• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Source for which aspect specifically? I touched on the nature of class, which is more straight from Marx and Engels, and I also touched on materialism, which I can recommend sources for dialectical materialism. If you need a source on the economy being overwhelmingly publicly owned and planned, then I think even Wikipedia can help, but I can recommend other works if you want to dive into the specifics.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        Economy of the Soviet Union.

        The economy of the Soviet Union was based on state ownership of the means of production, collective farming, and industrial manufacturing. An administrative-command system managed a distinctive form of central planning. The Soviet economy was second only to the United States and was characterized by state control of investment, prices, a dependence on natural resources, lack of consumer goods, shortages of goods and services, little foreign trade, public ownership of industrial assets, macroeconomic stability, low unemployment and high job security.[15][16] A 1986 study published in the American Journal of Public Health citing World Bank data claimed that the Soviet model provided a better quality of life and human development than most market economies at comparable levels of economic development.[17]

        The state was a worker state, composed of the proletariat and paid wages for administrative labor, not through capitalist accumulation of profits through an M-C-M’ circuit.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Yes, that’s correct, the economy was overwhelmingly publicly owned and the working classes controlled the state. This is basic Marxist economics.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              No? The state is not inherently bourgeois. The bourgeois state is bourgeois. The state is a product of class struggle, not itself a bourgeois element. When the working classes smash and replace the bourgeois state with a proletarian one, as they did in the Soviet Union, and thenceforth take ownership of the commanding heights of the economy, this is a worker state over a socialist economy.