Comment on Hrmmmmm

• TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Who is the proletariat?

  source

  • atmorous@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    The people

    source
  • HK65@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I mean in the current dictatorships, where it’s a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie by Marxist terms, it is usually one dictator and the setup is fairly hierarchical.

    Why is it called a dictatorship then?

    source
• lunaluster@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  If you are familiar with the Paris Commune of 1871, you’d know what was meant by that term, according to Engels.

  It is not a call to install ‘a’ dictator to usher in a new socialist world. It is the act of overthrowing the ‘dictatorship of capital.’ The character of the people should be radically democratic, and aim to put all social institutions in the collective hands of everyone who is affected by them. The only magic going on here is the mystification of what has been plainly laid out over the past two centuries, and attempted by numerous cultures across the globe, with varying degrees of success, in no small part due to people who knew what it means to take power away from self-interested tyrants.

  source

  • MacNCheezus@lemmy.today ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    “Varying degrees of success” is a great euphemism for “more people killed than several holocausts”

    source

    • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Anything’s possible when you make shit up

      source

      • MacNCheezus@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        The Holodemor alone killed almost as many people as the Holocaust, and that’s just one item in a very long list of communist “whoopsies”.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Dictatorship of the proletariat literally just means that the state represents the proletariats interests, rather than the bourgeois’ interests (like democracy in the west).

  source

  • MacNCheezus@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Democracy was supposed to do that. What would prevent a communist state from being usurped by capitalist interests (since capitalists are the ones who pay their bills)?

    source

    • irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      That is a good question. Keep in mind I’m not marxist, but I have read some of the theory.

      In a communist state, the means of production are usually nationalised by the state, for capitalists, all of their wealth comes from exploiting the labor of others, if the means are controlled by the people through a democratic government, the capitalists can’t profit since they don’t control the means.

      As such, the idea that capitalists pay the bills of communist states seems wrong to me.

      source