This kills the anarchist

...

Every time

Such a thorough and well-researched refutation of his actual ideas

Lenin didn't really follow State and Revolution

Fuggin anarkiddies, focusing on what Lenin did instead of a book he wrote.

...

...

He literally supported America during the cold war and was a zionist. Fuck him.

Marx was a race realist. I don't dismiss everything he ever said because of it.

By today's standards, maybe. Back then, everyone was like that or worse.

Don't use stormfag terms. The word is "racist."

He even refutes your BS in that screencap. Democracy is incidental. If it takes extra authority and centralization of power to enforce the DoP and smash the bourgeoisie, then it's totally consistent.

Marx was not a racist, he just said nigger sometimes. His actual theories (the shit he cared about and put forth as arguments) weren't racist in the slightest.

Meanwhile, Bookchin literally shilled Israel and imperialism all the time, and his theories are explicitly anti-communist. He's a CIA shill.

...

I don't really see that as relevant to my point.

Whatever floats your boat.

You really can't see the inherent contradiction between All power to Lenin vs All power to the Soviets?

Literally thought Mexicans were lazy and incompetent and needed to be under the Tutelage of the US.
It was a bit more then that:

I agree with state and revolution the book (except for the parts over-emphasizing centralism) I don't agree with the policies of Lenin the statesman. This opposition should not be hard to understand.

...

That was his early work when he correctly thought colonialism was a necessary vector to spread capitalism world-wide, which he considered to be more progressive phase of human society then feudalism, slavery etc.

As he matured his ideas tended more and more towards what we might call "anti-imperialism" today–Lenin didn't simply meme it all out of nowhere.

He also let a Jewish-nigger marry his daughter, some big ole vile racist. Marx just had some lit bantz tbh

"[Either] The dictatorship of Kornilov or the dictatorship of the proletariat… the petty-bourgeois element is fighting against the Soviet system in two ways: by the methods of the Savinkovs, Gotzes, Gegechkoris and Kornilovs… and the element of petty-bourgeois anarchy"

Lenin was right and continues to be right about anarchists for ever and ever amen.

pick one and only one

But there is no contradiction there :^)

ebin

But tell me friend, why is dictatorship of the proletariat incompatible with the exercise of dictatorial powers by individuals?

I'm weirdly surprised that this thread hasn't been bumplocked. Huh. Who'dathunk?

...

Really?

One vs many is a quantitative difference.
But why can't individuals, The Bolsheviks, act in accordance to the dictatorship of the proletariat?

Because they operate in two fundamentally different spheres of power. One is within the structure of the state, the other is a dual power outside of the state and contrasting with the states power. Lenin can't possibly be apart of all the internal discussions of every soviet, the nuances of the decisions reached and the reasons for reaching them. The soviets will not always be in agreement with one another, either, and there should be room for autonomy that very reason. Either the soviets can act with autonomy, or they don't really exercise any power and are merely their for the purposes of rubber stamping.