With growing disillusionment in capitalist “democracy,” more and more people are looking towards alternatives to provide the answers they need. As Marxists, our role is to guide others out of the darkness of liberalism and toward the liberating path of Socialism. With that in mind, one of the first steps is to clear up the confusion, which mainly stems from propaganda and anti-communist movements, about a concept at the very core of our ideology: the dictatorship of the proletariat. I aim to be brief, clear, and accessible to all readers as I do my best to make understood the meaning of dictatorship and how it is not about oppression, but liberation of all people currently being oppressed.

The dictatorship of the proletariat is one of the more controversial topics within Socialist and Communist politics. The word ‘dictatorship’ strikes fear in the hearts of many, and can stoke the flame of a million skeptics with a single blow. Discussions of the dictatorship of the proletariat tend to fixate on the word ‘dictatorship’ while ignoring the class content—’of the proletariat.’ This superficial reaction, shaped by decades of propaganda, demands correction.

Marx, from the very first mention of the dictatorship of the proletariat, repeatedly clarified what exactly this meant, repeatedly fought against opportunism (that is to say so-called representatives of the working-class collaborating with the very forces that dominate us)–a term he knew would invite distortion. Yet, the opportunist still persists. Our struggle continues to fight against this, to guide people onto the path of proletarian dictatorship, to clear up all confusion and purposeful slandering of the truly freeing vision behind the term. In order to fight against those who weaponize this idea, one must first understand its conception, i.e., the material and historical womb from which it was born.

The Origins of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat

…the proletariat rallies more and more around revolutionary socialism, around communism, for which the bourgeoisie has itself invented the name of Blanqui. This socialism is the declaration of the permanence of the revolution, the class dictatorship of the proletariat as the necessary transit point to the abolition of class distinctions generally, to the abolition of all the relations of production on which they rest, to the abolition of all the social relations that correspond to these relations of production, to the revolutionizing of all the ideas that result from these social relations.

— Karl Marx, The Class Struggles in France, 1848-1850, 1850, Marxists.org

Louis Auguste Blanqui, from whom Blanquism derives, was a revolutionary that was imprisoned for over thirty years. His ideology was heavily focused on the revolution itself, and not so much as to what society would look like after the revolution. Blanquists believe that a very small group should lead the revolution and establish a temporary dictatorship in order to redistribute wealth in a just manner. This marks a clear break from the class-conscious foundation of Marxist ideology, which sees revolution not as the task of a small elite, but of the organized working-class.

The first mention of proletarian dictatorship by Marx traces all the way back to 1850, to the early stages of his and Engels’ work. From its earliest days, Marxism has emphasized the necessity of proletarian dictatorship. The quote above from Marx’s The Class Struggles in France, 1848-1850, is the earliest mention by Marx of proletarian dictatorship, and what is even more outstanding than its age in relation to Marxism is how fleshed out this necessary idea already is: “…the class dictatorship of the proletariat as the necessary transit point to the abolition of class distinctions generally…”, from the first mention of it, Marx makes it very clear that proletarian dictatorship is necessary in abolishing all class distinctions and antagonisms entirely from society, i.e., in realizing Communism.

There is no revolution without a revolutionary change in who controls the state. From the minority using state apparatuses to oppress the majority to the majority building new state machinery as the mechanism for suppressing counter-revolutionism. This, in essence, is the dictatorship of the proletariat — power wielded by the hand of the majority for the first time in all the history of class society.

Proletarian vs Bourgeois Dictatorship

In order to inspire a change in society toward proletarian dictatorship we must first educate the masses, help them see that we already live under a dictatorship, dominated by the very rich who hold immense political power, on top of their inhumane amounts of wealth, and have control over every aspect of political, social, and economic life. Democracy is not a form of governance, but a measure of what class of people benefit from the government in charge. The control over the majority by a tiny minority is the essence of capitalism, i.e., bourgeois dictatorship, or, if you like, liberal democracy, the form of control and oppression that we’ve lived under and been subjected to for far too long.

The first step is to clearly expose the countless injustices perpetuated daily by the bourgeois dictatorship—those who claim to represent you and me while serving their own class interests. Let no travesty wither away in silence, let no misstep go unchecked, let no politicians consider themselves invincible. We must take on the role of the microscope in examining the current government and that of the megaphone in relaying their constant mistakes and wrongdoings to the people.

A workers’ government is one in which no official, no parliamentarian, no representative, officer, leader, etc. makes more than the average worker’s wage. The natural remuneration weeds out those who seek those positions for their wealth, privilege, influence, etc. This government brings to the forefront leaders who are dedicated in their service to the people with whom they share a class background, who know the struggles of the people and are better fit to deal with them than any politician born in the bourgeois cradle. This is the manifestation of proletarian dictatorship, which very clearly shows the striking differences between it and the dictatorship of the bourgeois class.

What we need is a government that is created by the working-class, for the working-class, and constituted of those who belong to the working-class. This government has the interests of the majority rather than current governments that exist to serve corporations and a handful of billionaires. A government made up of the people it governs is true representation.

A government of and for the people, that is proletarian dictatorship; a government not of the people, but for profiting off the suffering of the people, that is bourgeois dictatorship, that is capitalist government, that is your government, and that is my government.

The dictatorship of the proletariat is not about oppression, but liberation—the transfer of power from the few to the many, the unlocking of the chains that hold us down. It is a necessary phase in building a world free of class domination.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Andrew Lehrer.

French Polynesia’s anti-nuclear organisation Association 193 has criticised the latest French report about the impact of the France’s nuclear weapons tests.

France’s National Institute of Health and Medical Research evaluated additional declassified data from the tests at Moruroa Atoll and found that radiation from them had a “minimal” role in causing thyroid cancer.

The association’s president, Father Auguste Uebe-Carlson, told the AFP news agency there was a tendency by the French state and the institute to minimise the impact of the nuclear fallout.

• READ MORE: Other Tahiti nuclear test impact reports

He said the French Committee for the Compensation of Victims of Nuclear Tests refused to recognise the files of victims born after 1974, when the military carried out its last atmospheric test.

But Father Uebe-Carlson said there was an argument to also recognise cancer sufferers born since then.

According to Father Uebe-Carlson, the institute would one day have to explain why there were so many cancers in French Polynesia.

He has repeatedly accused France of refusing to recognise the impact of the tests, instead using “propaganda” to say they were clean or a “thing of the past”.

He said health problems were now being attributed to poor diet and lifestyle choices.

He said that three years ago he had carried out a survey in Mangareva, which is close to the former weapons test sites, and found that from 1966 onward all families reported cases of still-born babies.

Call for release of scientific data
The president of the test veterans’ organisation Moruroa e Tatou said the release of the scientific data was not enough.

Hiro Tefaarere told Polynésie 1ère TV that it was “absolutely necessary” for his organisation to get from the French state the register of the cancer patients and cancer deaths during the testing period.

He said it was “imperative” that these files be given to Moruroa e Tatou.

Tefaarere said this research, if the state agreed to release it, would give his organisation the essential elements to consolidate the complaints which have been filed

A Territorial Assembly member, Hinamoeura Cross, who suffers from leukemia, said she was outraged that reports were still being published that were downplaying the tests’ effects.

The new Tahitian president, Moetai Brotherson, said he would take the latest report into account when he entered into discussions with the French government.

French Polynesia had for years been trying to get France to reimburse it for the costs of cancer sufferers.

$1bn to treat radiation cancers
Its social security agency, CPS, said that since 1995 it had spent almost US$1 billion to treat 10,000 people suffering from cancer as the result of radiation from the tests.

In 2010, Paris recognised for the first time that the tests had had an impact on the environment and health, paving the way for compensation.

Between 1966 and 1996, France carried out almost 200 tests in the South Pacific, involving more than 100,000 military and civilian personnel.

Paris has refused to apologise for the tests, but President Emmanuel Macron said France owed “a debt” to the French Polynesian people.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.