The
Dictatorship of the Proletariat, Proletarian Democracy, or a Worker’s State are
the terms used to describe the form of the post-revolutionary Government. This
paradigm is one of the most misused terms by Bourgeois Liberals o undermine
worker revolutions because of the use of “Dictatorship”. Understandable of
course considering that Liberals are at ideological war with the Left and Karl
Marx did in a sense no anticipate the more rudimentary ways in which
counter-revolutionaries would attack the concept of the worker’s state. But
nevertheless, in more intellectual circles across the ideological divides,
there is a very accurate understanding of what the Dictatorship of the
Proletariat is. Now to simplify it for everyone else.
Who are the Proletariat?
The
proletariat are the working class. Who are the working class? Those who sell
labour for a wage and own no means of production or capital. In the very
simplest of terms, if you must work for a salary for sustenance, then you are
the working class. This basically makes 95% of the world or more the
Proletarian Class.
But… What About the Middle Class!?
The Middle
Class, so to speak, is an artificial class as per pure Marxian postulates. This
is not to say that they do not exist in the frame of Leftist thought. It means
that newer theories address the concept of the Middle Class. However, it is
important to understand why this class exists. The Middle Class didn’t exist as
a class until after World War 2. There was literally only what we call the
Labour Class and the Bourgeoisie till then – the bourgeoisie being the class
that owns capital and hires the Labour class.
The Middle Class is actually a
creation of Social Democratic and Liberalist economic policies of the West.
This is a simple matter of creating a divide in the Working Class. Worker
Revolutions all over the world had forced Western Governments to raise wages in
a graded fashion. Thus, some members of the Working Class prospered for their “intellectual
labour”. This newly prosperous class became a walking advertisement for the
Bourgeoisie to the Working Class of what rewards can accrue to those who are
willing to remain under wage slavery – albeit by working harder. So, in
summation, you may call yourself Middle Class but sadly, you are nothing more
than a wage slave. You are in fact the more vulnerable one because you are
neither protected by the labour movement nor by the Bourgeoisie.
But the Middle Classes are also a social class
apart, aren’t they?
Social
Class is a product of economic realities. Middle Classes are an expansive group
in that sense who can comprise those with a conservative to progressive, an
erudite to a luddite, and a religious to atheistic sensibility. If there is any
differentiation that can be observed here, it is the differentiation of the
Intellect – Knowledge. This is how Bourgeoisie play this game to divide the
Classes further.
Knowledge
is not a traditional “commodity.” Once created it passes from person to person
and doesn’t diminish in value and in that sense completely antagonises
Capitalism and the Free market. Thus, the Bourgeoisie and their hands in
Government Commodify Knowledge. They ensure that the fundamental right to an
equal and infinite education is price-restricted, thus class restricted and
sometimes race-restricted. This is the reason why the Labour Class and Middle
Class have become socially separate classes.
So that means the Dictatorship of the
Proletariat as actually a Dictatorship of …. Us?
Exactly! Right
now, every Non-Socialist country in the world is the opposite of the
Dictatorship of the Proletariat…It is the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie. And
why is that? Because the way Parliamentary Democracy in Liberal Democracies and
Social Democracies are structured, Democracy tends to allow the Bourgeoisie
into power. Once they are in power, they make policies and subvert Government
for their means and ends. This can be seen plainly and simply as this:
Elections are fought by parties for the votes of the population, they theory
being one man-one vote. However, parties need money to contest elections and
spread and advertise themselves – the point where the advertisement is more of
a personality contest than a statement of merit. This advertisement and propagation
requires money and this lies with the Bourgeoisie. The Bourgeoisie thus will
extract their pound of flesh in terms of policies once their party is elected.
But coming back to the basics, does this mean
Socialist countries are not Democracies?
This is
false and is Western anti-communist propaganda. The edifice of any Socialist
country is a Democracy. The difference between Socialism and Parliamentary
democracy is that the Bourgeoisie has been eliminated from Government and
Economic power so it becomes truly one person one vote. It is thus the people
who decide their fate ultimately and not the Bourgeoisie. The electoral process
exists just as in any other democracy; however, there are multiple safeguards
in place to ensure that power is never in the hands of one person, there is the
right to recall, there State funding of electoral messages from candidates,
etc. The electoral structures are different for different Socialist countries
but the best would be the Cuban model to analyse.
So that is why the Dictatorship of the
Proletariat is the same as Proletarian Democracy?
Exactly, it
is in fact the purest form of democracy.
But why are there only dictatorial figures in
Socialist countries like Fidel, Stalin, Mao, Xi, Kim Jung Un?
There are
multiple reasons for this. In the USSR, Stalin was unchallenged as an elected
leader of the Soviets. This is mostly due to the fact that Stalin was an awe-inspiring
figure in Russia and the father of the modern Russian state. In Cuba, the
country has since its inception, been under a state of distress and constant
threat from the US and counter-revolutionaries; therefore, the constant
rallying behind its revolutionary leaders. North Korea, has a cult of
personality around its leaders. China, post Mao, has subverted its own
Revolution and undermined its own democratic principles. However, all said,
internal party democracy is fundamental to the party of electing the leader to
a full term.
But let us also note here the various elected Communist Govts in
the world as well. It is important to note here that whenever there has been a
Socialist Revolution, the local and international Bourgeoisie do everything in
their power from sanctions to all-out war to ensure that the Revolution is
crushed. For that matter, they do this even when Communist Governments are
democratically elected like in Chile, Kerala, Venezuela, etc.
So, a Proletarian Democracy sounds like the
best model but if the Bourgeoisie are going to keep undermining it, what is the
way forward?
This is
exactly the problem that countries like Venezuela are grappling with, how to
implement socialism without revolution? Or is social democracy the only
sustainable model? But social democracy is not Socialism, it is still
Capitalism and allowing the Bourgeoisie to exist and have a method to get into
power. Countries like Venezuela should have switched to Revolutionary mode and oppressed
their Capitalist class out of existence like the USSR and China did. At the end
of the day, these two countries and Cuba present the best models. Revolution is
the only way to bring in a Proletarian Democracy because the Bourgeoisie will
not give up power unless it is staring at the barrel of a gun. Don’t think that
that is brutal, the fact is that the Bourgeoisie do that every day to the
Working Classes in a Bourgeois Democracy – that is what the Army and Police are
for….to oppress the Working Classes and to protect the property of the rich.