this person seems to have misunderstood Marx's comments about how capitalism lays the groundwork for socialism, they're expressing it badly but if you restrict this to the primary stage of socialism I could see how they got mixed up
No, because they've made a huge fucking error and equated capital and capitalism. Capital itself is just an economic tool to be wielded, capitalism is a way that the tool is wielded against the working class.
Not under communism, but expropriation of capital and utilization of existing economic structures is a part of the lower stages. Marx mentioned that in the Civil War in France. He missed about the idea of the revolutionaries sizing the treasury and utilizing it to further their goals, but understood that because the commune was a truly proletarian movement they didn't concern themselves with the capital housed there because they had no use for it.
However, the leveraging of that capital would have likely helped them maintain their power in the face of reaction. That's how most AES states have operated since.
Well in lower stage communism/socialism you by definition are not in a Dictatorship of the Bourgois so its understandable that people will call any workers post revoliutionary state construction Dictatorship of the Proletariat cause its ,as a description, true
this person seems to have misunderstood Marx's comments about how capitalism lays the groundwork for socialism, they're expressing it badly but if you restrict this to the primary stage of socialism I could see how they got mixed up
None of what they said is true about lower stage communism either though
No, because they've made a huge fucking error and equated capital and capitalism. Capital itself is just an economic tool to be wielded, capitalism is a way that the tool is wielded against the working class.
Could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that capital, at least in the Marxist sense, doesn't exist under communism
Not under communism, but expropriation of capital and utilization of existing economic structures is a part of the lower stages. Marx mentioned that in the Civil War in France. He missed about the idea of the revolutionaries sizing the treasury and utilizing it to further their goals, but understood that because the commune was a truly proletarian movement they didn't concern themselves with the capital housed there because they had no use for it.
However, the leveraging of that capital would have likely helped them maintain their power in the face of reaction. That's how most AES states have operated since.
DotP =/= lower stage communism though, they're distinct stages
Well in lower stage communism/socialism you by definition are not in a Dictatorship of the Bourgois so its understandable that people will call any workers post revoliutionary state construction Dictatorship of the Proletariat cause its ,as a description, true
If you've reached the point where class no longer exists (i.e. communism), there is no proletariat for there to be a dictatorship of
That's not what the "lower stages of communism" as Marx used the term are though. That's what the higher stages of communism are.
deleted by creator