Category talk:Dictatorship of the proletariat

Meaning
I believe the term "dictatorship of the proletariat" has been misunderstood. 01:33, 26 August 2013 (GMT)
 * You've removed Category:dictatorship of the proletariat twice from articles which it seems to fall into. What do you think it means other than a communist party in power controlling political activity in order to maintain the dominant role of the proletariat? User:Fred Bauder Talk 01:46, 26 August 2013 (GMT)
 * The term doesn't describe an action or a series of actions, it is a Marxist concept which means that, during the socialist stage, the state will be controlled by the working class, which will use it to fullfill its objectives. It's not really a way to describe the policies of a certain regime or political party, it would be like saying India is a socialist country just because it calls itself so in its constitution. Also I don't think "dictatorship" in this context means what you think it means, see the article. 03:11, 26 August 2013 (GMT)
 * According to the article, which, by the way, has almost nothing about dictatorship of the proletariat as practiced by a communist party in power, "according to Engels, writing in 1891, “If anything is certain it is that our party and the working class can triumph only under the form of the democratic republic. This is precisely the specific form of the dictatorship of the proletariat.” "

The citation is to a social democrat writing after the establishment of the Soviet Union who strongly criticized it for being an anti-democratic dictatorship. He's quoting Engels to emphasize that Engels believed in majority rule by the working class, but his point is to call into question party rule in the absence of support of the population as a whole. As applied to China, a capitalist party, such as the Republican Party in the United States which advocates exploitation of workers is not allowed to exist, nor is media such as Fox News which constantly distorts information from a conservative viewpoint. Nor are there elections where the candidates are funded by corporations in the context of media whose role is to shape public opinion in support of corporate control, even if done cleverly by liberal media such as The New York Times. If you read my user page you can see that I agree with Kautsky's and Engel's position but, frankly, I don't think Lenin was obligated by democratic principles to call an election in 1925 and have a nation-wide vote on whether to continue with or abandon the revolution. The situation later became much more ambiguous as it is today in the case of communist parties that have been in power for decades without garnering majority support and, becoming more and more unpopular, fear elections. User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:57, 26 August 2013 (GMT)