|
Post by negativecreep on Aug 24, 2012 18:12:44 GMT -5
I haven't made much of a study on the classes in the USSR. But from what I can see, he was partially correct. I believe there weren't classes (the bourgeoisie had been basically eliminated), but the bourgeois-ideology was still alive. This can be blamed on a few things, but I think this was mostly because of them still being in a world with capitalists. So basically, the fight against bourgeoi or capitalists-ideology was still needed, this was done of course. Unfortunately the counter-revolutionaries still were able to get to power.
|
|
|
Post by Dawn of the Red on Aug 26, 2012 13:09:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Dawn of the Red on Aug 26, 2012 13:38:29 GMT -5
I haven't made much of a study on the classes in the USSR. But from what I can see, he was partially correct. I believe there weren't classes (the bourgeoisie had been basically eliminated), but the bourgeois-ideology was still alive. This can be blamed on a few things, but I think this was mostly because of them still being in a world with capitalists. So basically, the fight against bourgeoi or capitalists-ideology was still needed, this was done of course. Unfortunately the counter-revolutionaries still were able to get to power. "For socialism is merely the next step forward from state-capitalist monopoly. Or, in other words, socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people and has to that extent ceased to be capitalist monopoly." - Lenin, 1917 (The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat It). Note how Lenin describes socialism here. In Marxism, classes are defined according to their relationships to the means of production. Lenin's definition implies that the first stages of socialism will have state capitalists who serve the interests of the whole people, which makes them socialists. So indeed, according to their relationship to the means of production, bureaucrats within the communist party were state capitalists in the Marxist sense. They were a different class, and became counter-revolutionary when they stopped working for the whole people.
|
|
|
Post by returnofthered on Oct 28, 2012 15:52:59 GMT -5
I haven't made much of a study on the classes in the USSR. But from what I can see, he was partially correct. I believe there weren't classes (the bourgeoisie had been basically eliminated), but the bourgeois-ideology was still alive. This can be blamed on a few things, but I think this was mostly because of them still being in a world with capitalists. So basically, the fight against bourgeoi or capitalists-ideology was still needed, this was done of course. Unfortunately the counter-revolutionaries still were able to get to power. "For socialism is merely the next step forward from state-capitalist monopoly. Or, in other words, socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people and has to that extent ceased to be capitalist monopoly." - Lenin, 1917 (The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat It). Note how Lenin describes socialism here. In Marxism, classes are defined according to their relationships to the means of production. Lenin's definition implies that the first stages of socialism will have state capitalists who serve the interests of the whole people, which makes them socialists. So indeed, according to their relationship to the means of production, bureaucrats within the communist party were state capitalists in the Marxist sense. They were a different class, and became counter-revolutionary when they stopped working for the whole people. Amadeo Bordiga didn't believe in state-capitalism at all. According to him it's just heavily monopolized capitalism, implying there are still capitalists. The workers had nothing to say, so they were being ruled. This entails the existence of classes.
|
|
|
Post by liebknecht on Oct 30, 2012 13:07:55 GMT -5
Bordiga carried the legacy of Marx in recognizing that a society is characterized by its infrastructure. Any society that preserves the capitalist relations of production is capitalist.
|
|