Did Marx ever once utter the word "revisionism?" If you think about it. Anti-revisionism is the ultimate revisionism because it is anti-dialectical. It stresses revisiting the "classics" of the numbered heads (however many you think are "worthy" of the title, 4 or 5 or 6) of Marxism-Leninism rather than scientifically studying the evolving world and coming up with New Theses. Marx and Engels were anti-dogmatic and stressed an evolving understanding of the system, yet so many of their followers today are "anti-revisionists" who think nothing (or at least nothing important) has changed since 1883.
Nice quote farming, libtard.
I got one too
>The essence of the “new” trend, which adopts a “critical” attitude towards “obsolete dogmatic” Marxism, has been clearly enough presented by Bernstein and demonstrated by Millerand. Social-Democracy must change from a party of social revolution into a democratic party of social reforms
<What Is To Be Done?
>>2639683>scientifically studying the evolving world is libtardedwrong
>obsolete dogmatic marxismdidnt say that marxism is obsolete and dogmatic. in fact i said marxism is the opposite of obsolete and dogmatic. this is why anti-revisionists dont understand marxism. they dont actually apply marxism to their material circumstances but larp as dead guys who did.
>Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time-honored disguise and borrowed language. Thus Luther put on the mask of the Apostle Paul, the Revolution of 1789-1814 draped itself alternately in the guise of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, and the Revolution of 1848 knew nothing better to do than to parody, now 1789, now the revolutionary tradition of 1793-95. In like manner, the beginner who has learned a new language always translates it back into his mother tongue, but he assimilates the spirit of the new language and expresses himself freely in it only when he moves in it without recalling the old and when he forgets his native tongue.https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch01.htm >>2639718Nice back peddling, retarded cuck.
>>2639582Revisionism was a historical tendency within Marxism, it's not just the dictionary term, lol. It came decades after Marx's death with Bernstein. And no, revisionism was fucking terrible. The majority of the marxist left denounced it, including Kautsky himself.
>>2639719>back peddlingyour mama peddles her back daily
>>2639718>anti-revisionists dont understand marxism. they dont actually apply marxism to their material circumstances but larp as dead guys who did. applying marxism to material circumstances requires creativity, charisma, and authority that they lack. they're afraid of being purged so they quote the masters and appeal to their authority like feckless scions. the eternal paradox of "marxism" (besides the fact that Marx said he wasn't one) is that you can justify any amount of revisionism and opportunism by dogmatically quoting the dead masters, while at the same time, those who actually Do Communism i.e. Scientific Socialism I.e. The Real Movement get called "Revisionist" and "Opportunist" for
not being dogmatic appealers-to-authority.
At the end of the day "Marxist" infighting is invariably Marx's "Ruthless Criticism of All That Exists" (Decried As Ultra Leftism) Versus Marx's "The Real Movement To Abolish The Present State Of Things" (Decried As Opportunism/Revisionism).>>2639721OP said anti revisionists don't understand Marx, not that revisionism is good. you guys lack reading comprehension
>>2639734Ah yes Marx the bandwagoning activist
>>2639741He was literally at every protest in London thinking that was the spark
>>2639725>commodity form is at tbe center of everhghingLol
Lmao
Good job turning marx on his head
>>2640674the meme is clearly making fun of that type of person
>>2641176no args, just slander
>>2639582Quote mining is based actually.
>>2641707exactly
embrace the dengism elder scroll
>>2639582Anti-revisionism is the worst product of revisionism.
>>2641868I assume Marx/Engels are the origin point of the graph that anchors everything?
>>2642229So what is the Scientific (tm) Socialist way to distinguish between "Dogmatism" and "Revisionism?" Just loyalty to Marx and Engels? But Engels stresses evolution and context sensitivity in the OP quote, as does historical materialism in general. What is the unambiguous and indisputable way to tell the difference between someone applying Marxism correctly to their particular material conditions, and someone being an "opportunist/revisionist?" What is the unambiguous and indisputable way to tell the difference between someone being loyal to Marx/Engels and someone being overly "dogmatic?" These are not rhetorical questions. I see no clear methodology and I think the a significant amount of Communist infighting may be correlated with (not necessarily caused by) an inability to address these questions.
We need to start meming on these elder scroll posters
They always post absolute dogshit all over /leftypol/
Unique IPs: 20