3 ms·

Communism in the formal sense, which is Marxist socialism or one of its offshoots, requires state control by definition. It can't be a "true scotsman" unless it

Communism in the formal sense, which is Marxist socialism or one of its offshoots, requires state control by definition. It can't be a "true scotsman" unless it's a dictatorship. Communist theory does not allow for democratic socialism, because it proposes real "democracy" is the "dictatorship of the proletariat", Marx's words.

paradoja 13y ago
Nope. The dictatorship of the proletariat is not communism. Not even for Marx. It is the state before communism, in which the proletariat makes changes in society so that communism may take place.
- cynicalkane 13y ago
  Nice try, but I explicitly stated I was talking about Marxist-style socialism, which is what 'communism' has come to mean. I almost never see people talk about "real" Marxist communism anyway.
  - paradoja 13y ago
    You explicitly said "Communism in the formal sense". You were wrong with that. Most ideologies and political or economic ideas have had their names subverted to mean something different by opponents (democracy, republicanism, communism, anarchism, capitalism...). That doesn't mean that if you speak in the "formal sense" you can decide to use whatever meaning you prefer.
moocowduckquack 13y ago
Which communist theory? There are now as many communist theories as there are variations on the People's Front of Judea from Life of Brian and many of them explicitly reject state control and are closer to US libertarianism than either side would really care to admit. edit - adding 'in the formal sense' to your post doesn't really change things. Formally, communism is supposed to be a developing theory, which is part of the reason for Marx famously saying that he wasn't a Marxist. Formally, communist theory, as envisioned by Marx, was never meant to be frozen as dogma, but rather relentlessly self-critical. Whether he was right or not is a seperate issue, but you are seriously misrepresenting his ideas.
steveklabnik 13y ago
You misunderstand what 'dictatorship' means in that context. The word didn't have the same connotation it has today. Specifically, capitalism is the 'dictatorship of the bourguise,' so it needs to be counteracted by a dictatorship of the proletariat. Within the governing body, democratic councils run things. To draw a parallel to today's concept of 'dictatorship,' think of it this way: one class has absolute, total rule of things. But a class is made up of many people...

paradoja 13y ago

Nope. The dictatorship of the proletariat is not communism. Not even for Marx. It is the state before communism, in which the proletariat makes changes in society so that communism may take place.

cynicalkane 13y ago
Nice try, but I explicitly stated I was talking about Marxist-style socialism, which is what 'communism' has come to mean. I almost never see people talk about "real" Marxist communism anyway.
- paradoja 13y ago
  You explicitly said "Communism in the formal sense". You were wrong with that. Most ideologies and political or economic ideas have had their names subverted to mean something different by opponents (democracy, republicanism, communism, anarchism, capitalism...). That doesn't mean that if you speak in the "formal sense" you can decide to use whatever meaning you prefer.

moocowduckquack 13y ago

Which communist theory? There are now as many communist theories as there are variations on the People's Front of Judea from Life of Brian and many of them explicitly reject state control and are closer to US libertarianism than either side would really care to admit. edit - adding 'in the formal sense' to your post doesn't really change things. Formally, communism is supposed to be a developing theory, which is part of the reason for Marx famously saying that he wasn't a Marxist. Formally, communist theory, as envisioned by Marx, was never meant to be frozen as dogma, but rather relentlessly self-critical. Whether he was right or not is a seperate issue, but you are seriously misrepresenting his ideas.

steveklabnik 13y ago

You misunderstand what 'dictatorship' means in that context. The word didn't have the same connotation it has today. Specifically, capitalism is the 'dictatorship of the bourguise,' so it needs to be counteracted by a dictatorship of the proletariat. Within the governing body, democratic councils run things. To draw a parallel to today's concept of 'dictatorship,' think of it this way: one class has absolute, total rule of things. But a class is made up of many people...