Remix.run Logo
Atlas667 a day ago

Im the person he replied to, check this:

"So long as the state exists there is no freedom. When there is freedom, there will be no state."

Lenin, The State and Revolution (1917)

So, the goal is that the people must become the state directly and dissolve the divide.

And so representative systems are necessary, as you say. And representative systems are not inherently bad.

What makes them bad is the other parts of society that allow a small group of people to take advantage of representative systems.

That small group is the capitalist class. Their control of production, and their profits give them a front row with the state.

Representation is all about context.

In order for the people (AKA literally everybody) to become the state we must undo that power imbalance and let people control production themselves.

lazide a day ago | parent [-]

This is just a restatement of the same non-answer. The ‘steel foundry in every village’ of Maoism didn’t change anything either. Well, it kind of did by causing mass starvation.

How do you propose this would actually work?

Atlas667 20 hours ago | parent [-]

Mass starvation was very, very common in that region of Asia. Refer to this link, but of course dig more into them to learn more. Wikipedia is like average-tier knowledge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines_in_China

What is interesting to note is that none of the other famines listed is attributed to ideological systems, just the last one even though monarchy ruled for the longest time. Also there has never been another famine in China since. But, anyways, I am not particularly fond of modern China and their affinities for capitalist production.

> How do you propose this would actually work?

The organization of the masses into our own political force. I dont mean middle class white people, I mean everybody. It literally requires the reorganization of our lives for the creation of mass democracy. It requires proactive participation of all of us that can. It requires physical tools as well as organizational tools. Democracy is something we do, not something that is done for us.

We would eliminate the regional bourgeois-state and replace it with the organized peoples representatives with essentially accounting roles FULLY accountable to regional and neighborhood councils. (blockchain could help manage funds) No more politicians with wealthy connections. No more policy groups deciding what goes on. It would be a council of representatives selected and organized by neighborhood councils whose collective aim would be the control of regional production. No more bourgeois-courts, it would be replaced by a peoples courts.

And you may say "That's what we have now", but it isn't. Your average citizen is so far removed from any democratic action and money has taken such a hold in politics that even voting is totally nullified in our system. That's why we call it bourgeois-democracy. Candidates are just celebrities/performers for their billionaire constituents and average people have ZERO control over candidates and their policies. Policy does not come from the people.

THERE IS NO DEMOCRACY WITHOUT MASS DEMOCRATIC ORGANIZATION.

And the reason that this cannot be taken advantage of within socialism is at the very core of socialism itself: and it is that through revolutionary education, people would learn to spot capitalists and eliminate them from social life. Like a person would stop a thief stealing in your own house. And we're talking about capitalists as a class, not necessarily individuals. No one will be allowed to own production for profits. No one will be allowed to employ other persons for a profit. People would enforce this with an iron fist in order to preserve their own working class power.

Just like if you see slavery you would stop it. Right? In the same way that slavery was extinguished and made unacceptable, so would capitalism. We would halt it as one would halt abuse on a street. If someone is using property to make profit from you they would be jailed as the only way to profit would be through wage theft, meaning paying employees less than what they worked for. Wage theft would be made a serious crime. Unlike today.

This is the "grandiose" check and balance of socialist representative democracy that through the democratization of production we dont allow individuals to leverage production. There shall be no profit-market from production.

We would then start reigning in that production and use production solely for the sake of satisfying needs, not generating private profits. Work would be a right, guaranteed. More workers is only better (except if you're producing for profits). Think about that, capitalism is the only economic system where more workers is worse because for-profit-production cant handle so many workers.

These are just thoughts I have from actually reading communist literature. At least read something. I've read about everything before making up my mind. Its called being intellectually honest.

Read about past revolutions from the perspective of people who were there, not the perspective of ideologues fear-mongering funded by millionaire think tanks. What is also very important to understand is that these 20th century revolutions were never "induced" by communists. They truly did arise from mass discontent, what the communists leaders did was guide the discontent into an organized form through teaching people who didn't even know how to read how to liberate themselves from for-profit-production.

Democracy is not something some dude on the internet writes into a chat box. We will decide on the best way to organize ourselves when the time comes, but private production ALWAYS leads to authoritarianism.

lazide 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Do you think this is how people actually work?

Atlas667 19 hours ago | parent [-]

What do you mean? I'm literally going off of historical realities.

Shit like this actually happened and not even that long ago. It sounds like you've been Americanized in such a way as to see social change impossible.

You've got suburb mentality. The capitalists define your historical progression, even your conception of it.

Authoritarianism follows that mentality.

lazide 15 hours ago | parent [-]

What you wrote literally makes no sense. Word salad. Like what is on the side of Bronner’s soap.

Atlas667 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Maybe to you cause you've never read about actual revolutions.

Like I said, a lot of this actually happened. Its word salad cause you're probably used to reading fiction.

Take the state and distribute its functions across organized neighborhood councils, treat capitalism like a crime, make production satisfy needs not generate profits.

There I condensed it for you.