To me they’re like mere servants of the State, like Lenin talked about in “2. What is to Replace the Smashed State Machine?” in his writing “The State and Revolution”

Under Capitalism, they are its privileged knights that try to deflect and control, if not defend directly its image as “the only option”, who have their incentive in doing so, with their class status stake being in their duty to shepherd the means of production and its resulting benefits

However, they don’t own the means of production, as they merely manage it for the landholding, industrialist, and financier capitalists

On the other hand, under Socialism, while its privileges will be probably be done away, the PM class on its own would innovated upon, for their new duty of overseeing, managing, and reporting the collectivized cooperatives and state-owned enterprises…

Until the final stage of Communism arrives, I think they’re pretty handy

I say this, because I hear such disgusted sentiment in Hexbear against them

  • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Who even came up with the term “professional managerial class” anyway? Like are we not allowed to have professionals managers under socialism?

    Lenin and Engels used the term labor aristocracy, which is much clearer and to the point anyway.

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s definitely used by anarchists to build a false equivalency between socialism and capitalism because they both have managers who tell you what to do.