ON THE DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT 63 (p 184). His book defends the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat against this rejection by the CPF and replies to the reasoning behind the rejection. Critique of the Opportunist Characterisation of the State Balibar succeeds in part in correctly defending this basic Marxist concept and exposing and unmasking the erroneous and opportunist reasoning of its opponents in the French Party. He nails down the opportunism of those who without batting an eyelid argue that the Marxist understanding of the State as an organ of class repression is a narrow appreciation for, in their view, the State does not only repress but organises society in the interest of all ("renders services which taken together have a universal service value"). This is nothing but resurrection of the opportunist arguments of Vanderveld whom Lenin castigated in the Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky, Such an attempt at underplaying the repressive role of the State by juxtaposing it with its organising role is only intended to establish an alibi for the class domination of the bourgeoisie, and argue that revolution can be avoided by expanding the latter role and reducing the former one. The class struggle which is necessary to overcome the rule of the exploiting classes does not enter the picture. Further, the argument conceals the fact that the so called organising role is nothing but activity to facilitate increased exploitation and profits for the capitalists, to make capitalism workable in the interest of the ruling class. Balibar correctly argues; "it is because the social relations of production are relations of exploitation and antagonism that a special organ, the State, is necessary for their reproduction; that is why the maintenance of the working population, which capitalism needs and the conditions of the development of the productive forces, which capitalism needs—including the construction of roads, schools, hospitals—must inevitably take the form of the State, But what we are now being offered, on the contrary, is the bourgeois thesis . . . that the State is something other than the class struggle; that it is partly (for the essential part) detached from that struggle... (p 75)." Eurocommunist ideology is based on this ridiculous distinction between the repressive and organising role of the State—in short on investing the State with a supra-class function enabling its advocates to indulge in dreams about achieving socialism without the dictatorship of the proletariat. The author also combats the new arguments of those who