This is not a SFW instance. NSFW communities will be tagged, and efforts will be made to keep SFW communities clean, but proceed at your own comfort level.
An interesting idea. Is someone more or less of the marxist if they are the marxist-leninist or are they less the Marxist than someone who says they are just Marxist?
Is a marxist-lenist-stalinist-maoist-thenextsomeone less of a Marxist than a marxist-lenist? How much of the principles and the heories are diluted or revised or pure? Is the Stalinist a revisionist, is it a revision if its a condition of the current needs and pragmatism? Does denouncing of crimes constitute revision? If someone calls themself a Stalinist and someone points to the secret speech as evidence of crimes, who is then the reactionary for the next comment?
Is the only “pure” Marxist then Marx at the exact moment of the death. Himself will have ‘adjusted’ the positions (revised?) as time goes towards.
I guess we’re operating from different starting assumptions. If you think there can be a “pure” Marxism or Marx’s theory is definitive, complete, or perfect, then I see how you could take issue with any modifications or additions to it.
If the demarcation of Marxism is to be so rigid, a theory more akin to a dogma, then I see how such disagreements might arise.
Unfortunately I don’t think this kind of model, emblematic of organized religion, is how the vast majority of self-professed Marxist-Leninists conceive of it. So the line of thought which seems to run along parallel lines to religious theology is going to be ineffective.
The possibilities of Marx’s purity or perfection of theory as put forth are hilariously ironic but I don’t think they’re serious, given how well known is for opposing idealism and organized religion in particular. I also think it might already have a cheeky name that echoes Christianity – Orthodox Marxism.
I am sorry, this comment went in the different direction. Is there not a dogmatic critique of the cult of x? Stalin’s successor was famously speech about the corrupting power of the individual. This was sharply rebuked by PRC as being revisionist. The interpretation of “orthodox Marxism” and revisions to ML. Cheeky. Would the USSR of the past not critique the PRC of today for its trade with the US or EU and lead to a soviet-sino split?
I lack the understanding of the mechanisms of PRC, USSR. I expect that they are at grass root very community driven. I also expect that dogmatic leadership can be a real problem, and my usual scared in enabling a ML which usually advocates for the vanguard, may turn into the board of public safety. The mechanism of recall or public shaming do little to remove the power of the threat of violence.
How will the corrupt be prevented from centralising the power and going against the interest of the common. In PRC we have seen purges of corruption, mayors hoarding bribed gold, billionaires exist, and Xi says they will achieve socialism beyond 2050. What trust can I put in the dogmatic to deliver a stateless, classless, moneyless society. Am I choosing between the shiniest of two turds? We do it because we must, but do I replace one master with another?
An interesting idea. Is someone more or less of the marxist if they are the marxist-leninist or are they less the Marxist than someone who says they are just Marxist?
Is a marxist-lenist-stalinist-maoist-thenextsomeone less of a Marxist than a marxist-lenist? How much of the principles and the heories are diluted or revised or pure? Is the Stalinist a revisionist, is it a revision if its a condition of the current needs and pragmatism? Does denouncing of crimes constitute revision? If someone calls themself a Stalinist and someone points to the secret speech as evidence of crimes, who is then the reactionary for the next comment?
Is the only “pure” Marxist then Marx at the exact moment of the death. Himself will have ‘adjusted’ the positions (revised?) as time goes towards.
I guess we’re operating from different starting assumptions. If you think there can be a “pure” Marxism or Marx’s theory is definitive, complete, or perfect, then I see how you could take issue with any modifications or additions to it.
If the demarcation of Marxism is to be so rigid, a theory more akin to a dogma, then I see how such disagreements might arise.
Unfortunately I don’t think this kind of model, emblematic of organized religion, is how the vast majority of self-professed Marxist-Leninists conceive of it. So the line of thought which seems to run along parallel lines to religious theology is going to be ineffective.
The possibilities of Marx’s purity or perfection of theory as put forth are hilariously ironic but I don’t think they’re serious, given how well known is for opposing idealism and organized religion in particular. I also think it might already have a cheeky name that echoes Christianity – Orthodox Marxism.
I am sorry, this comment went in the different direction. Is there not a dogmatic critique of the cult of x? Stalin’s successor was famously speech about the corrupting power of the individual. This was sharply rebuked by PRC as being revisionist. The interpretation of “orthodox Marxism” and revisions to ML. Cheeky. Would the USSR of the past not critique the PRC of today for its trade with the US or EU and lead to a soviet-sino split?
I lack the understanding of the mechanisms of PRC, USSR. I expect that they are at grass root very community driven. I also expect that dogmatic leadership can be a real problem, and my usual scared in enabling a ML which usually advocates for the vanguard, may turn into the board of public safety. The mechanism of recall or public shaming do little to remove the power of the threat of violence.
How will the corrupt be prevented from centralising the power and going against the interest of the common. In PRC we have seen purges of corruption, mayors hoarding bribed gold, billionaires exist, and Xi says they will achieve socialism beyond 2050. What trust can I put in the dogmatic to deliver a stateless, classless, moneyless society. Am I choosing between the shiniest of two turds? We do it because we must, but do I replace one master with another?