• Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    If it has a dictator or a government it is, by definition, not communism.

    Ignoring the dictator bit, this is an anti-Marxist take, Marx never stated that Communism would have no government. When speaking of the State, Marx specifically speaks of the institutions of a Capitalist Government that etrench the Capitalist class, ie Private Property Rights and the militarized institutions that uphold them (the Capitalist police).

    Marx was not an anarchist, he was advocating for central planning, and you cannot have central planning without central planners. Simply saying that the public mechanisms would “run really well” hides the fact that government would remain, planning and administrating.

    Even Cybernetics would still need to have human administration, elections, and so forth to represent the will of the people.

    You may wish to visit Critique of the Gotha Programme.

    • PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I may be misremembering, but the way I recall Engles describing it in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific is that as you dissolve class relations you remove the previous purpose of government, which was to enforce class roles through, for instance, enforcement of private property rights. As the “Administration of People” becomes unnecessary, the government is relegated to “Administration of Things” which moves it away from controlling people, and let’s it “melt away” as it’s remaining functions become less “governmental” and more of just managing logistics of things.