Coming soon - Get a detailed view of why an account is flagged as spam!
view details

This post has been de-listed

It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.

3
The State and Socialism
Post Body

I understand that the traditional Marxian understanding of Socialism is stateless, as is, of course, the Anarchist one (which I'm not discussing here). Correct me if I'm wrong on this point, but Marx and Engels claimed the state was a political force which balanced antagonistic class interests and maintained the current, exploitative economic system through private property protections, as this little quote from Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State explains:

It is a product of society at a certain stage of development; it is the admission that this society has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself, that it has split into irreconcilable antagonisms which it is powerless to dispel. But in order that these antagonisms, these classes with conflicting economic interests, might not consume themselves and society in fruitless struggle, it became necessary to have a power, seemingly standing above society, that would alleviate the conflict and keep it within the bounds of 'order'; and this power, arisen out of society but placing itself above it, and alienating itself more and more from it, is the state.

My question is how does this account for many seemingly non-economic or class related functions? What class antagonisms are suppressed by, say, traffic laws defining speed limits or construction regulations saying you can't build with asbestos? I can see why Socialists, including me, are opposed to the private property-protecting features of the State, but what about less class-based regulations?

I guess the main point is how, although one, arguably main, function of the State may be to guard against class antagonisms, why does that mean the abolition of capitalism, class and these antagonisms means the abolition of the State in general rather than just these specific features, leaving features like traffic and construction regulations in place? Or is it the Marxist position that a regulatory body of this kind which does not involve itself with protection of private property and class is not technically a State by the Marxist definition?

Author
Account Strength
100%
Account Age
9 years
Verified Email
Yes
Verified Flair
No
Total Karma
7,753
Link Karma
1,405
Comment Karma
6,348
Profile updated: 4 hours ago
Posts updated: 7 months ago

Subreddit

Post Details

We try to extract some basic information from the post title. This is not always successful or accurate, please use your best judgement and compare these values to the post title and body for confirmation.
Posted
7 years ago