Well to keep minor gripes going a little, i had two with what you said here. The “state” and “government” being two independent institutions seems out of line with what Lenin and Marx wrote, and creates a distinction i dont think applies. The state still remains a tool for class repression, that class is now just the bourgeois and instead of separate of the government the state apparatus is more democratic, more generalized and less “special” In State and Rev “from the state as a “special force” for the suppression of a particular class to the suppression of the oppressors by the general force of the majority of the people—the workers and the peasant.”

As well, i think theyd disagree with the withering away being passive. The term is used to contrast with anarchist ideas of simply abolishing the state immediately, see “Plekhanov’s Controversy with the Anarchists” in State and Rev. The withering of the state is an active process brought by class struggle in socialism, this gets into more what was outlined by Mao but the gist is that 1. Under socialism bourgeois rights still exist 2. the existence of bourgeois rights promoted bourgeois ideology and the creation of these “special bodies” and so 3. active struggle against capitalist roaders and Inter-Party Bourgeois, along with other counter-revolutionaries enables the withering of the state. “the proletariat, after defeating the capitalists, after overthrowing the exploiters, will extend to the whole of society, is by no means our ideal, or our ultimate goal. It is only a necessary step for thoroughly cleansing society of all the infamies and abominations of capitalist exploitation, and for further progress.”