The proletariat are by definition the majority. The Soviet Union was by no means ruled by the majority. Stalin murdered millions to enforce his autocracy—the exact opposite of majority rule.

[–] phthalocyanin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

just to chime in with an anarchist perspective-- majority rule, as lionized by proponents of liberal democracies, is itself a form of heirarchy in which the will of an ostensible 'majority' (though usually that of the capital- owning class actually) is inflicted upon society as a whole, alienating the minority position, enforced by the state apparatus' monopoly of violence.

if one values bodily autonomy, reconciled with the needs of the collective, a system of governance like mutual collective determination must be established which guarantees that all voices are heard and acknowledged.

[–] CrimsonOnoscopy@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The party leaders are not proletarian, but rather become part of a class of privileged bureaucrats.

[–] Coryneform@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

there's a trend towards that, which can be combatted & has been by communist parties. Stalin had a pretty incoherent plan to combat rightist tendencies within the communist party, assuming the problem stemmed from external meddling. Mao actually shared your view in that bureaucracy rots socialism, and that it needs to be decreased as the people are helped towards being self reliant, ready to self manage the economy & have suitable industry to run the country with. that's why the cultural revolution happened, to fight bureaucracy