Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 18:54 CST From: Scott Marshall <Scott-AT-rednet.org> Subject: Re: State and Revolution Barkley Rosser: > The results of the Bolshevik coup d'etat were neither >universal suffrage nor the replacement of the state by a >commune. It was the dictatorship by a small "vanguard" group >and I defy anybody on this list to find anything in Marx or >Engels that would support what Lenin and his cohorts did in Russia. Scott: Since I can't agree with your discription of what happened in 1917 I can't respond directly to your challenge. But it is clear that neither Marx, Engels, nor Lenin meant that dictatorship of the proletariat meant extending universal sufferage to the class enemy, not in the Commune nor in any other workers state. It is also clear in their writing that they held that the dictatorship of the proletariat was *expressly* to repress and supress the capitalist class and to stop, with force if nessesary, any action by the capitalist class or it's supporters to effect counter-revolution against the workers state. To use your example, Kerensky openly allied himself with those, including foreign powers who took action to promote and carry out a civil war to overthrow Soviet power, while Lenin, the Bolsheviks, the Soviets (made up of many different political trends) and the overwhelming bulk of the working class took steps to preserve the revolution - dictatorship of the proletariat in word not just theory - which Marx and Engels would have both supported. Would they have agreed with every measure? I doubt it. Marx was a severe critic of the efforts of the Paris workers to press the commune, but once they began the fight, he gave it his all. --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005