• Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Without democracy, you simply create a new ruling class. Workers had no say in the Soviet Union, even less than they had in the US back then.

    • Honse@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Yes but the alternative is no democracy. Democracy is falwed even when operating correctly, but it the greatest equalizing tool humanity has ever invented, and Marx recognized it

    • HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Marx loved democracy. He viewed it as the most stable path to communism.

      We’re seeing this play out more and more in Scandinavia.

      Its never been observed in any self proclaimed communist nation with an authoritarian state. Probably because authoritarianism is antithetical to the principles of communism.

    • PugJesus@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Nothing more threatening to the power of the proletariat than [checks notes] the proletariat voting.

      Like, if we managed to implement a legit socialist state by our current state of bourgeois democracy, as unlikely as that is, the chance of capitalists just ‘returning’ because people vote in a semi-screwed system is pretty fucking unlikely

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Why would it be unlikely every society is going to experience tragedies and down turns. Just then need a strong man backed by a bunch of money. Also think about it. Actually making everyone OK DOES actually cost money. That means that at least some extra taxes are taken from regular people to ensure that those less fortunate or less intelligent or capable are taken care of.

        This means there is legit cause for 50%+ of the population to grumble. If everyone is insane to imagine themselves a billionaire most can easily imagine themselves in the top half who would have more if they didn’t have to support those insert negative stereotype here.

        This is ultimately an insane complaint because ultimately a re-alignment back towards today would involve taking far more from the common man to give to the rich than returning what is taken from the common man and the vast majority would be worse off but the average person is a moron.

        • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          This means there is legit cause for 50%+ of the population to grumble.

          Should the government not be ran according to the consent of the governed? The solution is not less democracy.

          • stickly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            No no no you just don’t get it: a rational dialect-materialist examination of civilization proves that our social and economic development is constantly evolving due to unshakable opposing forces.

            But if we throw all that away and install a Red Proletariat© government then everything somehow collapses into a happy representative system that is totally stable and can never change. Don’t ask any more questions or you’re a counter-revolutionary.