• алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    1st of all, great whataboutism 👍

    but I will indulge you:

    Autocracy?! That’s not what that word means. Tsarism was autocracy, Chiang Kai-shek was basically an autocrat.

    What you are talking about is a revisionist degenerated workers state (or bourgeois state of a new type in the case of contemporary China) in which the bureaucracy grew too strong to a quasi caste-like status above the rest of the population. There were attempts to correct this in both the USSR (workers/left/united opposition) and in the PRC (Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution) but both were crushed

    So it’s definitely smth we should learn from, to not repeat those mistakes. But that does not mean turning to the snake oil that is social democracy/democratic socialism which believe that somehow we can magically convince the ruling classes of systemic change and that they will give up power voluntarily. (And even if you manage somehow to wrestle significant concessions, they will either be rolled back after 30yrs or you’ll get the bullet in a fascist coup)

      • squid_slime@lemm.eeM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        You know ‘dictator’ has a different meaning in socialist rhetoric. The ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ is tongue-in-cheek, as in, the dictatorship of the proletariat is the reverse of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, which is the system we live under. A CIA document even mentioned the misconception of the Western world in regards to the USSR’s dictatorship.