Xexizy needs to educate himself on Marxism-Leninism

According to him, Marxism-Leninism is 'When the Party does what is contrary to what the Proletariat want, because they think they know what's best for them'. (Paraphrasing)

Muke, you know nothing about Marxism-Lenism. What I suggest you do, is go to someone like theFinnishBolshevik and get him to have a discussion with you about Marxism-Leninism, like you did with that liberal about Socialism here youtube.com/watch?v=5O3ogBVOXW0

I'm not asking you to become an M-L or an M-L-M, but you should know what something is before you go around spreading your opinions on it, opinions based in false premises.

Other urls found in this thread:

onzetaal.nl/taaladvies/pannekoek-pannenkoek
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

the cold war is over user

Right, but all the current Marxist revolutionary movements are ML or MLM with the exception of EZLN which don't really do anything anymore, the government doesn't give a shit.

I think everyone can agree that the importance of communism now is not in its current existence but rather what it could be in a few years. The fact that the sad state of affairs for communism is in the hands of ML and MLM doesn’t mean they are any more important.

That being said I am MLM and think that what communism becomes will be MLM and believe there is more evidence of that than "naxals and DPR are ML bro"

but all the current Marxist revolutionary movements is get killed in the woods

I would argue that the almost overwhelming prevalence of ML/MLM would identify, in 2016 atleast, as the leading goal of the international proletariat.

As M-L-M Mayhem put it:

'Maoism, then, is just over two decades old, far younger than Marxism was at the time of the Russian Revolution, and already there have been significant attempts to pursue its operationalization: Peru, Nepal, India… There will be more attempts, and the RIM will rear its head again, and the 21st century will not only be a century of great rebellious upheaval––as is every period of crisis––but it will be for anti-capitalists, in many ways and despite banal movementist claims, the maoist century, just as the 20th century, regardless of the tiny counter-currents of anarchism and reformism, the leninist century.'

NPA is looking at a serious advantage with the new President's much less brutal counter-revolution against it. IIRC there is currently a cease-fire. There would not be a ceasefire if all the Revolutionaries were doing was getting killed in the woods, and in India, the Naxals are moving in on the industrial cities, or so I hear.

yeah this is what we need to solve our problems in 2016

I don't think you follow. The Ceasefire means that the government had to sign it in order to recover from what NPA has done to them. And if the Naxals take a city, that means that it's manpower will increase, possibly up to half a million depending on the city (they already have 100 000+ soldiers according to 2010 estimates, it's unlikely to have drastically changed since then), and taking a city/cities would mean transforming a rural guerrilla insurgency into a full on civil war.

I never said that…

If you're getting butthurt over my very old Stalinism video I already admitted that had problems in it though the core arguments I still mostly agreed with and have yet to really have anyone directly challenge them, but that's not to say therefore they must be right.

Honestly I've found myself becomming more and more sympathetic towards the USSR recently, but I still think ML'ism is irrelevant in the 21th century.

Lastly why did you make a fucking thread for this. Message me on twitter or fb or something jesus.

Of course they'd rather get into peace talks than have to deal with an insurgency, no matter how ineffectual it is. As for the Naxals, 100,000 people in India is not all that much.
Even if they do win somehow, revisionism will inevitably happen and the party will do retarded shit like the four pests campaign because of the nature of centralised authority.