As for economics, he demanded centralisation of economy under the administration of a state bank, and the nationalisation of other strategical, national resources, again, at the hands of the state.
Results 1 to 20 of 21
Marx on the role of the political party?
What are some good texts on Marx's view of the role of political parties, before, during, and after the revolution? Or if you know his views, what were they? Also, did Marx believe that the working class movement have to be a party-based movement? And, how did he envision the dictatorship of the proletariat would be set up (ie would there be a central government, a decentralised federated council system, or whatever)?
Edit: Also, did he ever say anything about economic planning, such as centralized or decentralized planning?
Last edited by Fourth Internationalist; 2nd July 2013 at 21:43.
As for economics, he demanded centralisation of economy under the administration of a state bank, and the nationalisation of other strategical, national resources, again, at the hands of the state.
The first few paragraphs of this explain Marx's view on the party.
Segui il tuo corso e lascia dir le genti.
Socialism resides entirely in the revolutionary negation of the capitalist ENTERPRISE, not in granting the enterprise to the factory workers.
- Bordiga
What does this mean exactly?
"The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties."
Exactly what is spelled out in the lines that follow it.
"Events have their own logic, even when human beings do not." - Rosa Luxemburg
"There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen." - Lenin
So it doesn't mean communists shouldn't form a separate party?
Well he goes on to say this:
So it's definitely implied that communists can organise as a party which is distinguishable from "other working class parties".
How he viewed what kind of organisations constitute "parties" is another question. Remember that at the time of the writing of the CM, even the bourgeoisie had not yet developed the kind of professional political parties that we see today.
"Events have their own logic, even when human beings do not." - Rosa Luxemburg
"There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen." - Lenin
Yeah, I think he uses party in the classical sense
"What is necessary is to go beyond any false opposition of programme versus spontaneity. Communism is both the self-activity of the proletariat and the rigorous theoretical critique that expresses and anticipates it."
-----
"...Stalinism is eternally condemned to govern capital, and the ideological dynamics of Stalinism are tied to this peculiar type of capital management; it is locked within this framework, reproducing the logic of capitalism under the veil of communism. For this reason, Stalinism, and its various derivatives, cannot accurately be regarded as communist if we choose to define it in materialist terms." - Tim Cornelis
What do you mean by in the classical sense?
Oh god, not another "Marx was actually, secretly an anarchist" thread.
Re: Marx on the role of the political party?
You need to grow up because no one said that or even implied it.Oh god, not another "Marx was actually, secretly an anarchist" thread.
Once again: the baseless, strawmen attacks against anarchism. The comrade asked a good question, please don't clog up this thread with more of your moronic posts.Oh god, not another "Marx was actually, secretly an anarchist" thread.
Segui il tuo corso e lascia dir le genti.
Socialism resides entirely in the revolutionary negation of the capitalist ENTERPRISE, not in granting the enterprise to the factory workers.
- Bordiga
At this point I'm pretty sure Akshay! is a troll.
pew pew pew
Or he's just an imbecile.
Segui il tuo corso e lascia dir le genti.
Socialism resides entirely in the revolutionary negation of the capitalist ENTERPRISE, not in granting the enterprise to the factory workers.
- Bordiga
I'm not really sure if there is a definition of a "party in the classical sense", but what I imply is that in the 19th century, as HTN says, there weren't political parties in the sense we have now. They were more of loosely attached groups, organisations and "societies" who agreed on some or most things. So I think it's fair to assume that he talks about the multitude of communist organisations.
"What is necessary is to go beyond any false opposition of programme versus spontaneity. Communism is both the self-activity of the proletariat and the rigorous theoretical critique that expresses and anticipates it."
-----
"...Stalinism is eternally condemned to govern capital, and the ideological dynamics of Stalinism are tied to this peculiar type of capital management; it is locked within this framework, reproducing the logic of capitalism under the veil of communism. For this reason, Stalinism, and its various derivatives, cannot accurately be regarded as communist if we choose to define it in materialist terms." - Tim Cornelis
From a post on a forum which name we dare not say:
"What is necessary is to go beyond any false opposition of programme versus spontaneity. Communism is both the self-activity of the proletariat and the rigorous theoretical critique that expresses and anticipates it."
-----
"...Stalinism is eternally condemned to govern capital, and the ideological dynamics of Stalinism are tied to this peculiar type of capital management; it is locked within this framework, reproducing the logic of capitalism under the veil of communism. For this reason, Stalinism, and its various derivatives, cannot accurately be regarded as communist if we choose to define it in materialist terms." - Tim Cornelis
This text which I have not yet finished might also be of interest:
"What is necessary is to go beyond any false opposition of programme versus spontaneity. Communism is both the self-activity of the proletariat and the rigorous theoretical critique that expresses and anticipates it."
-----
"...Stalinism is eternally condemned to govern capital, and the ideological dynamics of Stalinism are tied to this peculiar type of capital management; it is locked within this framework, reproducing the logic of capitalism under the veil of communism. For this reason, Stalinism, and its various derivatives, cannot accurately be regarded as communist if we choose to define it in materialist terms." - Tim Cornelis
Oh god, not another "Marx was actually, secretly an anarchist" thread.
I figured it would help if Lenin said it.
No comrade! In Akshay's eyes Lenin is a liberal!
Segui il tuo corso e lascia dir le genti.
Socialism resides entirely in the revolutionary negation of the capitalist ENTERPRISE, not in granting the enterprise to the factory workers.
- Bordiga
One of the few things I agree with Marx is his statement from the preambule of the Programme of the Workers Party which says that in the revolution "universal suffrage" should be "transformed from the instrument of deception that it has been until now into an instrument of emancipation". Concerning the topic, afaik, he never abandoned this position.
The economical subjection of the man of labor to the monopolizer of the means of labor lies at the bottom of servitude in all its forms, of all social misery, mental degradation, and political dependence. (General rules of IWMA)
Imposed communism would be the most detestable tyranny that the human mind could conceive. And free and voluntary communism is ironical if one has not the right and the possibility to live in a different regime, collectivist, mutualist, individualist- as one wishes, always on condition that there is no oppression or exploitation of others. (Malatesta)
.
