>>677901I'm basically at this stage, but I don't think you need to discard Mao in favour of Hoxha, rather Hoxha has added to the Maoist position. I think a consistent Maoist position recognises the revisionism that took place in China nearing the end of Mao's life anyway.
What Mao holds about peoples war, serving the people, the national struggle, etc, a lot of this was either true at the time or remains true.
All his tactical advice is sound advice. Geopolitically, Hoxha is more on the money, and in a way he advanced Maoist theory by including urban guerrilla warfare, which is an important development given the massive urbanisation of the 20th century.
In terms of revolutionary optimism, obviously you don't want to be an insane trot who preaches that revolution is just round the corner if only we sell a bunch of papers, but we must be of the mindset that revolution is possible, and must be taken seriously as a possibility, and therefore every step we take should be with the concrete idea of revolution and everything that entails in mind, from the first step to the last.
One thing I disagree with Hoxha and probably many in this thread on is Yugoslavia, while Tito had his problems, he was clearly a resolute anti fascist and highly capable popular leader, which he demonstrated in high esteem. i don't think isolating Yugoslavia was the tactically correct decision