User:RD/9k/State and Revolution (Q19,20)
(Redirected from User:RD/9k/Q19,20)
Motif
- The State and Revolution (Lenin 1918/1920) [1]
Motifs or claims
- initial bourgeois class rule / molecular scale bourgeois class rule (meta-Marxism) / bourgeois class rule (happening at small scales as part of civil society) -> this is so difficult to name distinctively in words although it's really intuitive as a concept. this is the concept of the bourgeoisie practically exerting control over an area — through their territories, security forces, or whatever special means are inherently available to them to rule people — before they are able to form a formal government, with the formal Liberal republic or similar soon to follow but not there yet. (perhaps hundreds of years ago 'Greek city state' could have been a possible type of "formal bourgeois government", when you only had the very earliest forms of capitalism. now you get Liberal-republicanism.)
realistically I'd guess this could be a process that takes place over years and doesn't happen "instantly" in a tiny stretch of time. after all, when the United States decided to wildly and recklessly expand west, the isolated producers went in one by one and it took them some amount of time to consolidate an empire in any particular spot. for the anarchists: this is an interaction between an area of tribal society and an area of bourgeoisie that would like to form a dictatorship-of-the-bourgeoisie. the consequences are tragic. this means that the bourgeoisie are not something to be messed with, and a really bad omen. writing an academic thesis and thinking you'll change the world by changing people's minds is the opposite of understanding that. - initial proletarian class rule / molecular-scale proletarian class rule (meta-Marxism) / proletarian class rule (happening at small scales as part of civil society) -> it's harder to have this than initial bourgeois class rule but at select times in history it can go through. factors leading to the 'breakthrough' include a consolidated group of proletarians that's great in number, or a party extending over a nationwide area that sticks together to the end. (by a nationwide area, I mean an area approximately as big as Russia or China. in Europe, that might be a 20-nations area. but the very minimum size might be approximately as big as Germany. Portugal could be too small for all we know. but there may be no upper limit if humanity eventually invents governments that get thinner as bigger ones come to be. sci-fi multi-planet governments might be the only thing that's too big to exist.)
chapter 5
chapter 6
- Marxism is basically Blanquism (Bernstein) -> I think he was a Menshevik but wow this statement is solid blue
- Attempting to compare Marxism and anarchism without addressing their approaches to The State or previous findings by Marxism on the topic in question leads to opportunism [3]
- The working class must smash the entire capitalist state (Marx, Engels) / The working class cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made state machinery and wield it for its own purposes (Communist Manifesto)
- Revolution presupposes long and deep-going struggles (Kautsky) -> I like this statement for how bad it is. it is... impressively vague. I like to take weird statements by the Democratic Party and expand them way out to what they're really saying in context. I am not totally sure how to expand out this one. critical theory and its concept of endlessly litigating civil rights (semi-literally) hoping you'll eventually get to some kind of socialist transition comes to mind.
- A Bolshevik railroad program is basically almost exactly like a Liberal-republican railroad program except organized more anarchically (Kautsky) -> I'm almost certain this is what Kautsky is saying, it is very transparent that he doesn't know what a workers' state looks like at all and thinks that on the inside it looks almost exactly like a Liberal state
- A Bolshevik railroad program is like any other industry inside Bolshevism, but nothing like a Liberal-republican state business because the delegates are 1) recallable at any time 2) not paid more than workers 3) the people, and not a designated circle of bureaucrats ->
hmm. I am still really unclear what went wrong on that third one. because they did end up with these ministries full of bureaucrats and Trotsky got super upset about it but Lenin dismissed it because he wasn't making any sense but later a bunch of people were complaining about The Bureaucrats so it's like, one of those times Trotsky short circuited a justified true belief and knew something without knowing it
Ideology codes
-
⧼hue-ins-domain-spacer/⧽mainstream Marxism-Leninism
()1-1-1 -
⧼hue-ins-domain-spacer/⧽Vladimir Lenin
()1-1-1