time to chill and read some "State and Revolution" (1918): https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/

Lenin continues to be astoundingly relevant for our current and future struggles.

"In a democratic republic, Engels continues, 'wealth exercises its power indirectly, but all the more surely', first, by means of the 'direct corruption of officials' (America); secondly, by means of an 'alliance of government and the Stock Exchange' (France and America)."

"A democratic republic [DR] is the best possible political shell for capitalism, and, therefore, once capital has gained possession of this... it establishes its power so securely, so firmly, that no change of persons, institutions or parties in the bourgeois­-DR can shake it."

"[The democrats]... intill into the minds of the people, the false notion that universal suffrage '*in the present­ day state*' is really capable of revealing the will of the majority of the working people and of securing its realization."

"It is often said and written that the main point in Marx's theory is the class struggle. But this is wrong... Only he is a Marxist who extends the recognition of the class struggle to the recognition of the dictatorship of the proletariat."

"To decide once every few years which members of the ruling class is to repress and crush the people through parliament­­-- this is the real essence of bourgeois parliamentarism, not only in parliamentary­-constitutional monarchies, but also in the most democratic republics."

"The way out of parliamentarism is not... the abolition of representative institutions [RIs] & the elective principle, but the conversion of the RIs from talking shops into 'working' bodies. 'The Commune was to be a working... body, executive & legislative at the same time'."

"The Commune substitutes for... parliamentarism... in
which freedom of opinion... does not degenerate into deception, for the parliamentarians themselves have to work, have to execute their own laws, ... and [have] to account directly to their constituents."

So clearly and succinctly stated, how the so-called "freedom of the speech" we observe here in the u.s. is "freedom of speech" for the rich, and where they deviate, they carry no consequences.

none of our elected face consequences for lying. think about that.

The representatives that Lenin & Marx describe in The Commune, a proletariat-run government, are revocable at any time for deviating from the working class' interests. are held to account constantly. and are paid an average working class salary.

to "smash the state", as Marx initially stated, is to do away with the capitalist state upon seizing it, and build a people's state upon its ashes. he describes what working people's state would look like.

one that is resistant to capitalist recapture. a resilient, helpful state

I'm short on direct quotes here because much of this construction is spread out in detail across some 10 or 15 pages. and even that is but a summary of some crucial elements.

"Abolishing the bureaucracy at once... is out of the question. It is a utopia. But to smash the old [bureaucracy] at once and to... construct a new one that will make possible the... abolition of all bureaucracy­­ - this is not a utopia, it is... the task of the... proletariat."

I stand firmly with this. we cannot abolish all state immediately. a proletariat state must exist so long as it is necessary to suppress capitalist counter-revolution.

it is, as I understand currently, where I (and Lenin and Marx) differ from anarchist comrades.

Engels on housing - "But one thing is certain: there is... a sufficient quantity of houses... to remedy... all real 'housing shortage', provided they are used judiciously. This can... only occur through the expropriation of the present owners & by quartering... homeless workers."

Engels is far more gentle with the landlords than Mao, but the conception of expropriating housing to fit the needs of the people goes back even to Engels' time (mid-late 1800s).

an entire section is dedicated to the difference between Marx, Lenin, and Engels and the anarchist perspective.

the choice of words is measured, and the question of "authoritarianism" is addressed in good form. I will provide one quote on the matter.

"Engels... ridicules the... ideas of the Proudhonists, who call themselves "anti­-authoritarians". Take a factory... said Engels: is it not clear that not one of these... establishments, based on ... co­operation of many ppl, could function w/o a certain amount of subordination?"

there is much more here, and it is worth a read. The question of authority and "authoritarianism" deserves a close look. who holds the power?

in this work, and in:
- Engel's "On Authority": https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm

the question is explored in more detail.

honestly, in all my reading of Lenin's writing, it seems he has far more fire reserved for the Social-Democrats than anarchists.

He calls anarchists "confused" or "reactionary", at worst. Social-Democrats he calls opportunists. grifters that reliably uphold the rich.

"When we pass from joint­-stock companies to trusts which assume control over, and monopolize, whole industries, it is not only private production that ceases, but also planlessness [results]."

Engels on "planlessness" being characteristic of capitalism.

this can be readily observed in our modern and present crisis, where there is, everywhere (in the u.s.), shortages of PPE and other essential products.

brings a smile to my face that Lenin canonically ended a sentence with two exclamation marks:

"...even for the party of the revolutionary proletariat!!"

Sometimes, some things deserve double the energy in their declaration, and I am here for that!!

"if careerism is to be abolished completely, it must be made impossible for 'honorable' though profitless posts in the Civil Service to be used as a springboard to highly lucrative posts in banks or joint­-stock companies, as... happens in all the freest capitalist countries."

and so the question of corruption in government posts is structurally precluded as much as possible,

by ensuring there is no way to make use of the new state apparatus to rise to wealth.

not to mention revocation of such representatives *at any time*.

"Between capitalist & communist society lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat." - Marx

we see much focus on this question in the text, each time in a different context, through a different lens. at times to criticize opportunism, but,

herein, it focuses on the question of how through scientific, economic analysis, this is the inevitable path of things.

Lenin asks, "What, then, is the relation of this dictatorship to democracy?",

and goes on to provide analysis of democracy in a capitalist state, and democracy in a "dictatorship of the proletariat",

which I'll quote accordingly below.

"In capitalist society, ..., we have a more or less complete democracy in the democratic republic. But this democracy is always hemmed in by the narrow limits set by capitalist exploitation, and... always remains, in effect, a democracy for the minority, ... only for the rich."

"Owing to the conditions of capitalist exploitation, the modern wage slaves are so crushed by want and poverty that..., the majority of the population is debarred from participation in public and political life."

otoh, in a proletarian democracy:

"Democracy for the vast majority of the people, and suppression by force, i.e., exclusion from democracy, of the exploiters and oppressors of the people­­ - this is the change democracy undergoes during the transition."

imagine that - rather than our homeless or the incarcerated being disenfranchised (mostly non-violent, primarily working class),

it will be the exploiters - CEOs, the landlords, war criminal politicians, insurers - who will be disenfranchised.

and for the slightest of tangents, this intersects with another crucial topic - prison abolition.

of which I encourage folks to read Angela Davis' "Are Prisons Obsolete?": https://archive.org/details/revhosatx84/page/n1/mode/2up

but for now, let us continue w/ State and Revolution

Lenin on early stage communism:

"It follows that under communism there remains for a time not only bourgeois [B] law, but even the B state, w/o the B!
...
But in fact, remnants of the old, surviving in the new, confront us in life at every step, both in nature and in society..."

"And Marx did not arbitrarily insert a scrap of 'bourgeois' law into communism, but indicated what is economically and politically inevitable in a society emerging out of the womb of capitalism."

it is crucial to take note of this when analyzing existing socialist states.

!! sighting:

"this point... substituted for the question whether it is necessary to smash this machine, the question for the concrete forms in which it is to be smashed, & then sought refuge behind the 'indisputable'... truth that concrete forms cannot be known in advance!!"

I find far too much joy in Lenin's !! usage

materially, the section focuses on frustrations with and the nature of opportunism in those that would co-opt Marx's works towards their (capitalist)-state preserving ends.

on bureaucracy:

"Kautsky has not understood at all the difference between bourgeois parliamentarism, which combines democracy (not for the people) w/ bureaucracy (against the people), & proletarian democracy, which will take immediate steps to cut bureaucracy down to the roots-"

"... and which will be able to carry these measures through to the end, to the complete abolition of bureaucracy, to the introduction of complete democracy for the people."

this connects with an earlier conceptualization in this text of proletariat governance, which does away with separate legislative & executive branches (bureaucracy), and transforms representative working-class groups into proper working groups.

and that completes my reading of State and Revolution!

there's more to get out of this than my selective highlights. it's about 70 pages in all.

some key themes:

- capitalist vs socialist state
- capitalist vs socialist democracy
- bureaucracy
- the need for revolution
- the need to eliminate capitalist state
- the vestiges of capitalism in early socialist society
- socialism vs communism
- anarchism vs socialism