CB, you a damn lawyer, why do I have to write this and continuously explain the most elementary understanding of the Marxist approach to the state!!!
^^^ Waistline, I'm willing to discuss this with you but , you know, _on the surface_ at least, your discussion doesn't have the appearance of a clear understanding of what you are "explaining". I'm willing to give you the benefit of a doubt , that you have some significant understanding from your many years of study and direct experience with capitalism from the standpoint of a socialist conscious proletarian. But you've got to give some consideration to my many years of experience as a predominantly mental laborer, writer, etc. Yea, I am a lawyer, and a long time student of materialism, so that means I got some good understanding of the state from Marx, Engels and Lenin's point of view. Lenin's fundamental discussion of the state relies especially upon Engels' anthropological book _The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State_. I'm a lawyer, and a student of anthropology and Marxist political economy and materialism. It was _The State and Revolution_ that was important in bringing me to Marxism. Lenin was a lawyer, etc., etc. So, what is it that you want to explain to me about the state ? And remember. You better come correct. Perhaps we should serialize _The State and Revolution_. Actually, I'm thinking these days the issues Lenin emphasizes in that book, non-electoral path to socialism are significantly turned into their opposite in our concrete circumstance. We might study _The State and Revolution_ to negate its thesis. The Dictatorship of the Proletariat is not the path for the U.S. It is _Imperialism_ and _Leftwing Communism_ that are most pertinent to our "right here, right now" The US state is too loaded for bear, including nukes, and the US population is too stupified with anti-Communism from the Cold War travesty/tragedy to build toward insurrection or a direct "assault" to take the state power. The US cannot be confronted into socialism. It will take a backdoor , bourgeois self-negating route. The capitalists will have to be allowed (as if we had a choice, and can stop them , smile) to take capitalism to such an extreme such that it turns into its opposite, on its own. In other words, the super dictatorship of the bourgeoisie/finance capitalists ( and it is important always to discuss the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie when discussing the dictatorship of the proletariat) will self-negate, turn into its opposite. Rather than the capitalists selling us the rope with which we hang them, we "give" them enough rope to hand themselves. We are seeing that now, as super imperialism is "imploding". Amazingly, it is bourgeois and capitalist journalists , economist intellectuals and high bureaucrats who see "we are all socialists now", want nationalization of the financial monopolies, see Marx as rising from the dead and call on him to save themselves from themselves, redbait themselves, almost begging for socialism. The bourgeois bureaucracy is in a mood for suicide, expropriating itself. Marx in "The Historical Tendency of the Capitalist Mode of Production" chapter of _Capital_ , and _Imperialism_ note how the monopoly-centralization-one capitalist kills many of capitalism is preparation for socialism. Emphaisis on discussion of the government function of the state is part of the anti-thesis of that of _The State and Revolution_. Rather than elections only being a measure of the maturity of the working class, they are where its at for, including going into the Democratic Party, that most despised proposition on the childish Left. That's a main lesson of the Obama tactic. More later _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
