This is a "deeper" reason theoreticaly but historicaly it has been much simpler than that. There was no point during the lifespan of any state born by a communist/socialist revolution where not having a state (or even being further down the line of the "withering away") was preferable, feasible or reconsilable with the projects own existance having to continue, survive and be guaranteed. I cant really see the fact that the state didnt wither away in the USSR/DPRK/Cuba/China or wherever as a strong counterargument against the general concept of the withering away of the state if i cant see how ,in the enviroment they existed, that withering away could in any way naturaly happen . Or even if it was "forced" to happen by the party (which we shouldnt do, its un-marxist) that it would have been a correct and benefitial choice. So i cant even begin to attribute the non withering away of the state to maybe that "deeper reason" you stated being determinal since i dont see it as ever being in the forefront of impact on the existance or not of the state for these historical projects
Thats not to say that there was room for those projects to be less centralized or more localy democratic and less bureaocratized. There was (a lot in some cases) and should have been persued within their calculated risks. But the "withering away of the state" is another dimension entirely
And the entire crux i feel is whether or not you believe that the state in any large scale progect should or would wither away when that project came into existance and had to survive and progress in a world were capitalism and imperialism are by far the dominant forces on almost all aspects and hostile to you, forcing you to defend and catch up(your starting point being garbage) as vital goals of your existance. And that once that contradiction is lessened or resolved to a large enough degree then a comprehensive withering away of the state can naturaly happen or be observed. Thats where im coming from so im still very unconvinced of interpreting past experiments as showing us a "state power’s main function is reciprocating itself, it ain’t withering away." conclusion. They didnt get a chance to do that in their own merrit
Couldn't agree more, you ever hear of Wing Walking? Well the first rule is to never ever let go until you have something else to hold on to, otherwise you'd die
The revolutionaries of the past didn't have anything else to hold on to, but we do and creating a portal to that dimension you described suddenly doesn't seem like science fiction like it did in 1930
This is a "deeper" reason theoreticaly but historicaly it has been much simpler than that. There was no point during the lifespan of any state born by a communist/socialist revolution where not having a state (or even being further down the line of the "withering away") was preferable, feasible or reconsilable with the projects own existance having to continue, survive and be guaranteed. I cant really see the fact that the state didnt wither away in the USSR/DPRK/Cuba/China or wherever as a strong counterargument against the general concept of the withering away of the state if i cant see how ,in the enviroment they existed, that withering away could in any way naturaly happen . Or even if it was "forced" to happen by the party (which we shouldnt do, its un-marxist) that it would have been a correct and benefitial choice. So i cant even begin to attribute the non withering away of the state to maybe that "deeper reason" you stated being determinal since i dont see it as ever being in the forefront of impact on the existance or not of the state for these historical projects
Thats not to say that there was room for those projects to be less centralized or more localy democratic and less bureaocratized. There was (a lot in some cases) and should have been persued within their calculated risks. But the "withering away of the state" is another dimension entirely
And the entire crux i feel is whether or not you believe that the state in any large scale progect should or would wither away when that project came into existance and had to survive and progress in a world were capitalism and imperialism are by far the dominant forces on almost all aspects and hostile to you, forcing you to defend and catch up(your starting point being garbage) as vital goals of your existance. And that once that contradiction is lessened or resolved to a large enough degree then a comprehensive withering away of the state can naturaly happen or be observed. Thats where im coming from so im still very unconvinced of interpreting past experiments as showing us a "state power’s main function is reciprocating itself, it ain’t withering away." conclusion. They didnt get a chance to do that in their own merrit
Couldn't agree more, you ever hear of Wing Walking? Well the first rule is to never ever let go until you have something else to hold on to, otherwise you'd die
The revolutionaries of the past didn't have anything else to hold on to, but we do and creating a portal to that dimension you described suddenly doesn't seem like science fiction like it did in 1930