Comment on Communism

• TheOtherThyme@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  But there doesn’t cease to be classes, there is now the “planning” class with no check on their power. Are the common people who supposed to rise up again and overthrow the planners when they obviously and inevitably become selfish and corrupt? This is the logical leap communist theory never answered.

  source

  • Cowbee@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    First, there’s no such thing as a “planning class.” Managers within Capitalist businesses are still Proletarian, planning is just a different form of labor. Such a distinction would mean that “plumber” is a class, as well as “doctor.” What determines a class isn’t the form of labor, but the relation to ownership, and in a fully Publicly Owned economy the planners are not the owners.

    Secondly, there are checks on elected officials, I am not sure at all where you are getting the notion that there are none. Recall elections have been a core aspect of Marxist theory of organization since near the beginning, as well as concepts such as Democratic Centralism.

    “Common people” are not distinct from “planners,” nor would the “Common people” be able to do away with the concept of planners and management. Again, from Engels:

    The first act in which the state really comes forward as the representative of the whole of society – the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society – is at the same time its last independent act as a state. The interference of the state power in social relations becomes superfluous in one sphere after another, and then dies away of itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the processes of production. The state is not “abolished”, it withers away. It is by this that one must evaluate the phrase “a free people’s state” with respect both to its temporary agitational justification and to its ultimate scientific inadequacy, and it is by this that we must also evaluate the demand of the so-called anarchists that the state should be abolished overnight.

    It’s not that Communist theory “never answered” your questions, its that nobody that is familiar with Communist theory would raise such questions as they don’t make any sense in context. Does that make sense?

    source

    • TheOtherThyme@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      So communism is a multi party system with state elections? You just invented democracy my dude. Oh, sorry, maguc stateless elections. With no corruption. No one is in charge, there is no one behind the curtain pulling the leavers, right?

      source

      • Cowbee@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Communism is democratic, yes. This can have multiple parties, but generally having different parties is not the same as having democratic control. It’s arguably more important to be able to vote on what you want, or who you want to do it, within an existing party or party-less system. As an example, among a local council, rather than voting on a party, it makes more sense to vote on which representative from said council will participate in the regional council, not necessarily which party.

        Secondly, again, you are confusing a “State” in the Marxist sense, ie the elements of government that denote class distinctions (private property rights, as an example) with the colloquial sense of the word “State,” which is largely synonymous with government. Communism would have a government, complete with elections and representatives, without a state, hence me bolding Engels when he says "The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the processes of production." You cannot direct the processes of production without, you know, directing production.

        Moreover, corruption likely will never fully go away, but it will be minimized over time, certainly in comparison to modern Capitalism, and even early Socialism. Communism isn’t some Utopia free from any worry or problem, and Marxists are the first to point this out.

        source