Actually, this town has more than enough room for the two of us
He/him or they/them, doesn't matter too much
Marxist-Leninist ☭
Interested in Marxism-Leninism, but don't know where to start? Check out my Read Theory, Darn it! introductory reading list!
That's a great comment, thanks for linking it! And ReadFanon hit the nail on the head, so to speak, we have to train and practice for revolution, while being cognizant that distrusting any and all formalized structure sets us back, as these formalized structures appear whether we acknowledge them de jure or not. Jo Freeman's essay is also wonderful for showing how we really need to formalize vanguards, so as to legitimately democratize them and prevent people from naturally dominating the space.
I’ve been thinking for a long time that any large-scale organization will lead to greed, corruption, injustice, et al.
Why? Seriously, think about it. Are you appealing to a supernatural explanation like "human nature," or a materialist answer? Is the presence of any corruption or greed unacceptable or incapable of countering with structures and checks?
It’s only since I’ve been reading about ML that I learned I lean anarchist. Vanguard parties sound like a bad idea to me.
Why are vanguards a bad idea, in your eyes? The working class should organize, and the most politically advanced should organize in parties. Can you imagine if we refused to let scientists perform research? If we refused to let surgeons handle surgery? Why should revolution be any different? Any long-term, complex project should be led by those who study and train for it.
Copying over @Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 's comment reply to you:
This is a very idealistic view of history. Ideology did not create material conditions, material conditions created ideology (and ideology was used as a tool to reinforce material conditions)
The slavery, genocide, capitalism and colonialism came first. Then liberalism was created to justify it. And I do want to emphasise that all of those 4 things were justified using liberal logic, that was the point of liberal logic.
The first liberals deemed the “unenligtened” to be subhuman, incapable or governing themselves, worthy of being treated like livestock and as fundamental threats to the ruling order. This was their justification for doing everything they did, you can read their writings on native Americans and Africans and see exactly what classical liberalism was all about.
Later waves of liberals ended up using liberal logic to abolish slavery. Great. But the reason they did this was because the capitalist mode of production had superceded the slave mode of production. The surplus of proletariats hated competing with slaves and having their wages be reduced. Meanwhile the northern bourgeoise often had friction with the southern planters since the planters were rentiers extracting wealth from the whole economy like parasites.
Modern liberals now proclaim themselves to be great champions of “liberty” (the liberty for the bourgeoise to buy property), but they by in large continue to support capitalism and western imperialism*. And frankly, why wouldn’t they? That was what the ideology was created for.
*you can see this in their insistence upon using “white man’s burden” arguments whenever foreign intervention comes up
I'm both a Statesian and a communist, sure.
If you want to learn about Marxism, I made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list. I'll also copy over @Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 's reply to you, which you cannot see:
Engels and lenin had good writings for beginners. You might want to read principles of communism, or state and revolution to get some basic context and theory. The first one is structured like an FAQ and is short. The latter you can find english translations that are quite accessible.
Once you understand the basic principles of marxism, you will understand just how different the whole philosophy really is. If you get deep into the theory, you might see that Marxism is basically a whole separate branch of philosophy that breaks away from the enlightened tradition of western philosophy. In some small sense, I see Marxism as a refuation of liberalism.
Sadly .world accounts won't see this.
Liberalism was pushed by capitalists in fighting the aristocracy. In that sense, it was progressive, but only in that context. Now, it's outstayed that welcome, and is used to fight against progress. We have lived up to the constitution, it was designed to protect capitalist profits and rule as a settler-colony founded on genocide.
As for communism, the various socialist countries have lived up to Marxist ideals. The problem is that, at least in the eyes of some typically western communists, socialism in real life means having all of the struggles and imperfections that come with being real, and these imperfections can't compare to the perfect, almost religiously pure ideal of socialism in western leftist heads. If we uphold Marxism correctly, we support this existing socialism, warts and all, for being dramatically progressive and liberatory for the working classes.
MLs have a lot to be frustrated about. We advocate organizing in real life, which has its own frustrations, and when most people are still supportive of capitalism it's a constant uphill battle. We arn't angsty edgelords using ML as an excuse, but often tired and drained because we are MLs, leading to many of us lashing out.
Liberalism is the ideology supportive of capitalism. Marxism is supportive of socialism. I think it's important to recognize that liberalism was driven by capitalists to fight the aristocracy while justifying their own future rule.
Yes, being fine with the system of capitalism and all it entails when it's clear that we need to advance to socialism is a problem.
Neoliberalism is a subset of liberalism. Liberalism is older than neoliberalism, and was in fact built on the slave trade and colonialism.
Platforms like Voat have disgustingly promoted fascist ideologies in the name of “free speech”, but that doesn’t excuse leading members of Lemmygrad, Hexbear, and Lemmy.ml from their persistent history of supporting Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, supporting Chinese totalitarianism (not even true communism) over Taiwanese democracy, and disgusting transphobia.
I don't know what you mean by "true" communism.
For the sake of Lemmy’s growth, it’s problematic that join-lemmy.org (as an official platform) features Hexbear, Lemmygrad, and Lemmy.ml so prominently. While I dislike Reddit enough to have not tossed away Lemmy as a whole for its tankies and instead blocked those instances, featuring and recommending the use of extremist instances hurts Lemmy’s image (and Piefed and Mbin by association) in the eyes of potential users.
Speak for yourself, the fact that Lemmy offers leftist and communist instances is a big draw for a lot of users, myself included. They are prominent due to their size and activity, and recommending them for those who want them is good for growth. Further, for those that prefer not to be on leftist/communist instances, it's good that the communists have a place to go to, rather than joining, say, Lemmy.world, which would be a poor fit and result in far more friction.
Marx rejected liberal values of individualism and the free reign of private property, I'm not sure exactly what you're including in "liberal values."
Yep, and going to brunch.
Sure, but we must still understand their utility exists to justify the base, ie the economic structures.
Imperalism wasn't coined by Lenin, he built off of Hobson and used Marxist analysis. Just a minor correction.
Pretty much, lol!
Brunch isn't bad itself!