I would recommend reading Marx, and maybe some scholars on the subject, as I am not that. The Communist Manifesto is very short, and does a good job explaining what it is in layman’s terms.
In the most basic terms, Marxism states that the means of production should be owned by the people who actually do the work. That there should not be a division between the people who make the stuff, and the people who own the machines that make the stuff.
In a real Marxist state (if even possible), there would be no class. There would be no real mechanism for someone to gain power over another.
So it provides, absolutely no control over those making decisions abusing that power power for personal gain.
In what way is democratic control (i.e. worker ownership) “no control”, exactly? If the workers (or rather: the people affected by a decision have a say directly proportionional to how much they are affected by that decision) have control over decisions: how exactly will that power be “abus[ed] for personal gain”? How is that supposed to happen? Also: Why is that supposed to happen? What is the personal gain to even be achieved?
In fact even less so though capitalism…
In capitalism, you have exactly 'ero control over what the boss wants you to do in his company,as lono as they don’t break the law (which they can lobby for with their capital). How is that more control than all companies being democratically controlled by heir workers?
My friend, I am not a communist.
But no, Marxism is absolutely not designed that way. Explicitly so.
Please give a couple examples of how it does so. I’m by no means an expert.
I would recommend reading Marx, and maybe some scholars on the subject, as I am not that. The Communist Manifesto is very short, and does a good job explaining what it is in layman’s terms.
In the most basic terms, Marxism states that the means of production should be owned by the people who actually do the work. That there should not be a division between the people who make the stuff, and the people who own the machines that make the stuff.
In a real Marxist state (if even possible), there would be no class. There would be no real mechanism for someone to gain power over another.
Great that is what I thought.
So it provides, absolutely no control over those making decisions abusing that power power for personal gain. In fact even less so though capitalism…
In what way is democratic control (i.e. worker ownership) “no control”, exactly? If the workers (or rather: the people affected by a decision have a say directly proportionional to how much they are affected by that decision) have control over decisions: how exactly will that power be “abus[ed] for personal gain”? How is that supposed to happen? Also: Why is that supposed to happen? What is the personal gain to even be achieved?
In capitalism, you have exactly 'ero control over what the boss wants you to do in his company,as lono as they don’t break the law (which they can lobby for with their capital). How is that more control than all companies being democratically controlled by heir workers?