• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 days ago

    All socialist states will have to use authority, though, in order to disempower capitalists and fascists, and protect the gains of the revolution. Capitalists will see this as authoritarian, but it’s also liberating for the working classes. States don’t just wield power for the sake of it, they are thoroughly connected to class struggle and as such class analysis needs to be at the core of understanding authority.

    • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 days ago

      well sry i dont know what i mean. I mean authoriatarianism as in, using the power of the state and laws and whatever to keep a select few in power, who are above the laws, while also using the power of the state to fullfill whatever intrestest some group of people have.

      like a dicatorship or a kingdom

      while i dont mean like democratic authority (whitout it beeing opression/ more then nessasary opressing)

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Okay, sure, but we aren’t talking about capitalism but existing/formerly existing socialist states like the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc. That doesn’t apply to those.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            It was a dictatorship of the proletariat, ie the proletariat was in control and oppressed capitalists. For the working classes, ie the proletariat and the peasantry, it was a dramatic expansion in democratization, and society was oriented around fulfilling their needs. The gap between the richest and poorest was about ten times, compared to the hundreds of thousands to millions in the Tsarist and capitalist eras.