Since Marxism-Leninism led to Trotskyism, Stalinism, and Khrushchevism, and since Maoism and Anarchism are memes, what exactly is the strain of socialist thought we should adhere to in the 21st century?
Since Marxism-Leninism led to Trotskyism, Stalinism, and Khrushchevism, and since Maoism and Anarchism are memes...
Marxism-leninism with anarcho-communist characteristics
A new one, we can't know yet.
how about we concern ourselves with the only thing that matters: where the proletariat, wholly separate of any pre-ideological necessities, already finds itself resisting capital and in what forms, and contrast this to (the complete lack of) its prior methods?
Isn't that leaning into Marxism-Leninism-Maoism?
I dont know, hope its syndicalism.
But the one thing i do know is that the lefts tendencies towards sectarianism needs to stop and does us no good, we need a thought that we can at least all agree on.
we need a new manifesto for the left in the 21st century.
The people who are actually engaged in an organized armed struggle for socialism in today's world are mostly Maoists. That doesn't mean you need to be a Maoist yourself or agree with Maoism necessarily, but you definitely shouldn't dismiss it as a meme just because it also happens to be popular among edgy idpol obsessed ☭TANKIE☭ LARPers on twitter.
And I fucking hate anarchists but a similar argument could be made about anarchism.
We call it socialism and strengthen unions, hard left parties within bourgeois democracy, ourselves, and weaken the bourgeois state and corporate power all at once, while we wait for any potential trigger for a violent revolution
user, this does actually have a name: empiricism.
No because we aren't dumb chinks
Also this: nihilistic reformism.
1. Stalinism doesn't exist. It's a slanderous fighting term by liberals.
2. Trotskyism isn't Marxist Leninist. Leninism was actually a term coined by Trotskyites in opposition to it and only later adopted by Leninists.
3. Khrushchevism isn't Marxist Leninists, it's a revisionist deviation away from it seeking to destroy it from within, breaking with its principles while hiding behind its banner.
4. You forgot to mention the revisionist Hoxhaites. They, like Maoists, are revisionists as well, even more obscure than Khrushchevites, hiding behind the banner of "anti-revisionism".
Our local albaniaflag poster is advocating for people like fucking Dubcek ffs, basically an early Gorbachev.
The answer is: Marxism Leninism.
anarcho-communism with national-capitalist characteristics
The immortal dialectical science that is so advanced, it’s indistinguishable from magic of Juan Posadist Thought, or Marxism-Trotskyism-Posadism
Wait shit my flag lol
Look, the party organizes. It reaches critical mass. It takes the state. It takes the world. It withers due to no more Capitalists, no more private property, no more market. It's really, really fucking simple and we have way, way too many of these threads. The only complicated part is the execution, and if the "debate" is over execution, I must be on a different Holla Forums board, because all I see are autists who are really upset because they A.) are retarded or B.) are retarded.
I dont "Support" Dubcek so to speak
I was simply against the Soviet invasion
Hoxhaism IS Marxism-Leninism
Lenin was the last to develop marxist theory with scientific methodology and actually incorporate it into praxis. After Lenin, the USSR took a dogmatic approach (what they coined as diamat) towards his writings. Also the stash is right, there is no such thing as "stalinism". Stalin didn't develop anything himself, his whole body of written work was more of a encyclopedic gathering of lenin's theories. "Stalinism" is a slur coined by all shades of revisionism to refer to that, when they themselves are the ones who introduced non-scientific anti-marxist concepts in their own "versions" of marxism (for example trotsky and his "state capitalism" bullshit).
That being said, the ussr was very dogmatic on the subject of developing the science of marxism. Dogmatic enough to threaten any researcher attempting this with deletion from the party/ hold them in contempt. As of today, the pioneering developments on marxist theory have been made by victor alexeyevich vaziulin (the logic of history) and evald vassilievich ilyenkov (dialectical logic). Only in the recent years have the comintern parties been willing to study these to scholars and take their research into consideration. Unfortunately, much of their work doesn't exist in english so I cannot upload any .pdfs.
You just immediately proved that you have not read a single line of anything Trotsky ever wrote.
I've read all your 30 page pamphlets. You should read trotsky's philosophical and psychological musings, where he states marxism doesn't apply to psychology and a freudian approach is more relevant.
Trotsky literally never used the term "state capitalism" to describe the USSR and devoted several pages in The Revolution Betrayed to explaining why it wasn't an accurate descriptor.
Don't pretend to read people you haven't read.
oh i'm sorry, "degenerated worker's state" lmao
that was Lenin you illiterate
Calling the USSR socialist as opposed to a degenerated workers' state just goes to show that you have no idea what Marx or Engels said about anything.
One of the least developed major economies in the world can't have the most advanced mode of production. This is the ABCs of Marxism.
On the other hand, Jobbik and Angela Merkel.
We need to figure out what we're doing wrong.
I'm referring to trotsky's "critique" of "stalinism", not the policies of war communism obviously
have you actually read marx? socialism is ONLY possible in underdeveloped nations once when capitalism reaches the imperialist stage, because those are the most exploited ones. have you even read anything lenin wrote?
fucking responding to trots is a farce every single time. they give you those 30 page pamphlets about "muh bureaucracy" which essentially go like "this phenomenon is something that plagues the ussr, let's dig a little deeper and see how it came to be" and goes to "it's all stalin's fault" in 3 pages flat. none of you have read marx or engels or even lenin, at least most m-ls have read lenin if nothing else
daily reminder that trots
That was Lenin, not Marx. And he said socialist *revolution* will happen first in less developed countries. Not socialism itself.
Both Marx and Lenin were very clear in their belief that socialism/the lower stage of communism HAS to happen in the advanced countries first. Wanna know why? Because productive forces are what determine productive modes, you fucking moron.
Trotsky was dead by this point. I don't care what some random Trot groups said, I care what Trotsky himself said.
Oh wow, the hand-picked followers of Stalin and his allies voted to kick Trotsky out. Shocking.
This is true of every leftist tendency. Do you know how many fucking Maoist groups there are in the USA?
Stalin literally said (on multiple occasions) that the USSR can peacefully co-exist with capitalist countries. What's more class collaborationist than that?
It's more that Stalin and Khrushchev were able to take ML and use it to their own ends, within scope of the theory and is it possible to avoid that without being revisionist. Is there a neo-orthodox Leninism?
It's called "pragmatism".
fucking kys you pseud
How dumb can you be?
God I fucking hate trots
So social democracy in a controversial package
And yet… pretty much the only active leftists in the world are either Maoist (India, over a dozen US military bases in Syria) or syndicalist (pretty much all of the new wave of Latin American Labour and student organisation)
R0java is closer to communalism or even mutalism than maoism.
>"mom i showed some guy i know what a word means, i quoted wikipedia!"
by the regressive facial hair of the classics you are one sad and stupid faggot
How can someone this dumb unironically post under the book flag?
PKK are communalist/democratic confederalist ex leninists, the MKP and MLKP are the next two most influential groups of the coalition
I personally think we need to have a global collapse , but if we can steer it in the right direction id prefer Not Socialism with state capitalist and republican (of being a republic, not right wing) traits
Holla Forums is god awful and economically illiterate
user, why are you here? Also how many fucking nazi-posters do we have around here nowadays.
Marxism-Leninism of course.
this but (almost) unironically
we agree about stuff like building dual power, right?
Maybe a hybrid of Syndicalism and Technocracy, in which specific political fields are voted in my unionized workers (eg, farmers vote for secretary of agriculture, teachers for education, maybe form an immigration union for the immigration departments, etc) At least I feel that would be somewhat sustainable if done globally. If not, the third-world will have to collectively revolt so capitalist can't exploit their lands and people.
So it's right where you belong, then.
M A R X I S M
Che was a Stalinist.
The problem is the "withering" is not so simple. You think The Party, once they've literally taken over the world, will just step down from power? lol, no. Politicians fundamentally just want to be class president, and they will do whatever it takes to stay on top until someone else pulls them down.
This is why dual power is the only viable solution. Assuming ML takeover, the transition to communism needs to start immediately. When the Party starts suppressing actual democratic workers councils, then the revolution has failed.
No. In fact, he was diametrically opposed to the Stalinist theses on socialist political economy, particularly the deliberate use of the (capitalist) law of value: marxists.org
Cuba only started a Sovietization process of sorts after he died, and even then only because they needed a reliable economic partner.
another book on Guevara's thought: gen.lib.rus.ec
But aren't the labor unions in the present capitalist system spooked to hell?
How's Cuba today?
Marxism-Leninism is just the official name for Stalinism. The theories of Lenin are referred to as Leninism.
This is a meme.
Yes, String Emil is a meme.
No, Marxism-Leninism being the official name for Stalinism is not a meme. Stalin was the first to coin the term "Marxism-Leninism", largely in reference to his own policies in order to claim that said policies and his administration were just a continuation of Lenin.
In my opinion, whatever socialist movement of the future that comes will most likely be some kind of loose united front built upon some kind of collective sectarian understanding that post-revolution the different factions will be separate and probably only interact in some kind of confederate parliament to discuss happenings. Our hate for each other will carry us forward
Interesting. I was just thinking of these quotes:
>Along the way, I had the opportunity to pass through the dominions of the United Fruit, convincing me once again of just how terrible these capitalist octopuses are. I have sworn before a picture of the old and mourned comrade Stalin that I won’t rest until I see these capitalist octopuses annihilated.
>In the so called mistakes of Stalin lies the difference between a revolutionary attitude and a revisionist attitude. You have to look at Stalin in the historical context in which he moves, you don’t have to look at him as some kind of brute, but in that particular historical context. I have come to communism because of daddy Stalin and nobody must come and tell me that I mustn’t read Stalin. I read him when it was very bad to read him. That was another time. And because I’m not very bright, and a hard-headed person, I keep on reading him.
Btw, wasn't the "Sovietization" of Cuba kinda copy-pasting the Soviet system under Khrushchev, not the Stalin era? I believe this is why many anti-revisionist MLs and Maoists believe, not only that Cuba isn't socialist, but that Cuba was never socialist.
Stalin wrote "The Foundations of Leninism", not "The Foundations of Marxism-Leninism".
Ho Chi Minh, an "ML"/"Stalinist" wrote "The Path Which Led Me To Leninism", not "The Path Which Led Me To Marxism-Leninism" and in it he's praising the "Stalinist" third international.
The Communist Party of China, a "ML" party published "Long Live Leninism!", not "Long Live Marxism-Leninism!".
The League of Communists of Yugoslavia, who were totally anti-Stalin and which characterized the USSR as "bureaucratic socialism," still described itself as Marxist-Leninist.
The idea that there is some clear distinction between Leninism and Marxism-Leninism is something people who watched a few youtube videos and hang out on r/socialism_101 believe. It's completely disconnected from how the terms Leninism and Marxism-Leninism have been used historically. "Stalinists" used the term Leninism interchangeably with the term Marxism-Leninism to describe their ideology. And anti-Stalinists used the term Marxism-Leninism interchangeably with the term Leninism to describe their ideology.
De Leonism is pretty much the very best ideology that the left has on offer.
It being at the head of a resurgent (anti id-pol) left is really the only thing that could bring me back to Socialism.
I think the left needs to see to the cancer that is killing it before it can hope to effectively organise again.
Unless something is done about the id-polers that currently control the left; Socialism is going to be effectively dead for several generations, if not longer.
Not according to Lenin.
I never claimed that these parties never used the term "Leninism", merely that "Marxism-Leninism" referred more properly to Stalinism because only Stalinists used the term because it's completely redundant. It's a term people only used if they were trying to either suck off the CPSU or invoke the figure of Stalin.
I just wrote that the fucking yugos used the term Marxism-Leninism as well. I've heard trots use "Marxism-Leninism" to basically mean the theories of Lenin and Marx too (and in that sense Stalinism and Trotskyism are different tendencies within ML).
Oh and "Marxism-Leninism" was used in the USSR after destalinization as well.
Yugoslavia was more of an exception.
But, yes, the Khrushchevites used it too to basically refer to the party line of the CPSU, but since there there basically aren't any Khrushchevites anymore, and people who follow the Yugoslavian system tend to either call themselves Titoists or Market Socialists, Marxism-Leninism refers mostly to Stalinism in the modern day.
And don't come to me with what a couple of no-theory Trots *might* have said. There's no such thing as non-Marxist Leninism, the term is stupid and redundant and only used by people still desperately fellating Stalin's decaying corpse.
Marxism is not an ideology, Leninism is insofar as it is a guide to action. Together, it's Marxist analysis of the conditions of existence + vanguard party ideology, and it's stratification into real existing socialism through Stalin's achievements.
That doesn't matter. Leninism is largely an expansion of Marxism. There's no need to stick Marxism in front. Leninism doesn't make sense outside of the framework of Marxism, therefore Marxism is directly implied.
Hopefully someone not named after a person, because it's a huge red flag (of the bad kind) that a cult of personality will follow.
Scrap most everything written by the top Bolsheviks after Lenin died, and instead read what Soviet and other communist economists and philosophers were writing afterwards. The USSR was founded by intellectuals, but bureaucrats completely dislodged them, in no small part with Stalin's help, and as a result, the government was filled with mediocrities or downright sociopaths. Needless to say, virtually all commie countries repeated the same mistakes.
Also, again, change labels and aesthetics. These kinds of labels matter, whether you like it or not.
What did Stalin mean by this?
Market Socialism for realistic economics that actually work and Democratic Confederalism for horizontal power structure in society.
So basically Mutualism.
Made by IMF gang
I sure do love unemployment an debt.
Yugoslavia, while unironically decent, was a failure: read Zizek.
One party state led by charismatic technocrats with a socialist constitution and a strong rule of law based behind it to prevent porkie tampering and corruption
Economy would be a state monopoly based on cybernetic planning, determining what the enterprises would do between each other
The planning would mix centralized and decentralized methods. Workers would have an input as well.
The currency would almost entirely be replaced by labor vouchers.
A special emphasis would be put on anti-imperialism, post-colonialism and environmentalism. The cities would be almost carfree and rely on mass transit.
I CAN ONLY DREAM…
Just call it communism. Anything else leads to pointless infighting and ideology-shopping nonsense.
Immediately send these sorts to a prison or some sort of work camp. They are hugely dangerous and as far away from communism as any nazi is.
At least go with Kadarism, you silly twat.
nice try IMF gang
OGAS all the way!
Well, obviously. But that guy wanted Market Socialism. And the shittier strain of the two Market implementations.
You know, Orthodox folk creed says that the bodies of saints don't decompose. And Stalin was well aware of this, having been a seminarist. He knew what he was doing even more than we think.
The cybernetic economic control network is more popular in Holla Forums than I thought.
Lenins strenght and failure was his material understanding of his time. So when he wrote civil society was still embryonic, and since his life was filled with wars jails soldiers and police aka the repressive state apparatus he didn't write enough about the ideological state apparatus. U need to update leninism with gramsci. The state is now far too developed and the revolutionary subjects are too deep into ideology to engage in any revolutionary action in the west
how about marxism?
It´s a reformist meme that is not to be taken seriously.