The design and UX isn't done, Rob and Abbie, okkurrrr! đ
brnineworms's review
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
3.0
Itâs hard not to view this book primarily as an insight into Leninâs psyche and temperament. I donât want to delve too deeply into psychoanalysis but each page is so laden with hunger, antagonism, and mistrust, itâs difficult to set that aside for the sake of the theoretical content. Lenin has a black-and-white worldview with a pessimistic bias; Marx and Engels are saints while everyone else, it seems, is some kind of âopportunistâ or âphilistine.â It sometimes comes across like heâs using Marx and Engels as a shield, in that he goes on and on about what they believed and never plainly states his own beliefs without invoking at least one of them for justification (/deflection?) Itâs an interesting move considering his ego â he very much strikes me as an âif you want something done right, do it yourselfâ kind of guy.
The State and Revolution, as the title suggests, concerns the role of the state in the development of a communist society. Iâd come across the concept of the state âwithering awayâ but had never really grasped it until now. From what I understand, the idea is that the proletariat will seize power and use the state apparatus to nationalise every industry, thereby eliminating the capitalist class by replacing private ownership with public ownership. Since the state no longer serves its intended purpose of protecting property and generally serving the interests of the bourgeoisie, it is functionally something entirely new, to the extent that it doesnât really make sense to call it a state any more. Whatâs left of the state gradually becomes redundant and obsolete and thus ceases to be maintained. (MLs, how did I do? Not too bad for an anarkiddy, eh?) I donât entirely agree with this strategy but I can at least appreciate the rationale behind it.
Lenin is deliberately noncommittal regarding how long it will take for the state to wither away. On one hand heâs adamant that itâs inevitable, but on the other he does seem quite attached to this idea of a âtemporaryâ transitional state, arguing that itâs vital for administrative purposes and for the âsuppressionâ of both potential bourgeois rebellions and workers who refuse to pull their weight. Iâm sceptical about his advocacy for an âarmed proletariatâ in that Iâm not sure how a state-approved paramilitary differs from a conventional military or police force â what Lenin is advocating sounds like a police state to me. In general he seems a bit too keen to enact violence, whereas I see violence as an unfortunate necessity (if, indeed, it is a necessity in a given situation). If all you have is a hammer...
The State and Revolution is, in a word, authoritative. Lenin clearly knew what he was talking about when it comes to Marxism, and I canât deny heâs got some charisma. I feel I gained a more robust understanding of Marxism, though the writing was quite repetitive and filled with petty aspersions. Itâs not something Iâd go out of my way to recommend but if youâre already planning on reading some of Leninâs works, this is a good place to start.Â
Moderate: Colonisation, Slavery, and Violence
Minor: Ableism, Sexism, Sexual assault, War, Death, Blood, Drug use, Police brutality, and Pregnancy
More...