I have some probably dumb questions to ask about marxism and wasn’t sure where to go. Is there like a ask marxists or debate marxists forum? Anyway

What and how many branches of marxism want state socialism during the socialist transition period before Communism? I was under the impression that all (or most) leninists wanted state socialism during this period. I have since been told that Trotskyists don’t want this. Is this correct if so what do they want instead? How does this all relate to vanguardism?

Furthermore how does marxism define a state? Is this different from how other groups define statehood?

I still don’t fully grasp the difference between marxists and anarchists. I thought the difference was mainly that anarchists don’t want a state, and encourage mutual aid. Now that I hear not all marxists want a state I am pretty confused.

  • areyouevenrealOPEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    It is always interesting to me that for most people the state always has to be a large centralized entity.

    Well yes that’s how most states work. I don’t see how this is surprising. If anything the definition you use about having a monopoly on violence is a somewhat unusal definition.

    I don’t see how assuming meaninglessness is logically frought. To assume there is meaning would be to believe something without evidence. Same with morality. At least this is the case if you don’t consider personal feelings to be morality or cosmic significance which I don’t.

    Humans are sensual rational beings. Not perfectly rational, and most of our rationality is post-hoc at best with imperfect information, but we absolutely have the capability for considered, effective, action. Perhaps someday we will use it. I’m not holding my breath, but there are good things coming.

    I am not 100% sure we actually agree what rationality is. To me rationality is a means to an end, this I think is compatible with Hanlon’s razor. Rationality is never the motivation behind something, it creates instrumental goals to reach a terminal goal. The terminal goal is the actual motivation. Rationality just tells you what you need to do to work towards your terminal goal, not what the goal is.

    That’s assuming you believe in the very concept of rationality and it’s not just an illusion or something made up by people to denigrate women and minorities. Personally I am not sure if I believe in it anymore, I think it’s a limited understanding of how intelligent systems operate. It’s better to think of intelligent things in mathematical, engineering, or biological/evolutionary terms than philosophical ones. Either an intelligent system gives an optimal answer or a suboptimal one, calling it rational or irrational isn’t really helpful.