Part of the reason past Marxist movements “fell” to authoritarianism is because the revolution was led by a charismatic political leader and not the working class. Also the US and other capitalist nations have usurped Marxist movements around the globe, installing pro-capitalist dictators. - ThreadSky

resisticat.bsky.social • 114 days ago

Part of the reason past Marxist movements “fell” to authoritarianism is because the revolution was led by a charismatic political leader and not the working class. Also the US and other capitalist nations have usurped Marxist movements around the globe, installing pro-capitalist dictators.

Comments

resisticat.bsky.social•114 days ago

Dictators like Stalin and Mao co-opted Marxist ideology to garner support from the public, but their governments weren’t actually communist or socialist because Marxism requires a classless, stateless, decentralized form of government controlled by the people, not a political leader.

sourbimmer.bsky.social•114 days ago

Ideally, of course. But at that point it is just anarchy because people don’t inherently act in the interest of the group. We are inherently selfish beings. I’m not for political parties or leaders but democratic government is important. Human psychology does not mesh with the end game unfortunately

resisticat.bsky.social•114 days ago

A decentralized government doesn’t mean anarchy. What I mean by that, and what Marx described, is a community-based system of government controlled by the people through direct democracy. There can still be law and order. Capitalism breeds greed via the profit motive. Marxism is anti-profit motive.

sourbimmer.bsky.social•114 days ago

My only concern about direct democracy is the populations knowledge base, but honestly basically anything is better than the direction we’re heading in right now. I’m hopeful about our chances of getting through without violence, but not optimistic.

sourbimmer.bsky.social•114 days ago

The capitalist nations usurping is a given. The charismatic leader part though is (I’d argue) part of the human psychology problem I mentioned before. A movement/group is much easier to get behind and much more organized when you do have some consolidation of power.

resisticat.bsky.social•114 days ago

The key distinction is that this time there is no sole leader. The people are organizing the movement together. In this global digital age, we don’t necessarily need a leader to succeed because our ability to collectively participate in and quickly mobilize a grassroots movement is unprecedented.

sourbimmer.bsky.social•114 days ago

It is important to note that their is still hierarchy in these movements though, which is what I was getting at

resisticat.bsky.social•114 days ago

If you haven’t already, I highly recommend reading The Communist Manifesto. It gives a great explanation of Marxist Theory in a relatively short format and much of it’s content is prescient.

sourbimmer.bsky.social•114 days ago

I’ve actually been meaning to! I’ve been reading John Dewey recently. He’s a liberal thinker from the post reconstruction/WW1 era that puts a lot of emphasis on economic inequality. I’m getting there, I just wish there was more time.

resisticat.bsky.social•114 days ago

Yes, but the working class are largely doing the organizing this time. Abolishment of class hierarchy is a gradual process, but the global collapse of capitalism and the climate crisis are aiding in the transition.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply