"Dictatorship of the Proletariat"

[RedOctober]

Of the people hear, how do you interpret the "dictatorship of the proletariat." do you see it as a way to credit Marx as the father of totalitarianism. Such as Stalin and President Johnson did. To help claim that Marx did want a dictatorship. Or...do you see it in a more democratic sense where the proletariat are able to rule their own lives for a change.

I personally dont see Marx in a fascist sense at all. During the time that Marx used that term during 1848 and 1850 he was really down and out and basically didnt care how things went down as long as they did and ended in the dictatorship of the proletariat. but he still meant in a democratic sense. thats how i see it, i was just curious as to how everyone else interpreted this term...considering most people (most i know of) hear of this statement and consider it a totalitarian statement.

[petrel]

In Marx' time "dictator" referred to the Roman republic, where in emergency situations an official (the dictator) might get extraordinary powers for up to six months. So it is temporary. Being on the proletariat, it basically means that the working class remains the ruling class as long as after a succesful revolution there is still antagonism with the overthrown former ruling class.

[T.K.A.-Denmark]

Well dictatorship of the proletariat just means that the proletariat keeps down the bourgiosie to secure the revolution.
Another word for it that i'm more fond of using is workers democracy since many people don't like the taste of the word dictatorship.

[mir]

I interrpret it as a temporary transition stage into communist where the proletariat are the absolute rulers while the bourgeoisie are out of power.  I think this is going to last during the violent class warfare in which the transition period from capitalism into communism is waged.  To sum it up, it is a neccessary period so that the proletariat is not undermined by reactionary elements, but temporary nonetheless.

[ScottMcR]

couldn't have said it any better mir =)

comradely
scott

[djn]

RedOctober,

TKA has it spot on. Dictatorship of the Proletariat = Workers Democracy, which is far more democratic than the sham we have in Western nations today. In fact, liberal capitalist democracy is accurately described as the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie.

[turnoviseous]

http://discussion.newyouth.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133

Here is an old thinking of mine. Hope you can understand it. My point was that workers´ state both is and is not socialist society, and that communist society is not a "workers´ state".

[OUTOFTHENIGHT]

Mir/TKA?Djn have covered the point correctly.At the moment the bourgeoisie rule and dictate under a guise of democracy.They use our vote every few years to justify their position.In no way do they want a vote by the masses to affect their unrelenting drive for profit.Time and time again the capitalist class can do away with voting if it serves their purpose or threatens their position. Counterpose that with dictatorship of the proletariat, complete democratic workers control of the means of production, common ownership under a national/international plan of production, vigorously defended against any re-establishment of capitalism.
Lenin further developed the dictatorship of the proletariat in his work State and Revolution.In no way can the caricature of Stalins dictatorship, later, be connected with this. Unfortunately a lot of mud has stuck and it is up to us to explain the true meaning of Marxism.
Ian

[mir]

But needlessly to say, the dictatorship will not be a permanent one.

[18tir]

I don't think Marx meant dictatorship as the word is used today. I believe in his mind, dictatorship meant whichever class controlled the natural resources, factories, mines ect. In America, the middle classes and upper classes have all the power. So, like djn said, America is being ruled by the dictatorship of the Bourgeoise. A dictatorship of the workers can also be a democracy. It is a state where the workers have all the power.

[OUTOFTHENIGHT]

Yes, Mir.

[the_sociallist]

18tir
  You are kind of right... The power in america lies not in the people that are considered to be the middle and upper class.  But soley in the upper class, owners of big business. Big business lobbys for thier case and usually wins. Politics is all about money, it is not about the interests of the people. And it should be. The dictatorship in the US is held by Corprate America.

[mir]

Well, what I think some of you are saying is that America is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the communist revolution will place a dictatorship of the proletariat.  Now, the former is the rule of the majority by the minority and the latter is the rule of the minority by the majority.  So, are the communists that much more democratic than the capitalists?  Therefore I say, the communists don't wish to physically destroy the bourgeoisie, just the means by which they enslave and exploit us.  Therefore, the dictatorship of the proletariat should not be the last stage of communism but rather the first one, a time when forces of reaction are turned one the movement.

[Miestermatt]

Capitlism is the enmy here, not demcarcy.  Demcary is only bad when mixed with capitilsim.

[mir]

That's what I was saying.  The point is, we can't exchange one form of exploitation for another.  Therefore, the dictatorship has to be a temporary one.