Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Why is Mitchinson wrong about the “Abolishion [i.e. Abolition] of the state”?

mitchinson wrong
0
Posted

Why is Mitchinson wrong about the “Abolishion [i.e. Abolition] of the state”?

0

Mitchinson moves on to argue that the “modern capitalist state can wear many guises, monarchy, republic, dictatorship, but in the end its purpose remains the same, to maintain the minority rule of the capitalist class. Marxism’s goal therefore is not simply to abolish the state, but to put an end to class society.” Needless to say, that is also anarchism’s goal. As Bakunin argued, “political transformation . . . [and] economic transformation . . . must be accomplished together and simultaneously.” [The Basic Bakunin, p. 106] So, as can be seen, anarchism’s goal is not simply abolishing the state, but to put an end to class society. That anarchists have always argued the state and capitalism must be destroyed at the same time is easily discovered from reading their works. Continuing this theme he argues that the state “was born with the split of society into classes to defend private property. So long as there are classes there will be a state. So, how can class society be ended? Not by

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123