• zeal0telite [he/him,they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    The current state must be changed, but not destroyed. The nation can live once that is done.

    Once the bourgeois no longer have control of society the society doesn't have to change any further unless through the will of the people.

    • SadStruggle92 [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      The current state must be changed, but not destroyed...

      Once the bourgeois no longer have control of society the society doesn’t have to change any further...

      I'm not sure that either of those things work that way, tbh.

      To be in conflict with Capitalism is to be in conflict with the Bourgeois State; to refuse to destroy an opponent in conflict is to ensure one's own defeat.

      The removal of the ruling class from power necessarily opens the proverbial floodgates to waves of social change such that the resulting society may not look at all like the one which preceded it.

      • zeal0telite [he/him,they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        When I say "the state" I mean it's apparatuses and such. Definitely not the people who ran it into the ground in the first place.

        I don't think the structures themselves are awful, but bourgeois influence certainly is.

    • TyMan210 [he/him, comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      The current state must be changed, but not destroyed.

      "Both Britain and America, the biggest and the last representatives — in the whole world — of Anglo-Saxon 'liberty', in the sense that they had no militarist cliques and bureaucracy, have completely sunk into the all-European filthy, bloody morass of bureaucratic-military institutions which subordinate everything to themselves, and suppress everything. Today, in Britain and America, too, 'the precondition for every real people's revolution' is the smashing, the destruction of the 'ready-made state machinery'."

      Read State and Revolution.