yes but Lenin and much of the subsequent theory/practice which is based on his attempts in Russia, in my opinion, are what need to be criticized if not almost completely left to history.
The Paris Commune implemented genuine dictatorship of the proletariat? As far as I am aware they didn't even colectivise.
Sorry to just drop quotes on you, but I'm to lazy to write anything substantive at the moment, so I'll just leave you with some thoughts on the matter, from Freddy:
But those still don't answer my questions!
Well collectivization happened in Russia after the N.E.P. was in effect for a decade, however by your definition during the N.E.P. there ceased to be a dotp. The commune came around as a result of a revolution, whichmakes it a DotP in the same way that revolutionary france (the first revolution) was a Dot bourgeoisie and early proletariat, who may of not had time to distribute the aristocracy's land at first.
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
Until the revolution was isolated, in the mid to late 1920s, the Russian revolution was successful in establishing and maintaining the first state that was the result of direct workers democracy. The fSU was the result of a workers revolution, they couldn't get rid of the stuff that was won until the 1990s.
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
I'm sorry. Could you list your questions for me?
It's kind of silly from both a Marxist and a historical viewpoint to say that the French Revolution succeeded in establishing a "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie." There was no conscious effort by the French bourgeoisie to create a state of their own, it just happened as a result of the actions of the French masses.
