Correct! We are discussing the means, and if the means are justified. This is where I disagree with the direction Lenin wants us to take, by creating a vanguard to lead on the behalf of the proleteriat.
Might not be your intention but you’re making a very benign concept that is essentially a necessity at any sort of scale (representative democracy) sound quite ominous. For any organisation of groups beyond a few people everyone voting on everything is simply unfeasible.
This is not even to get into the weeds of the uneven development of class consciousness, etc.
Collecting 100’s of millions to billions of votes for every little decision is absolutely unfeasible. Even if the act of voting itself was instant the time lag for everyone to get informed to the degree they feel comfortable and then get around to voting alone would make it unworkable. There’s a reason even movements like the Zapatistas end up shifting towards some version of councils/representatives.
They were/are Socialist. Communism is an end stage that can only be achieved once the class struggle has been overcome on a global scale. Unfortunately since no button exists to make this happen instantly and perfectly a transitional period is necessary, and the most successful/best answer that has been put forth thus far on how to implement this is the proletarian state. This is what tankies (and communists more generally understand/believe).
Not all the communists are tankies but all the tankies are communist.
The difference is where you believe the power should be concentrated.
I believe in a stateless system and that any system with a state is not communism.
Congratulations you believe the exact same thing as tankies in that regard.
Correct! We are discussing the means, and if the means are justified. This is where I disagree with the direction Lenin wants us to take, by creating a vanguard to lead on the behalf of the proleteriat.
Might not be your intention but you’re making a very benign concept that is essentially a necessity at any sort of scale (representative democracy) sound quite ominous. For any organisation of groups beyond a few people everyone voting on everything is simply unfeasible.
This is not even to get into the weeds of the uneven development of class consciousness, etc.
It’s actually not unfeasible nowadays. Maybe back then.
Collecting 100’s of millions to billions of votes for every little decision is absolutely unfeasible. Even if the act of voting itself was instant the time lag for everyone to get informed to the degree they feel comfortable and then get around to voting alone would make it unworkable. There’s a reason even movements like the Zapatistas end up shifting towards some version of councils/representatives.
So we all agree that China and the USSR have never come close to communism, correct?
They were/are Socialist. Communism is an end stage that can only be achieved once the class struggle has been overcome on a global scale. Unfortunately since no button exists to make this happen instantly and perfectly a transitional period is necessary, and the most successful/best answer that has been put forth thus far on how to implement this is the proletarian state. This is what tankies (and communists more generally understand/believe).