83
Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism? (quokk.au)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
213 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Is it simply over-correcting in response to western anti-communist propaganda? I'd like to think it's simply memeing for memes sake, but it feels too genuine.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 6 months ago (7 children)

The PRC is socialist because public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state

The 13th NPC (2018–2023) included 468 representatives categorized as farmers and workers, representing roughly 15.7% Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20230224112256/http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c30834/202302/be334508d78a41c4bf3b2d2b47a22fd0.shtml

Dude. How the fuck working class controls the state if 15.7% of NPC are workers according to the NPC

Like... Literally, how? Like stop for a second. You're saying you're from USA. Do you think if 15.7% of USA congress members were from working class, the USA congress would pivot to being pro worker class socialist country?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (6 children)

    They were categorized as front-line workers and farmers' representatives, not as though the remainder were capitalists. Administration is not a class in and of itself, the state is the extension of the ruling class in society, its political force. In China, they have direct elections for local representatives, which elect further "rungs," laddering to the top. The top then has mass polling and opinion gathering. This combination of top-down and bottom-up democracy ensures effective results. For more on this, see Professor Roland Boer's Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    I believe I asked a very direct question, not asked for an excuse.

    For someone claiming I'm not engaging with what you write you seem to be doing that a lot of?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    I didn't give you an excuse, I refuted your point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (3 children)

    I mean if you believe that a government not made from workers representatives is - or can be - good for the workers right, socialistic and shit, you should change your instance, because Marx would kick your ass. I don't know about Lenin.

    Actually I think I can now call you a class traitor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    The NPC is made up of representatives of the working classes. Administration is not a distinct class, but a subsection of classes. Just like there are bourgeois administrators there are proletarian administrators, the same applies to intellectuals. Marx wouldn't kick my ass, he'd see that I'm correct here, same as Lenin.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    :D are tou sure about it?

    Administration is not a distinct class, but a subsection of classes.

    Have you perchance ever read anything by Marx, my sweet Marxists? Or talked about bureaucracy with communists not from China?

    Since you didn't, in marxist theory state bureaucracy is distinctly never a part of working class. Iirc the quote, it's always "appalling parasitic body".

    And honestly, thinking that administrations are worker class... Like damn.

    Unless you claim tautology?

    NPC not made from working class representatives is socialist, because China is socialist. China is socialist because it's ruled by socialist government, although not made from working class representatives?

    (Before talking to you I honestly thought this duck looks less like capitalistic duck).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago

    I've read Marx, quite a lot, actually.

    This executive power with its enormous bureaucratic and military organization, with its vast and ingenious state machinery, with a host of officials numbering half a million, besides an army of another half a million, this appalling parasitic body, which enmeshes the body of French society and chokes all its pores, sprang up in the days of the absolute monarchy, with the decay of the feudal system, which it helped to hasten.

    He was talking about the French state. You're actually taking a metaphysical approach to Marx, not a dialectical one, by trying to abstract points away from the necessary context they exist in.

    Classes are social relations to production and distribution. When production is collectivized and owned by all, it still needs managers, what Engels refers to as the "administration of things." Further still, between capitalism and communism there is the transition from one to the other, that is still heavily made up of elements of the old as elements of the new grow and overtake it.

    This is basic dialectics.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent