• алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    I don’t think it’s rude and I appreciate a good faith discussion.

    Although I think there has been a misunderstanding, it never was about seizing or appropriating the bourgeois state and it’s bureaucracy, which brings with it all the problems you mentioned (which in turn is why Marxists despise reformists BTW, because they believe they can magically wrestle control of the bourgeois state apparatus and peacuflly convince the ruling class of socialism).
    It’s about destroying it and then – as a necessity against global capitalism encirclement – building a proletarian state to resist and oppress the bourgeoisie.
    Marxism has the global POV of wiping capitalism off the face of the earth, and thus is willing to use the necessary means to achieve that end.

    I agree that one must be cautious when building a worker’s state, one must learn from history to prevent the same mistakes as made in the past (though a lot of them arose from historical conditions), which is why I find the analyses of “degenerated/deformed workers state” to be vital.

    I must apologise that I don’t have the necessary energy to continue this discussion further, but I believe ComradeSharkfucker made a good comment in this thread regarding the topic.