• kaffiene@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’d say that Marxism at least is fatally flawed. The idea that you start a Communist society by gathering all power to a central council is the issue. Once power is obtained it’s never willingly dispersed. This has been the fate of existing all communist governments

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      This is a fundamental and critical misunderstanding of what Communism is, and what Marx refers to as a State. Marx makes himself clear in Critique of the Gotha Programme, but the State for Marx isn’t just “government.” Marx was vehemontly anti-Anarchist, not out of principle disagreements, but on a practical and rational basis.

      For Marx, the State is the element of government by which class society sustains and protects itself. Ie, private property rights, and the police that protect it. Communism would have a government, its own police, and its own structures and administration through central planning. The State whithering away, as Marx puts it, is the slow lack of retaining the former elements of class society. For example, we no longer have Streetlamp Lighters, as streetlamps are electric now. This wasn’t because they were targeted and eliminated, but simply fell out of favor with the progression of society.

      Once power is obtained it’s never willingly dispersed. This has been the fate of existing all communist governments

      This right here is the crux of your misunderstanding. Carrying over from the whithering away elaboration from my last paragraph, the government is not supposed to intentionally collapse itself, it’s supposed to remain a democratic worker government, and continue to be built up over time.

      Different AES states have seen their own issues, but none of them have been due to “not willingly giving up power,” which is a fundamental misconception of how these AES States function, or what the Marxist path to Communism truly is.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          You should never be “happy” with your interpretation. You should always be willing to learn, refine and adjust your interpretation to changing conditions.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Believing Marxism to be “fatally flawed” because you completely misunderstood his works to the foundational level is silly though, right? Marxism isn’t literary fiction or anything, where you can apply Death of the Author and write about your own personal meaning from the text, Marx was very clear both in writing and in speeches, and Marxists have studied and built on his original body of work.

          You don’t have to take it from me alone, Marxism is extremely thoroughly documented and understood, flexible, adaptable, and widely discussed.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              What was the point of your original comment? Just to take a dig at what other people were discussing and then dip when I tried to have a productive discussion with you?

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I doubt they are a troll, they had a common misconception and then got upset when it was pointed out. There was nothing deliberately provacative.

                  Just odd all around.

                  • daltotron@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    I just mean that I don’t think they were a good faith interlocutor. Probably if I were to put a specific explanation on it, I’d say that they are probably tired of having the same argument over and over again and being corrected repetitively, to the point where they’re not genuinely engaging anymore, I’ve seen that a lot. Especially with how quickly they backed out but also still left a comment. I dunno if that level of bad faith would be considered trolling in the strictest sense, but I would probably still classify it as such.

              • kaffiene@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                Sometimes you make a comment about something that seems interesting and then realise you’ve wandered into a enclypoedia convention and have bitten off more than you have the head space to deal with. I probably should have said that instead of what I did say. My apologies

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I did try to be thorough, but I guess I overexplained and ended up alienating you, my bad. I do hope you got something from it, I try to clear up misconceptions about Marxism when I see them because he is very misunderstood, especially on instances like Lemmy.world.

                  Have a good day!

                  • kaffiene@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Don’t apologise. Totally my fault - I was being a dick. I’ve been on the other side of this kind of interaction with someone doubling down after being called out on being a jerk. I should do better. Thanks for your response

      • twelve20two @slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Communism would have a government, its own police, and its own structures and administration through central planning.

        I don’t get how this just whithers away

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          It doesn’t.

          What does whither away are things like Private Property Rights and other elements by which Capitalist society maintains itself.

          The “whithering away of the State” is one of the most commonly taken out of context aspects of Marxism, most people associate the State with all aspects of Government. Marx does not make that same association, and used the word State as shorthand for the aforementioned Capitalist elements of government.