from the patsoc dipshit from the barista thread
:lmayo: :amerikkka:
Hmm… There are Nations, and then there are States, and there are also valid Non-National social groupings. It would be folly to confuse all three.
The current state must be changed, but not destroyed. The nation can live once that is done.
Once the bourgeois no longer have control of society the society doesn’t have to change any further unless through the will of the people.
The current state must be changed, but not destroyed…
Once the bourgeois no longer have control of society the society doesn’t have to change any further…
I’m not sure that either of those things work that way, tbh.
To be in conflict with Capitalism is to be in conflict with the Bourgeois State; to refuse to destroy an opponent in conflict is to ensure one’s own defeat.
The removal of the ruling class from power necessarily opens the proverbial floodgates to waves of social change such that the resulting society may not look at all like the one which preceded it.
The current state must be changed, but not destroyed.
“Both Britain and America, the biggest and the last representatives — in the whole world — of Anglo-Saxon ‘liberty’, in the sense that they had no militarist cliques and bureaucracy, have completely sunk into the all-European filthy, bloody morass of bureaucratic-military institutions which subordinate everything to themselves, and suppress everything. Today, in Britain and America, too, ‘the precondition for every real people’s revolution’ is the smashing, the destruction of the ‘ready-made state machinery’.”
Read State and Revolution.
