Marx’s idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is not a literal dictatorship, despite what tankies attempt to peddle. Marx posits that a worker’s democracy is a dictatorship of the proletariat in the same way that he regarded the democracies of his period - which largely lacked even such basic democratic ideas as universal suffrage - as dictatorships of the bourgeoisie.
Well of course it isn’t (a real dictatorship). I just tried to get a point through to someone thinking democracy and communism is somewhat the same thing. I just hate those people trying to conflate a good thing with their favourite thing. I didn’t even judge them.
Communism (here meaning both the end-stage of communism and the intermediate stages of socialism), as envisioned by Marx and most non-authoritarian leftist writers, is, inherently, meant as a democratic society. All communist societies (according to an ideal form, if not necessarily practice) are democratic, but not all democratic societies are communist. Does that make sense?
It might make sense for you, but democracy isn’t the end goal of communism (the theoretical good one)! Where on earth does that idea come from?
I mean think up one that does, like some sort of more aggressive social democracy why not, but the Marxs communism isn’t ending in birds singing and a democracy. That is just not true. Except if you think communism in some twisted way “is” democracy, but if you do so you have reinvented the meaning of the definitions.
You were told democracy is bad by the people who said communism is good.
See, it’s easy!
Not for nothing buddy but democracy and communism are not opposites.
They are not opposites nor are they compatible. Maybe you think social democracy as a kind of communism?
No it’s just that communism as defined is about democracy. Maybe you’re confusing communism with tankies?
Communism is autocratic, it’s the dictatorship of the workers. Democracy is the dictatorship of the majority.
Saying communism and democracy are the same is just not correct and I suggest you are just trolling. Apples and oranges are not the same either.
Marx’s idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is not a literal dictatorship, despite what tankies attempt to peddle. Marx posits that a worker’s democracy is a dictatorship of the proletariat in the same way that he regarded the democracies of his period - which largely lacked even such basic democratic ideas as universal suffrage - as dictatorships of the bourgeoisie.
Well of course it isn’t (a real dictatorship). I just tried to get a point through to someone thinking democracy and communism is somewhat the same thing. I just hate those people trying to conflate a good thing with their favourite thing. I didn’t even judge them.
🤷🏼♀️
Communism (here meaning both the end-stage of communism and the intermediate stages of socialism), as envisioned by Marx and most non-authoritarian leftist writers, is, inherently, meant as a democratic society. All communist societies (according to an ideal form, if not necessarily practice) are democratic, but not all democratic societies are communist. Does that make sense?
It might make sense for you, but democracy isn’t the end goal of communism (the theoretical good one)! Where on earth does that idea come from?
I mean think up one that does, like some sort of more aggressive social democracy why not, but the Marxs communism isn’t ending in birds singing and a democracy. That is just not true. Except if you think communism in some twisted way “is” democracy, but if you do so you have reinvented the meaning of the definitions.
deleted by creator
The workers are the majority.
But not elected.
… who exactly are you supposing should elect the majority? The minority? The wealthy elite?
Wow.
If only workers can vote, guess you’re okay with non workers being left out. Nice.