In The State and Revolution, Lenin (and Engels, whom he is quoting) disagrees with communists using “People’s State” or “Free People’s State” as a programme goal.

If I understand correctly, this is because a) it creates a misunderstanding on the final phase of communism, which is stateless and b) it goes against the Marxist understanding of states as forces of oppression. On the other hand, it seems logical to me that a state following the dictatorship of the proletariat principle would call itself “People’s”, since the proletariat is the majority.

So, I’ve been wondering if the existing socialist states have an official line about this, or if there’s a consensus amongst M-Ls.

  • non-diegetic screams@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    9·
    1 year ago

    idk if I’m communicating clearly. I mean there feels like a difference between:

    • Not winning or even being close to winning, and explicitly writing the demand for a “People’s state”.
    • and, Winning and just calling it a People’s state without writing the demand.

    It feels to me like the issue is making an empty call for a “People’s state” a programmatic goal, and not the actual naming bit.

    As a goal it’s pretty meaningless sounding.