• PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Communism is simply an economic framework, not a political one. I dont agree with the notion that authoritarianism is a prerequisite for communist society.

    At the very least the existence of anarcho communism points towards that.

    • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Fair - I did wonder about inappropriately conflating things around this point - but a transitional ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ is definitely a stage of development in communism. For what it’s worth, what I’m reading on the subject right now is this (only started reading after commenting, prior comments based on previous knowledge/discussions of communism): https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch05.htm

      Admittedly, perhaps not all flavours of communism, but it’s hard to argue with this showing up in history. The question becomes: is it really a dictatorship of the proletariat? Or a separate political class using that language and ideology to justify their position?

      I will be the first to admit I’m not up-to-date with my communist theory, nor aware of the dominant strains of it in contemporary good faith discourse. So I’m happy to be presented with rebuttals or different positions on this - the more you know and all that.

      • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You seem well intended, no worries.

        Just for an example, Im a libertarian communist. I believe in a Democratic communism where a direct democracy makes larger political decisions.

        Somewhere between anarcho communist and socialist. My view on governments, communist or otherwise, is that they should be only big enough to help the people. It should serve effectively no other purpose but to run social programs and to stop greedy people.

      • PugJesus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The dictatorship of the proletariat originally, in Marx’s work, did not mean a literal dictatorship, but a democratic government run for the workers with the effective exclusion of other potential power centers. He refers to capitalist democracy in turn as a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, for reference.

        Marxist-Leninists are the big offenders here, because two of the major ‘innovations’ to Marxism introduced by Marxist-Leninists (at least, two which are relevant here) are that of the revolutionary vanguard (that you need to give power to a small number of people who are really well-read on theory, and THAT’S what will save the revolution), and the idea that you can ‘skip’ over capitalist democracy and go straight to socialism if you just try really hard and shoot a lot of people who think wrong.

        Marx was long-dead by the time Marxism-Leninism came about.