The Dictatorship of the Proletariat: what does it mean?

Paris Commune 1871 -- the first workers state

by John Maryon

The qualitative transfer of society from obsolete capitalism to progressive socialism is the historical mission of the working class. Karl Marx, Frederick Engels and Vladimir Lenin developed an essential and powerful ideological theory to achieve scientific communism.  A cornerstone of Marxism-Leninism is the need for a revolutionary change to bring about the dictatorship of the proletariat.  Those opposed to Marxism-Leninism are at pains to deny this essential process and foster an illusion of gradual transformation using the bourgeois state apparatus. In effect tinkering with a collapsing system and incorrectly assuming that the working class will grow in terms of knowledge and understanding. In practice the power of the bourgeoisie needs to be challenged by the united efforts of all sections of the working class.
To fully understand the dictatorship of the proletariat it is important to be aware that it does not imply the use of force or threats against others. In Marx and Engel’s days the term "dictatorship" didn’t mean autocratic one-man rule in the way we understand it today. They used the term to mean class rule. In the capitalist era we live under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The dictatorship of the proletariat means the working class taking power to establish a new type of democracy.  To organise the economy to benefit the former exploited classes.  To raise political and social awareness of the masses.  And to stimulate progressive cultural developments. This would see an end to identity politics, elevation of trivial diversions above matters of substance, the greed and corruption of lobby groups and the politics of hate, blame and exclusion that we experience in Britain today. The Paris Commune gave a first glimpse of the dictatorship of the proletariat in action. Tinkering with the bourgeois machinery of the state will achieve nothing. It must be replaced with a new management apparatus as an essential prerequisite for building true sustainable socialism. 
The basis of the dictatorship of the proletariat lies in the creative organisational activity in leading the masses towards building a new form of society. Lenin emphasised that it is the rule of the working class through strength of organisation and discipline using all the achievements of culture, science and technology.  Also to develop proletarian affinity with all working people to develop prestige and respect.  It may take different forms and methods depending on the nature of the socialist revolution, the existing social structure, the level of economic development and cultural background.  Proletarian democracy systemically creates a state of the whole people with the working class playing the leading role.
 Lenin said that capitalism condemns the masses to a downtrodden, crushed, anxious existence. A gigantic apparatus of falsehood and deception hoodwinks the workers sowing confusion, fostering ignorance and stultifying their minds. We see this in Britain today. It is obvious that we have reached a great watershed in our political system. As the capitalist crisis has developed the establishment is no longer able to govern in in the traditional manner.  There is an increasing risk of neo-fascists gaining power and influence. Today the population of Britain is largely politically ignorant, is incapable of critical or analytical thinking and has sadly becoming brainwashed by continuing propaganda.  Multiple colour leaflets issued by Reform reflected the politics of blame and hostility but ignored austerity, affordable housing, crumbling infrastructure, a collapsing health service or job security. 
So what political forces are there left in Britain today that can defend workers rights, educate and enthuse the masses for something better? The Labour party has for the past century been the main political party for workers in Britain forming an essential component of the labour movement.  Sadly it has always been dominated by its right wing with affinity to social democracy. It has a long history of betrayal.  Ramsay Macdonald, the first Labour prime minister, started progressively by recognising the Soviet Union shortly after Lenin's death and by opposing imperialist wars but was to later betray the party by forming a National Government with the Conservatives. The tremendous social progress made immediately following the Second World War was implemented only because of the pressure of the people who demanded change. Sadly the party has gone downhill since those halcyon times. With the abandonment of clause four and the establishment of New Labour the Labour Party abandoned any pretence of socialism.
We have always gritted our teeth and supported Labour because of its link to the trade unions. Today we face unprecedented changes which may forge new alliances in a totally different political landscape. If they can get their act together Your Party may play an important role for the left in Britain but will be limited in what it can achieve if it becomes just another hopeless social- democratic institution. Keir Starmer is on the way out but will his successor be any different? I very much doubt it.
One thing becomes immediately obvious. The urgent need is to build unity among all progressive forces to put forward the case for socialism. This is where a vanguard party like the New Communist Party of Britain has an important role to play.  We must grow to be more effective in motivation of the working class.  Don't delay join us today and help put Britain on the road to socialism. 

What a difference a day makes…

...or not in the case of Sir Tony Blair whose comments on the current turmoil within the Labour Party were splashed all over the bourgeois press last week. Whatever he achieved in office –  Scottish and Welsh devolution, ending the conflict in northern Ireland and pushing through some minor social  reforms – was far eclipsed by his despicable role in supporting the American onslaught on Iraq which ended in invasion and the execution of the Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein. The dreams of Anglo-American imperialism ended in the streets of Baghdad as the Iraqi resistance fought back to eventually free the country from imperialist occupation. Blair fell from grace soon after – leaving Downing Street to console himself with lucrative sinecures, non-jobs like his “peace-keeping” role in the Middle East, that were given to him by the Americans as a reward for his life-time of service to imperialism. 
To be fair Blair never pretends to be anything more than he is – a mouthpiece for what he thinks is the dominant trend within the ruling class. He has plenty to say but he’s got nothing to offer workers. Or as Jeremy Corbyn  put it “Tony Blair thinks the answer to this country’s problems is AI, welfare cuts and endless spending on war. Who benefits? Arms companies and tech billionaires. Once again, Blair is wrong. The answer is a redistribution of wealth and power and the relentless search for peace”.
Tony Blair, like Ramsay MacDonald and Sir Keir Starmer, divided and ultimately betrayed the Labour Party. But to paraphrase Orwell and say “all Labour leaders are rubbish, but some are more rubbisher than others” may be going too far.  Attlee, Wilson and Callaghan did have their moments – though this was largely due to the immense pressure at the time from the labour movement as a whole for social justice.
Tony Blair is a rich man who has also acquired a number of gongs along the way. These include the usual honours reserved for past Prime Ministers as well as the American Presidential Medal of Freedom and the more dubious Dan David Prize given by Tel Aviv University for Blair’s "exceptional leadership and steadfast determination in helping to engineer agreements and forge lasting solutions to areas in conflict".
None of this has, however, restored his political standing in Britain. The fame that Blair so longs for continues to elude him. His paean of praise for the sort of  American-style neo-con policies that have been embraced by both Democratic and Republican administrations in Washington throughout the 21st century may have been music for the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg in the Conservative party but it didn’t go down well with Keir Starmer or the two contenders for his job, Wes Streeting and Andy Burnham, and can only serve to remind them of how glad they were to see the back of him in 2007.