Like I think a central state is needed for the first phase of the revolution, but the more brutal aspects is something I just don’t want to do, even if I understand why they did them?
I always wonder why we try to directly apply the theory from 50-150 years ago to our situation when that theory arose in drastically different circumstances than ours.
If we want to do communism in the US, wouldn’t we need to develop theory over the course of decades like the Europeans did?
69 years after the Manifesto the October revolution happened. That’s quite a bit of time and space for something to develop.
What’s the argument about going backward in the development of old theory until we reach a point that applies to us and continue from there? I think we would have better arguments at least.
To actually read and understand that theory means to do so. Theory isn’t dogma and shouldn’t be treated as such. It should be treated as valuable analysis and experience, and as a framework, but a key aspect of Marxism is responding to material conditions and continuing to develop theory that is applicable to the present circumstances. That’s what Lenin did, that’s what Mao did, and we don’t stop with them.
