State and Revolution

What Hacker News says

1. cmrdporcupineApr 2024
   That's not even in Leninism, no. Read Lenin's "State & Revolution" and you will definitely come away with a different impression -- he speaks openly about the abolition of the authoritarian state and a radical democracy... just not a parliamentary one.

   Though clearly what happened in the USSR in the 20s was something different from what he wrote. What you saw in Russia in that period was a response to an ongoing civil war, followed by the rise of Stalin.. who, yes, really did believe in brutal authoritarianism.

   All these Stalinist states (and I would classify China this way too) will pay lip service to Leninism as a way to seek ideological legitimacy. But their "official" readings of Marx and Lenin are very... creative... shall we say.

   But it's 1:30am and I should no be getting into this argument.

   Show morethread
2. vidarhJan 2022
   Marx argued the state inherently would cease to serve a purpose and would "wither away" (the term itself is from Engels who argued it was based on Marx writings) once class antagonisms no longer exist, so I don't think there's much basis for the idea he believed in "command and control" other than at most in a transition. Ironically given his authoritarianism, Lenins The State and Revolution is one of the best summaries of Marx' criticism of the state, and even Lenin plaid lip-service to the notion of the withering away of the state to the point of arguing for an eventual society without a state.

   The core distinction between Marxists and many forms of Anarchists, as early as during the dispute in the First International between Bukharin and Marx, was their view not on the long term dismantling of the state - where they agreed - but the role of the state in the transition from capitalism to socialism, where the anarchists wanted the state dismantled immediately, while Marx argued the state could serve a role in a transition, itself becoming a tool to execute the changes necessary to change society.

   In his works on the Paris Commune he explicitly criticised the Communards for failing to take the next step and destroy the bourgeois state. While that could certainly have been replaced with a proposed federation, a key distinction was that he celebrated the bottom up delegation of authority, which is hardly compatible with "command and control" if any part can withdraw.

   As such, libertarian Marxism directly opposed to the very existence of a state became a thing, based in large part on his writings on the Paris Commune.

   Show morethread
3. tehjokerSep 2020
   Like others have said, "The Communist Manifesto" is the easiest entry point. My copy also has "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte" which some say is the work most descriptive of the US today. "The State and Revolution" by Lenin is a relatively easy and enlightening read as he talks about the nature of the capitalist state, the police, and other topics. "Reform or Revolution" by Rosa Luxemburg is also clarifying as it talks about why reformists have lost the thread. However, there are also many many many leftist podcasts you can listen to that can be easier to digest and will get you the basics, so that way when you read the original works later you have a baseline of understanding.

   Capital is a doorstop, but I have heard that past chapter one which talks about the labor theory of value, the reading is much more breezy.

   However, while some of these books are dense, even rural peasants have been able to read and metabolize these books, so don't despair!

   Show morethread
4. horsemessiahJul 2020
   State and Revolution is where I'd recommend people start for ML ;)
   thread
5. hybridsOct 2019
   Socialism is not "the state doing things" or "state intervention" or "state ownership." Of course these can be aspects of an implementation of socialism, but they are not socialism in itself - the "how" and "why" actually matters. This is a conflation that historically came to prominence during the Cold War to make the difference between capitalism and socialism "digestible." Even young modern socialists believe this now, no longer understanding socialism as a historical tendency towards emancipation, which attests to the current pitiful state of the Left.

   You want actual evidence of what actual major socialist thinkers thought of the state during the time when socialism was most relevant, read Marx's 18th Brumaire or read Lenin's State and Revolution and come to your own conclusions.

   Show morethread
6. Sag0Sag0Sep 2019
   The State and Revolution - Lenin
   thread