What I did that was new was to prove: (1) that the existence of classes is only bound up with particular historical phases in the development of production (historische Entwicklungsphasen der Production), (2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat,[1] (3) that this dictatorship itself only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society .
And of course so was Lenin, decrying “Bernsteinism”:
Denied was the fact of growing impoverishment, the process of proletarisation, and the intensification of capitalist contradictions; the very concept, “ultimate aim”, was declared to be unsound, and the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat was completely rejected. Denied was the antithesis in principle between liberalism and socialism. Denied was the theory of the class struggle, on the alleged grounds that it could not be applied to a strictly democratic society governed according to the will of the majority, etc.
I don’t even get ypur objection here. Are you implying Marx did not call for DOTP or are you claiming I wasn’t sufficiently clear about saying Marx also called for DOTP? My point was that both call for DOTP but Lenin’s version of it was the only one that was realized, that it turned out to be rather brutal, and that tankies (like you just did!) don’t even distance themselves from it but embrace it. Which was the entire point in the OP.
Sorry. I made a typo and have just corrected it. Yes, it looked like you were saying that only MLism called for a DotP.
The idea that implementing a DotP was brutal is a narrative. Brutal compared to what, is the question. Because what all of those revolutions have in common is that the ruling class was already extremely brutal. The DotP reversed the brutality and made it very obvious to people because it wasn’t interested in masking it. But the reality is that all the DotPs saved more people than it killed.
Obviously? Here it is, right from the horse’s mouth:
And of course so was Lenin, decrying “Bernsteinism”:
I don’t even get ypur objection here. Are you implying Marx did not call for DOTP or are you claiming I wasn’t sufficiently clear about saying Marx also called for DOTP? My point was that both call for DOTP but Lenin’s version of it was the only one that was realized, that it turned out to be rather brutal, and that tankies (like you just did!) don’t even distance themselves from it but embrace it. Which was the entire point in the OP.
Sorry. I made a typo and have just corrected it. Yes, it looked like you were saying that only MLism called for a DotP.
The idea that implementing a DotP was brutal is a narrative. Brutal compared to what, is the question. Because what all of those revolutions have in common is that the ruling class was already extremely brutal. The DotP reversed the brutality and made it very obvious to people because it wasn’t interested in masking it. But the reality is that all the DotPs saved more people than it killed.