The DPRK has the working classes in charge of the state, with public ownership as the principal aspect of the economy. As long as these remain true, and there are no underlying problems of the character that can overturn those, simply continuing to develop industry and infrastructure is working towards communism. I don’t see anything major upsetting this in the future.
Isn’t that a bit of a tautology? If working class ownership is desired only as a means to communism, and communism is assumed to be the eventual result of working class ownership, you would never be able to falsify your theory.
I don’t see what you mean. The path to communism, ie a fully collectivized system of production and distribution based on a common plan, devoid of classes and the state, requires building that. To build that, the working classes need to stitch together all production and distribution through socialism, and continue to erode the basis of class struggle. This requires political control by a working class state. The path to steam is heating water, eventually water boils when you keep heating it. You can spill the pot or turn off the heat, but that’s a disruption in the current path.
Totally, but I might also expect to see continued development toward the disillusion of class and state. Simply industrializing doesn’t give me much hope on its own.
The state will cease to be when class does as the state is simply the instrument of class rule.
When the state ceases to be the government remains as administration and coordination is necessary for modern production.
When the state ceases to be and socialism has reached its end goal that is called communism and is impossible in one country as the antagonism between the proletariat and international bourgeoisie remain. Then so does class society.
Class dissolves alongside collectivization of production and distribution. The DPRK is one of the farthest along in this regard. The state is a product of class struggle, and dissolves when class has been.
What do you believe class is? If ownership of industry and its control is all owned by the same class, and everyone belongs to the same class, then there is no class as such and class struggle dissolves.
I really am just concerned about whether collective ownership is really achieved. Something can look collectivized just because it is controlled by the state, but without a radical democratic apparatus you will never see the dissolution of class.
Comrade Bordiga limits himself to upholding a cautious position on all the questions raised by the Left. He doesn’t say: the International poses and resolves such and such a question in this way, but the Left will instead pose and resolve it this other way. He instead says: the way the International poses and resolves problems doesn’t convince me; I fear they might slip into opportunism; there are insufficient guarantees against this; etc. His position, then, is one of permanent suspicion and doubt. In this way the position of the “Left” is purely negative: they express reservations without specifying them in a concrete form, and above all without indicating in concrete form their own point of view and their solutions. They end up spreading doubt and distrust without offering anything constructive.
The DPRK has the working classes in charge of the state, with public ownership as the principal aspect of the economy. As long as these remain true, and there are no underlying problems of the character that can overturn those, simply continuing to develop industry and infrastructure is working towards communism. I don’t see anything major upsetting this in the future.
Isn’t that a bit of a tautology? If working class ownership is desired only as a means to communism, and communism is assumed to be the eventual result of working class ownership, you would never be able to falsify your theory.
I don’t see what you mean. The path to communism, ie a fully collectivized system of production and distribution based on a common plan, devoid of classes and the state, requires building that. To build that, the working classes need to stitch together all production and distribution through socialism, and continue to erode the basis of class struggle. This requires political control by a working class state. The path to steam is heating water, eventually water boils when you keep heating it. You can spill the pot or turn off the heat, but that’s a disruption in the current path.
Totally, but I might also expect to see continued development toward the disillusion of class and state. Simply industrializing doesn’t give me much hope on its own.
I’m not holding my breath to wait for global communism before I see a movement toward class abolition within any country.
So you’re not interested in reality. Communism and class abolition are only possible globally whether you hold your breath or not.
Class dissolves alongside collectivization of production and distribution. The DPRK is one of the farthest along in this regard. The state is a product of class struggle, and dissolves when class has been.
I guess I’ll have to take your word for it.
What do you believe class is? If ownership of industry and its control is all owned by the same class, and everyone belongs to the same class, then there is no class as such and class struggle dissolves.
I really am just concerned about whether collective ownership is really achieved. Something can look collectivized just because it is controlled by the state, but without a radical democratic apparatus you will never see the dissolution of class.
You’re worried far more about the possibility of imperfection than what’s actually happening on the ground, and what can best be done to achieve that.