ANTI-REVISIONISM GENERAL Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:32:36 No. 668762 [Last 50 Posts]
A thread for anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninists who apply and stick by the tried-and-tested principles of communism; revolutionary armed struggle, the necessity of socialist construction via economic planning, the need for dictatorship of the proletariat, rejection of social-democracy, proletarian internationalism, democratic centralism, anti-imperialism and the centrality of class struggle.
No Dengism.
No social-democracy.
No Khrushchevites.
No Titoites.
No Eurocommunists.
No anarchism.
All those who defend these principles are welcome, whether Hoxhaist, Maoist, or otherwise.
READING LIST The real Stalin series.
https://espressostalinist.com/the-real-stalin-series/ Eurocommunism is Anti-Communism
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/euroco/env2-1.htm Yugoslav "Self-Administration" – Capitalist Theory and Practice
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/1978/yugoslavia/index.htm The Titoites
http://www.marx2mao.com/Other/TT82NB.html The Revisionist Attack on Marxist-Leninist Economics
https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/periodicals/marxist-leninist-research-bureau/mlrb-02.pdf Principles of Marxism-Leninism: A Study Course
https://espressostalinist.com/marxism-leninism-versus-revisionism/principles-of-marxism-leninism-a-study-course/ The Khrushchevites
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/1976/khruschevites/index.htm Useful websites.
https://www.mltranslations.org/ https://espressostalinist.com/ https://neodemocracy.blogspot.com/ https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/ https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/erol.htm Feel feel to contribute more.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:33:34 No. 668763
>>668762 What about Cockshott?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:39:09 No. 668771
We already have a Maoism general so this seems more like a Hoxhaist or ML general.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:43:52 No. 668777
FINALLY
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:44:22 No. 668778
>>668771 I said Maoists are welcome. If we're going by the restoration of capitalism argument then clearly Maoism doesn't fit either.
My problem with Maoism is that it originally arose as a sort of tendency towards "national Marxism" as Hoxha mentions here, and that I do not think it is applicable to proletarianised countries, only ones with a large peasantry and a dispersed population.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/imp_rev/imp_ch6.htm Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:47:24 No. 668780
Maoists are welcome
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:52:30 No. 668786
>>668780 Cockshott is supportive of all existing socialist states including the PRC and Vietnam. Are you sure you want to welcome his followers?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:10:01 No. 668796
>>668786 >Citation: your ass There are numerous occasions where he has argued the opposite.
In the market socialism video he doesn't even consider China "market socialist" (relegating that to Tito's Yugoslavia) but rather closer to classical social democracy, or the UK Labour Party during either the 60s or 70s.
In another talk he outright argues for the Vietnamese to adopt his cybernetic direct democratic centralism model, which would take the country to a hard left and move away from money and instead implement labor tokens (domestically)
Finally in the most recent example he gave this talk to a group in
recently liberalized Shanghai saying explicitly that the short-sighted China simp model of some LatAm communist parties are mistaken and that they should instead emulate a strategy closer to ML-Mao Zedong Thought, or dare I say Maoism:
https://youtu.be/be0ZvoBXm88 He's not railing against "modern revisionism" in MLM fashion but it is abundantly clear that he does not share the rightist position and in fact has proposals in line more with a political line somewhere in between general ML anti-revisionism and even left-communism (so pretty much the opposite political direction of the Bukharinites/Dengites/Xiists).
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:13:18 No. 668803
Anarchists are welcome.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:15:10 No. 668804
Lenin Hat is not welcome.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:17:02 No. 668806
>>668796 You're misinterpreting Cockshott's arguments. He considers the UK social democratic government as a genuine step towards socialism, one that failed due to insufficient ability to turn the tools of state repression towards the capitalist class when they went on investment strike.
But by support, I mean he defends AES states against imperialist aggression as evidence by his lecture on the dangers of AUKUS.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:20:43 No. 668813
I have literally never seen a definition of "revisionist", the word is only a vulgar smear meant to shut down thought and debate, it's the mirror of "tankie"
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:21:10 No. 668814
>>668806 >But by support, I mean he defends AES states against imperialist aggression as evidence by his lecture on the dangers of AUKUS. As do most. This isn't a counterargument. Also in historical overviews he clearly favors the Stalin and Mao periods in the USSR and China.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:22:16 No. 668815
>>668813 Not even being sarcastic, start here:
>>285223 Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:24:17 No. 668817
>>668815 At least link to a particular post or pdf in that thread
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:35:02 No. 668826
>>668786 Cockshott is supportive of them on a personal level. His theory time and again showed the problems of the Bukharin/Deng model of socialism.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:36:03 No. 668828
Incredible thread
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:40:22 No. 668833
>>668817 Marx & Engels:
Critique of the Gotha Programme Lenin:
The State and Revolution Hoxha:
Reject the Revisionist Theses of the XX Congress […] Mao:
On Contradiction Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 03:09:45 No. 668861
>anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninists
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 03:14:26 No. 668865
There's no such thing as revisionism, what you denounce as revisionism 99% of the time is a good faith effort to move the class struggle forward in a country or region's specific conditions. Sometimes it will involve class collaboration, other times it means class liquidation. Taking "Leninism", meaning Marxism applied to 19th and 20th century Russian conditions, and attempting to apply it everywhere and it will not work.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 03:14:50 No. 668866
I invite an MLM to also reply to this
>>668833 with a good anti-revisionist work from maybe CPI-(Maoist) or CPP
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 03:54:37 No. 668925
>>668865 Nobody asked, liberal
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 03:57:45 No. 668931
>>668925 It's you who is the liberal, attempting to take your idea of "Leninism" which comes purely from your head and bludgeon people with it until you get into power is liberalism, subjectivism, and idealism all wrapped into one. Some communists will win bourgeois elections, some will win revolutionary wars against the state, others will be in trade union politics, this ALL CONTEXT DEPENDENT.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:01:45 No. 668940
>>668865 This. Accusations of "revisionism" are more often than not sectarian jabs over disputes which by no means should produce any sort of organizational split in our movement. Honestly if the label is meant to mean acting in the interests of the bourgeoisie while pretending to uphold Marxism, the label "revisionist" probably only actually applies to the betrayal of the socdems in WW1, and debatably Deng, Gorbachev, and the capitalist roaders. People who throw it around often seem genuinely incapable of conceiving that an intelligent, well-meaning comrade could have a different view than them. You might as well call people "heretics" at this point.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:03:02 No. 668941
>>668865 >revisionism doesn't exist This is complete bullshit. Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc. fought revisionists all the time.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:04:26 No. 668944
>>668762 The first revisionist was Marx. Second was Lenin. We go further and further away from full communism with these clowns claiming its realistic to establish dystopian slave societies to achieve communism. WHAT A FUCKING TRAGIC JOKE.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:05:53 No. 668946
>>668941 I'll give you Lenin but how did Marx and Engels fight revisionism when their thiught wasn't even hegemonic in the movement of the time? Makes no sese
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:07:43 No. 668948
>>668944 "Mask"* off! *(We all knew it was coming)
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:09:19 No. 668949
>>668947 Ah yes, because the proletariat would thrive under nuclear war
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:10:05 No. 668951
>>668949 Its better alternative than slave societies of leninism and capitalism.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:10:22 No. 668952
>>668946 Why are you here if you refuse to read basic materials? Why did you choose to become an e-poser? Don't you feel shame?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:12:56 No. 668960
>>668953 Again, if there's no proper organization how can you be a revisionist? What official line was there to revise?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 04:26:53 No. 668976
>>668960 >Again, if there's no proper organization how can you be a revisionist? There were already organizations in their time. Marx and Engels helped organize the International, and various workers parties were starting to emerge.
>What official line was there to revise? The revolutionary one.. the Marxist one, that reformists and revisionists tried to attack or abandon.. either through ignorance or class betrayal.
You should check this out
https://mronline.org/2020/12/04/119739/ Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:17:34 No. 669030
>>668947 This is the exact shit I'm talking about. When Stalin throws Greece under the bus to avoid war with the West, or demands that Spanish Republicans pay for supplies in gold while Hitler hands them to Franco on credit, vulgar-Stalinists bend over backwards to justify or excuse this. But when Khruschev refuses to start a nuclear war over Cuba, suddenly he's an evil revisionist. "Peaceful coexistence" was a fucking meme. Sure, a peace drive on the part of the Soviets was doomed to fail, but it's also clear that when the Americans didn't reciprocate the Soviets hardly backed down. They still were by far the greatest benefactor of revolutionary and national liberation movements around the world. They were still a bulwark against imperialism and an inspiration for the oppressed. Shit, at least Cuba's revolution survives to this day despite Khruschev's "betrayal". I wish I could say the same about Greece. Like I said, most accusations of "revisionism" are retarded, and the accusations made against Khruschev are the prime example. That mf continued the vast majority of Stalin's policies, led the USSR through one of its greatest periods of growth and prosperity, and oversaw some of its greatest achievements. But sure, he was actually on the side of the bourgeoisie because he didn't doom the world to nuclear Armageddon.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:20:28 No. 669033
>>669030 lets be honest the reason why kruschev is demonized is that he failed, meanwhile someone like deng isnt as demonized because he succeded
. I wouldnt be suprised that if the soviet union survived up to this day, a lot of anti kruschev communists would be praising kruschev just like some do to deng. Hell a lot more would be praising kruschev since kruschev nowhere did the extreme reforms deng did.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:23:19 No. 669034
>>669030 >That mf continued the vast majority of Stalin's policies, He got rid of tractor sharing and abandoned progressive reduction of the workday
Stalin laid out everything he needed to know in the Economic Problems
KRUSCHEV BETRAYED THE SOVIET UNION BY NOT READING THE FUCKING MANUAL and by criticising the great and merciful Stalin Fuck Kruschev!
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:23:22 No. 669035
>>669033 >lets be honest the reason why kruschev is demonized is that he failed I wouldn't even say that. It what sense did he fail? Sure he was removed from power, but is the definition of success ruling for decades before expiring in the Kremlin hallway? The actual record of his administration is overwhelmingly positive.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:25:06 No. 669036
>>669033 > I wouldnt be suprised that if the soviet union survived up to this day, a lot of anti kruschev communists would be praising kruschev just like some do to deng Yes
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:26:43 No. 669038
>>669035 failure in terms that he got removed is what i meant and that his succesors governed a union that was slowly collapsing to the point he got unfortuantely grouped alongside with them.
meanwhile deng was lucky and he managed to never get couped and managed to have competent succesors)
ones legacy was associated with the start of the fall and the other was associated with the start of the rise. Im gonna be honest kruschevs story is fucking tragic when you think about it
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:29:08 No. 669041
>>669034 ironically if kruschev had done what deng did and say stalin was 70 percent good 30 percent bad then kruschev legacy would have been better
not only that if he had been a lot more economically competent and never got couped then he would have never had recieved the reputation he had.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:32:10 No. 669043
>>669038 Things were still very much on the upswing when Khruschev took power, it was really Brezhnev who oversaw the transition from growth to stagnation (yes I know that the "era of stagnation" is greatly overblown, but economic growth and people's outlooks still declined significantly). Even leaving that aside however, criticizing Khruschev is fine. Hell if you want to argue that he did more harm than good that's fine. But it's honestly ridiculous to declare him a "traitor", a "revisionist" or "agent of the bourgeoisie". Certainly the actual bourgeoisie in the West didn't feel like he was their friend. Again, some people seem genuinely incapable of disagreeing without it turning into hyperbolic accusations and moronic splits.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:32:55 No. 669045
>>669043 *when Khruschev left power
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 05:35:55 No. 669047
>>669043 yeah i agree
yeah
and the real tragic thing is ive seen more deng supporters than kruschev. Like dont get me wrong i dont hate deng, but looking at how much deng gets support while how much kruschev get little support
like holy fucking shit its sad for the corn man
Grillpilled Schizo 2022-01-01 (Sat) 07:20:40 No. 669097
>Khruschev >Revisionist
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 07:30:48 No. 669104
>>669097 like i just dont understand deng gets kind of a pass by a decent amount of leftists i meet
but kruschev doesnt at all
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 07:32:37 No. 669106
>>669104 Are these the same leftists?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 07:39:17 No. 669107
>>669041 >if kruschev had done what deng did and say stalin was 70 percent good 30 percent bad then kruschev legacy would have been better Yes, worth noting Mao declared Stalin had seven good fingers even if he had three bad and Deng declared he would consider himself lucky if he was scored 50 50 by history
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 07:54:20 No. 669114
>>669107 yup also huh i didnt know about the mao stalin thing hmm
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 11:24:59 No. 669169
>>669104 You're talking to the wrong leftists if they don't call Deng scum.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 11:30:14 No. 669174
>>669169 >Deng 40 percent good 60 percent bad
Kruschev probably 30 percent good 70 percent bad
Would have been the other way around except you can trace a direct line from kruschev's lies about Stalin to the collapse of the Soviet union
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 11:39:39 No. 669178
>>669174 Probably the most correct take on this.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 14:41:26 No. 669275
>>669097 Khrushchev began the process of the market reforms that were finalised in 1965. The Machine And Tractor Stations had their property transferred to the farms which enormously increased commodity circulation in the USSR instead of phasing it out as Stalin argued for. Also on the political front, countless anti-Soviet traitors were rehabilitated or released. This did huge damage to the proletarian dictatorship. On the cultural front, Khrushchev allowed for bourgeois ideology to fester instead of clamping down as Zhdanov did.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 14:42:24 No. 669276
>>669275 What are your feelings about Deng?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 15:47:23 No. 669353
>>668813 It means revising the basic principles of revolutionary communism and Marxism to nullify the class struggle.
>>668828 Cheers sage.
>>669104 Khrushchev led a palace coup and arrested Beria and other Marxist-Leninists on fake charges.
>>669276 A man who like Khrushchev has done immense damage to communism, and the Chinese proletariat first of all. The Chinese bourgeoisie have gained the upper hand for thirty years. Exploitation has returned to China when in the early 1970s it had been eliminated.
Deng is the Chinese Bukharin, nothing more. The PRC is only socialist in name.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 15:50:32 No. 669357
>>669353 >A man who like Khrushchev has done immense damage to communism Well at least you're consistent. I've encountered some schizos who denounce Khruschev for "restoring capitalism" in the USSR while simultaneously hailing Deng and modern China as real socialism.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 15:54:51 No. 669362
>>669357 They're just opportunists who haven't grasped Marxism-Leninism.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:16:27 No. 669380
>>669357 People get their politics from Twitter and this happens.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:27:21 No. 669390
>>669353 It’s nice to see someone else in this sea of fake socialists who recognizes that Beria was innocent. That leftypol buys into Khruschev’s lies only goes to show how far this board has fallen from being a genuine bastion of leftism
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:30:46 No. 669392
>>669390 This board should be Marxist-Leninist, rather than "leftist".
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:41:27 No. 669401
>>669357 That is the standard ML anti-revisionist line for fucks sake. Maybe you should at least try to make yourself familiar with the subject before yapping so ceaselessly in a thread about it and limit your "education" through places like Twitter, like
>>669380 alluded to. Every once in a while you write good criticisms of Chinese revisionism in /PRC/, but your uninformed apologia for Khrushchev in this thread (
>>669030 >>669035 >>669043 ) was just ridiculous and made me lose a lot or respect for you.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:41:38 No. 669402
>>669392 Considering how seeped in idpol most self proclaimed leftists are, that might be for the best. “Left” has become so associated with gay pride parades, simping for woke corporations, and general cultural liberalism that attaching socialism to the “left” is more of a liability if anything. I’ve been thinking about using the term “right-socialism/right-communism” to distinguish us from the lunacy of the left, but the problem is that might draw unintended connections to the traitor Bukharin. Any ideas?
(glow harder) Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:46:41 No. 669407
>>669402 We should just call ourselves Marxist-Leninists or communists. All great communists have fought against both rightist and leftist deviations.
Personally I think "rightism" is a much more insidious problem at present given the way the bourgeoisie trumpet the likes of Deng and Bukharin and the fact they claim to be Marxist-Leninists, whereas leftist deviation tends to end up with Trotskyism or ultralefts.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:50:04 No. 669410
It's not about ideological purity. It's about why these revisionists got power in the first place. How can men like Khrushchev and Deng undo the foundations of socialist development? Centralized unaccountable authority and top-down governance will always be susceptible to revisionism. There is no way to ensure that the right people will be the ones conducting the purges of revisionists. Socialism shouldn't be able fall just because the wrong guy is in charge. Hoxha should be all the proof you need that anti-revisionism is massive failure. There's no way that 170 000 useless bunkers would have been constructed if the proletariat actually had meaningful political power. There is a reason that Cuba has held out. It has real proletarian democracy.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:05:47 No. 669425
>>669410 The USSR was far more democratic from 1917-1956 than it was after. The truth is that bureaucrats like Khrushchev were always against actual Marxism Leninism. This is something Trotskyists either ignore or lie about. The Soviet bureaucracy was anti-Stalinist.
Revisionism comes from economic interests of those who wish to topple socialism and seek privilege for themselves. People like Stalin, Zhdanov, Kaganovich, Molotov were excellent Bolsheviks but the CPSU was severely weakened as a result of all the deaths it suffered in the Great Patriotic War. The party got taken over by revisionists who first of all staged a coup against Bolsheviks like Beria and Molotov in 1953-1957, then began the process of usurping socialism and proletarian power. The party is the General Staff of the proletariat revolution, but it can be infiltrated.
The only solution to this is constant mobilisation against any revisionism, fighting bureaucracy as the likes of Stalin did in the 1930s, constantly promoting the vanguard proletariat and tackling bourgeois ideology at all levels. There is no magic button but vanguard methods are the only proven tactics. Anti-vanguard methods are hopeless as there will never just be a spontaneous uprising.
The likes of Hoxha rendered immense service to communism. Just because their efforts were undone does not negate that. Without people like Stalin and Hoxha there wouldn't have been any socialist project whatsoever. Even a few years of socialism is worth more than a life of capitalism.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:09:21 No. 669427
>>669402 I think what you're trying to get at is the left-liberal infiltration stemming mainly from the imperial core, I like to call them the social fascists; they support US imperialism and capitalism, only to propose some social liberal welfare reforms which inadvertently also increases the surveillence of the bourgeois state. They therefore lay the bed for the fascist counter-revolution a la what was seen in the pre-years of Nazi Germany, only with even less pretensions to socialism nowadays (some of them seem phobic of the concept and prefer the vagueness of liberal "progressivism").
>>669402 >>669407 I think an insistence on Leninism would be good enough. Since the pseudo-communist rightists pick up Bukharin instead of Lenin on crucial problems they are anti-Leninist. These traitors to the proletariat also have a hegemony over this site and I would personally not mind collaborating with more "heterodox" Leninists just to diminish the overall influence of these rightists. I am biased and take great interest in the economic critiques of the heterodox Leninist Amadeo Bordiga of the International Communist Party.
>>669410 While I think the Cultural Revolution was the right direction more or less, I do agree that modern revisionism clearly seems to go deeper than that, to the
economic problems faced by 20th century ML states. Here I personally start to turn to more Leninist "leftcom" solutions of addressing the problems of money, commodity production and value as it relates to the (at first) growth of the bourgeoisie in historical ML states, where it increasingly infiltrated more and more powerful positions, namely through the bureaucratic monopoly capital apparatus that then led straight into the Party. Hetereodox Leninists like Cockshott and Bordiga address this problem in particular, though as should be noted, in somewhat different ways (but both still fundamentally more base-economic, than for example the superstructural interventions of the Cultural Revolution, which I still think will be necessary either way too).
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:19:03 No. 669441
>>669425 All of this. word by word.
Leninhat poster producing based posts lately.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:43:15 No. 669459
>>669455 A good refutation to the stupid "hurr only university students like communism" meme. Shows that proletarians very often do already know their class interests.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:44:20 No. 669461
>>669425 >The USSR was far more democratic from 1917-1956 than it was after If that democracy CAN be dismantled like it was, then Leninists need to seriosuly think about structural reforms to prevent such things like yoy described
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 18:05:13 No. 669477
Without knowing it most in this thread are reproducing the monarchist argument that the most important aspect of government are the personal virtues of those that rule rather than structures
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 18:14:15 No. 669490
>>669461 There's no infallible structures, class struggle continues in socialism.
What we can say we've learnt from the USSR is the necessity of eliminating bureaucracy, the necessity of struggle on the cultural ideological front as well as the economic and political one, the importance of phasing out remnants of bourgeois life as quickly as possible, the continued necessity of suppression of the bourgeoisie rather than relaxing it, the necessity of better political education, the necessity of better planning nd deepening it, the necessity of a better party structure.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 19:20:40 No. 669556
>>669490 >the necessity of eliminating bureaucracy, the necessity of struggle on the cultural ideological front I hope that by this you mean things like encouraging the masses to critique all aspects of government with full freedom of speech, bureaucrats and officials being accountable to ordinary workers, Cuba-style constitutional debates, etc instead of the secret police cracking down on "bourgeois thought"
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 19:46:39 No. 669571
>>668786 you can lend tacit support to something even if you don't think it's perfect anon
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 20:04:45 No. 669590
>>669556 Or you can automate the planners and bureaucrats out entirely using computer tech we have
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 21:00:02 No. 669645
What are the main differences between Hoxhaism and Maoism/MLM/MZT? Also is Cockshott a Maoist?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 21:14:19 No. 669660
>>669645 >Also is Cockshott a Maoist? >>653203 claims so
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 21:15:41 No. 669662
>>669590 Thank you Silicon Valley for another great idea.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 23:59:34 No. 669814
>>669556 The USSR did have this stuff until the 1960s. But it wasn't to a faceless "workers" but to soviets, trade unions and party control bodies.
Cuba has a security force as well which was largely built with the assistance of the KGB. Chekist organisations should be directed against bourgeois counterrevolution as they are in Cuba, or the DPRK, or as the Cheka/OGPU/NKVD did. There will always be those who seek to overthrow socialism. Tackling bourgeois ideology is done via educational means, not police crackdowns. That wasn't the goal of either the Red Terror of 1918-1921 or the trials of 1936-1938.
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 01:03:59 No. 669893
>>669402 Idiotic. You are the type who is as obsessed with idpol as any twitter liberal.
>>669814 I do agree with you to a point that the USSR was democractic. The Soviets did have power and were some of the best examples of real democracy to have ever existed, but the government was not elected, which is a major problem unless you keep purging revisionists 24/7. This is justifiable because of the position the USSR was in at the time, where the threat of counterrevolution and genocide was imminent, and without a leader as good as Stalin the revolution would have surely failed.
However, after the Great Patriotic War I would argue that democracy should have been implemented fully. That means country wide elections for all government officials and increased direct democracy through the Soviets, as well as the possibilty of introducing sortition for some jobs, which would completely stop careerism from forming. In the 1950s the USSR was at the safest point it had ever been from counterrevolution, and spreading the revolution to Europe was unfeasible because of nuclear weapons. The people were no longer uneducated peasents. Instead we got revisionists followed by traitors in government, most of this being against the will of the people, who wouldn't have allowed the counterrevolution to happen as they knew what their class interests lay and were educated very well. If the government could have been elected in the USSR it would still be a planned economy to this day. I want to remind everyone in this thread that Lenin did plan to extend democracy to unprecedented levels once it was feasible to do so. Cuba is an example of how, whilst democracy can't completely stop revisionism, it can stop the reaction that has happened in China, Vietnam etc.
I agree with you on everything else though. Purging bureaucrats is necessary.
China is anti-revisionistpilled Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 01:34:34 No. 669931
China is anti-revisionistpilled Li Shenming, former vice president of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times that "there are many different explanations from around the world about why the Soviet Union collapsed, but the one which holds that 'Stalinism,' or 'the socialist model of the Soviet Union,' is the root cause continues to dominate."
"But in China, we have reached common ground after much research and many discussions that Stalinism is not the root cause, and the real reason is that, from Nikita Khrushchev to Mikhail Gorbachev, the leadership of the Soviet Union gradually deviated from and eventually betrayed Marxism, socialism and the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the people," Li noted.
To blame Stalin, or the socialist model built by Lenin and Stalin, for the collapse of the Soviet Union is irresponsible, Li said. "Although the model was not perfect and needed reforming, the Soviet Union achieved great goals such as industrialization, victory in World War II and a successful post-war reconstruction under this model," Li said.
The starting point of the Soviet Union's collapse was the reform initiated by Khrushchev, because it failed to address the problems. Instead, it gradually denied the basic political and economic system of the Soviet Union's socialism, and when it came to the Gorbachev era, the leadership of the country fully betrayed Marxism and chose a path with no turning back, experts said.
The Soviet Union's leaders were not just betraying their original aspiration, but also forgot that serving the people is their core mission, rather than becoming enmeshed in power struggles with other countries, bullying and threatening its comrades within the socialist bloc including China, pursuing military expansion and even invading other countries like Afghanistan, said Chinese analysts.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1243430.shtml Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 11:53:03 No. 670340
a potentially stupid question, but I'll ask it either way: why is it called "revisionism" when revising one's theories is central to science? for example zachariah and cockshott's refinement of labour values?
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 13:09:29 No. 670407
>>669401 >That is the standard ML anti-revisionist line for fucks sake. No it's incoherent schizophrenia, since Deng's market reforms were far deeper and farther reaching than anything Khruschev did. Besides, this isn't the era of the comintern, there isn't a "standard ML anti-revisionist line." Instead there are countless tiny, irrelevant sects all claiming to be the "true" anti-revisionists.
>but your uninformed apologia for Khrushchev in this thread was just ridiculous and made me lose a lot or respect for you. What exactly made Khruschev so bad? I've never gotten a satisfactory answer from anybody, most criticisms always seem to focus on rhetoric instead of actual policy. I don't buy the argument that the USSR was democratic before he took power, if it was then you should he able to point me to a single instance of the legislature overruling or blocking the executive during the Stalin period.
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 13:18:49 No. 670417
>>670407 >What exactly made Khruschev so bad? For fuck sake how many times have I told you that
cancelling tractor sharing and
not progressively reducing the hours of the working day when comrade Stalin spent the last years of his life writing the fucking operational manual that laid out these and more steps and precisely why they were neccesary is unforgivable
HELLO CAN YOU HEAR ME IS THERE SOME DIFFICULTY YOU HAVE IN UNDERSTANDING THIS VERY SIMPLE THING THAT HE DIDN'T JUST RTFM THAT WAS LEFT FOR HIM CAREFULLY WRITTEN SO EVEN AN IMBECILE COULD UNDERSTAND MAKES HIM WORSE THAN DENG HELLO TESTING TESTING 1 2 3 DO YOU COPY Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 13:21:37 No. 670421
>>670417 >>670417 >cancelling tractor sharing and not progressively reducing the hours of the working day You seriously think that this makes him a "traitor"? Seems like a fairly minor policy change to me.
>comrade Stalin spent the last years of his life writing the fucking operational manual that laid out these and more steps and precisely why they were neccesary is unforgivable Communism is when you do exactly what Stalin tells you to, and the more you do what he tells you the more communist you are.
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 13:30:35 No. 670426
>>670421 It's not like Mao left detailed retard proof notes on his current work on the project of building socialism for Deng or whoever
Imagine if you're halfway through building a bridge the project chief leaves you detailed notes on how to proceed and you just chuck them out and wing it
Have you ever built anything in your life even if just a footstool or a toolbox
If you haven't please just build one project in your life
I promise you it will be worth it even if it's something as simple as a shoerack for your mum
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 14:07:31 No. 670473
>>669893 The Soviet government was elected and operated to the same procedures as other bodies did. However that does not preclude the existence of opportunism, bureaucratism and revisionism. These structures arise from the remnants of bourgeois class society and from class struggle in socialism.
Stalin, Beria and co actually planned further democratisation of the USSR after WW2.
http://marxism.halkcephesi.net/Grover%20Furr/index.htm The way to stop careerism is to make it so the Communist Party functions purely as a vanguard vehicle, reducing the scope of the state. I would also make it so government workers are actually paid less than average to dissuade anyone looking for careerism from entering. The party, once the proletarian dictatorship has been established, needs to work to make itself unnecessary. Is that contradictory? Perhaps, but that is the nature of dialectical materialism.
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 15:56:06 No. 670685
http://www.cipoml.net/ ICMLPO is the main international for Anti-Revisionist Marxist-Leninist parties.
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 16:05:38 No. 670709
>>670679
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 18:47:56 No. 670973
Stalin: What They Don't Teach You in School
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rSWhSBmfMA Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 12:46:27 No. 671919
>>668771 Worked great in China!
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 13:40:12 No. 671958
>>668771 Exactly what is the great theoretical contribution here besides "purge harder and harder until you have communism"?
Also, where is Hoxhaism "revisionist", it's just dogmatic.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 14:12:44 No. 671999
>>668771 >ML is now Maoism >Hoxhaism is revisionist Nonsense. A shame you even got replies to begin with with this poor bait.
>>670685 That and ICOR
https://www.icor.info/about-icor >The ICOR is a union for practical cooperation and a form of organization of international cooperation and coordination for the activity of the revolutionaries of the world, and for mutual support in class struggle and party-building. It unites parties and organizations on an equal footing, which are very different in terms of size, practical, organizational and political experience, historical-ideological roots, strategic task and socio-economic conditions. The Founding Resolution includes a revolutionary, anti-imperialist, anti-revisionist and anti-Trotskyite platform, which forms a basis for achieving unity in all essential questions by an interrelated process of theoretical discussion and practical work. A World Conference of representatives of all ICOR member parties and organizations takes place every three years as supreme decision-making body. The joint implementation of international days of struggle is a training ground for practical cooperation. >>669931 >>670973 Chinese revisionist historical and material falsifications and platitudes.
>>671919 >>671958 Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought did
indeed work incredible in China. No proletariat the world over have ever, or since, come closer to communism than the Chinese workers during the GPCR, and that is a material fact. That is its contributions.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 15:17:34 No. 672062
>>671999 What a fantasy larp by some western fag
China was in the brink of collapse. Deng literally saved China. Literally no one in China except for schizo homeless people and a few oddballs miss the Mao period. They're having to much fun raising their quality of life
Stay mad and keep assuming you know better than the largest CP in the world, fag
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 15:23:19 No. 672073
>>672062 China in 1976 was not on the brink of collapse, don't be absurd.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 15:27:46 No. 672078
>>668804 kek, underrated post.
>>668762 > anti-revisionist Anti-revnisionism is anti-Marxist
Mao revised the theories of Marx of two developed countries by the time, and he applied them to his underdeveloped peasant-economy-based country.
Lenin applied Marxism to the Slav circumstances.
Revision should be a neutral term and just given the circumstance it gains a pejorative connotation.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 15:31:36 No. 672085
>>672078 You don't know what revisionism in the context of Marxism is, which is a tell that you also talk without investigating sources - i.e. you've neither read Lenin nor Mao in this case.
No investigation, no right to speak.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 15:49:44 No. 672120
>>672085 Projecting much? So according to you Lenin didn't revise the works of Marx? didn't Mao revise the works of Marx? now tell me, how defines Marx ("in the context of Marxism") revisionism. Go on, illustrate me, oh so great "investigative, therefore, acredited to speak" smart guy.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 15:59:13 No. 672139
>>672078 They developed Marxism, they didn't revise it. Did they deny the need for revolution, for class struggle, for liquidating the bourgeoisie, for establishing equality of women and uniting all nationalities?
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:13:22 No. 672188
>>672073 The cultural revolution effectively ended in 1968. though some leftists remained in positions of authority, they were quickly and easily sidelined after Mao's death.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:19:10 No. 672199
>>672139 >developed Marxism So in my point of view is a positive revision of Marx's works. Bad revisionism: Believing that bombing yourself on some poor communities will overthrow the capital rule, good revisionism: The "develop" of new startegies according to each new dilema or each new problem facing the revolutionary processess.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:21:19 No. 672204
>>672004 One of the most well researched video on China I've seen around.
Impressive
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:26:53 No. 672213
>>672199 Revisionism means revising and negating basic truths of Marxism. In China's case, this has allowed the growth of a massive and rich bourgeois class and weakening of socialist planned economy, plus a weakening of proletarian culture. Private property is rife in China.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:30:50 No. 672224
>>672213 Mao never ended capitalism in China nor private property, nor COULD he because the social and physical technology wasn't available. You live in a fantasy world where the peasant collectives could lift the country out of near feudal conditions, the breaking up of those collectives and the iron rice bowl were historical neccesities.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:31:31 No. 672225
MLbros, help me out here - what is the point of remaining dogmatic when it doesn't do anything for the masses in our current time? I'm not going to lie, I am quite burned out and I don't see how intellectual wanking is going to do much when most of us aren't particularly intelligent compared to actual academics, and even then those academics do nothing and are consigned to their own bubbles and institutions.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:32:53 No. 672229
>>672213 There you go, revisionism to you is just an object of being an ultra accusing others of not doing whatever your schizo head has, while you armchair your revolution "developing" the pimples between you arsecheeks and the too-used chair ready-to-die-tired-of-your-farts.
Non-adjectivetal "Revisionism" is just virtual signal for useless ultras.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:37:13 No. 672232
>>672229 Well you have to understand these are child minded burgers looking for excuses to hate me bad Chynah on plebbit
Check out the response I got to →
>>672182 :^)
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:39:21 No. 672238
>>672224 Necessary for whom? The Chinese bourgeoisie class, not for the Chinese proletarians and peasants. The dissolution of the collective farms meant a massive increase in the strength of the bourgeoisie in China, and enriched a small section.
The solution to the peasantry is to gradually proletarianise them by applying the same principles as is done to industry during socialist construction. Elevation into state property.
Really is amazing that communists can argue against things like the iron rice bowl.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:41:27 No. 672240
>>672229 The term revisionism has a long history going back to the early 1900s, through to Lenin, Stalin, Hoxha and Mao. It isn't a random term of abuse but one that identifies vacillating and anti-communist trends in Marxism.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:45:40 No. 672241
>>672240 Stop arguing with people who don't want to be reasoned with anon.
You're just wasting your time.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:46:56 No. 672244
>>668771 But if Dengism is revisionism or capitalist restoration then Maoism was a failure
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 16:50:24 No. 672248
>>672240 >>672240 The problem is that you are comparing the movement created after the arrival of Kruschev to equate to China, while you aren't doing your own revolution which only seems to me you are armchairing criticism on China.
Whatever started the anti-revisionism didn't achieved anything meaninful because in the end the USSR collpased. You are trumpeting a failed strategy.
>>672241 t. the one that can diferentiate between good and bad revision
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:14:22 No. 672287
>>672238 What do the five stars on China's flag represent? Ill tell you, one of them is the petit bourg and the other is the national bourg, both are INTEGRAL to the Chinese nation and its recovery from the century of humiliation. They are and will be historically neccessary against the left-deviationist workers and peasants.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:15:30 No. 672289
>>672248 The Anti-Revisionist movement arose outside the USSR. Khrushchevites expelled, arrested and shot Marxist-Leninists.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:20:44 No. 672297
>>672287 "Left deviationists" would be elements who proposed going straight to communism. That is not what happened in China from 1949-1976, although elements of this voluntarism did come to the fore in the GPCR. Fact is that the Right Opportunists got the upper hand with Deng.
If anything the whole bloc of four classes things just proves that class collaboration is ultimately untenable. Only one class can ever truly have the upper hand. In China until the rise of Dengism (but let's call it what it really is, Bukharinism) the peasants and workers were the ruling class. Now, China has billionaires and enormous swathes of the economy are in private hands.
Imo, right opportunism is always a bigger danger since it usually means the restoration of capitalism.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:36:36 No. 672321
>>672316 I've read that.
>What do these facts show? They show that the question of the fight against the Rights and "ultra-Lefts" must be put not abstractly, but concretely, depending on the political situation And looking at that how can one argue that the problem in China isn't one of the "right"?
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:40:09 No. 672325
>>672321 Because the ultra left Red Guard groups almost plunged the country back into civil war, the bourg and petir bourg have done no such thing since 1949, clearly the left is more dangerous
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:43:14 No. 672327
>>672321 >the problem in China isn't one of the "right"? We're not in china
What is our concrete political situation?
It is that we are on a Mongolian throat singing forum that is currently overun by amerisharts due to the time being burger hours
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:49:10 No. 672330
>>672327 To be fair the burger hours right now should be at work dying for their bosses who hate them.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:51:27 No. 672335
>>672330 That's only first shift, burgers who work second shift can post
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 17:53:02 No. 672336
>Cultist General
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 18:09:11 No. 672350
>>672325 Only a danger to Jack Ma and the Chinese bourgeoisie.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 18:56:09 No. 672410
>>672327 I didn't bring up China. But frankly so long as parties adhere to Bukharinite and Dengist ideology they're going nowhere.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 19:51:28 No. 672454
>>672410 So your thread was legitimate to talk about anti-revisionism, in the bad sense, but was overridden by ultras attacking China?
Anything can be considered a revisionism. Let me break down this through, because you insiste in some theories not being revisionist, but others are.
For example this video:
>>672004 All good and everything, it draws Mao as the true and genuine socialist revolutionary and portrays "capitalists roaders" everything that came up after the cultural revolution (including Deng and other members), but what this video doesn't tell, doesn't contextualize, is that was Mao who did the Third World Theory which theorized that the USSR would destroy the world with nukes, therefore accusing the USSR of not being a force of peace, a force that would destroy workers lives worst than capitalism, and so on. It is bad revisionism of that video author for not framing how Mao was agaisnt the true interests of the solidarity wihch is inherent with communism that could boost those "capitalist roaders" to not only exists to overtake the CPC calling the USSR whatever his geopolitical ambitions directed his resentfulness for the shitty things krushit did, it is bad revisionism of Mao further splitting the USSR/China, of course krushit shared a lot of burden on this, of course, Stalin started the first grievances with China during the Korea war and didn't purge party careerists (which are hard to detect) like krushit, of course Stalin stagnated on the process of building socialism inside, were they revisionists? yes, they revisioned Marx's works, were they bad revisionists? no, not completely. They did add information, crucial information, for example how not to keep cooperatives as the goal of the working revolution, as not to theorize other communists or revolutions as the world enders, and never erase the memory of a leader with de-(insert surname or last name) processes, but saving the best of them, and trying to frame the bad decisions of them according to the right circumtances.
That's what Marx would love with his DiaMat.
Have you ever grasped the idea of the number of self-proclaimed "antirevisionists" parties are there around the world? which different currents are there out there? some claim Stalin was a revisionist, others that Trotsky was a revisionists, others that Lenin was a revisionist, others than anything below Mao was a revisionist, where does that end? do they have any worker organization control on the countries they are in?
Meanwhile, the bourgeoisie still runs rampant.
Again, using, non-adjectivatal, clearly delined, pointed out, revisionism is, to me, pure useless ultra virtue signaling.
Just look how your thread got derailed to Deng and China inmedialtly.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 20:04:35 No. 672467
>>672454 I'm not a Maoist so I don't defend everything he said or did. He did wage a struggle against Khrushchevite revisionists and he should be commended for that. But the three worlds theory was anti-Marxist.
Marxism is always developing and cannot remain stagnant, but those who aim to replace basic principles will never lead the proletariat to communism.
Only an open, honest and ceaseless struggle can establish the real revolutionary methods and historical truth. Unless we have a correct understanding of communist history, we cannot understand the present correctly. Otherwise communists will make the same mistakes and errors and blatant violations of Marxism as the likes of Khrushchev and Deng did.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 20:21:14 No. 672478
>>672467 Well, I find it useless to discuss "anti-revisionism" from westerners that not only haven't delined a clear method to arose to power in their own country but only waste time pointeing out what is and what is not communism.
You said "krushit and deng did a lot of damage to communism", no, what did a lot of damage to communism is the useless ultras serving as a catspaw in their capitalist countries, attacking those countries. CPUSA for example served as a channel to lie about how the U.S. was a paradise to the soviets, and when the communist party of Italy saw the start of the Vietnam war, and they asked what can they do to help, what the CPV answered was: Start your own revolution.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 20:27:31 No. 672486
>>672467 Based and correct take.
About the thread: Mods should enforce moderation when talking China.
It's unbearable that 50% of the board is Dengoid vs Everyone else and 40% is [insert latest culture war bullshit from the Us].
This is just my two cents I don't wanna impose anything on anyone but there are days this fucking place is unreadable due to the repetitivity of all this.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 20:36:49 No. 672504
>>672486 It won't be possible what you ask, or really hard to get it done, unless you spend time, a lot of time, organizing, agitproping, and doing praxis.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 20:39:21 No. 672512
>>672467 Much agreed comrade, death throes of capitalism, revisionism, etc.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 20:58:54 No. 672573
>>672504 Based and correct take. Sadly there's nothing in my country to organize with aside for a few unions (which mostly work with foreign workforce sadly due to various reasons historical and economic).
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 23:20:13 No. 672725
>>672478 its almost as if so called revisionism comes in response to the complexities of governing, and that the reason why ultras exist is because most of them never had a position in gov and just sit all day on their armchair.
Dont get me wrong i think the so called revisionists were naive and idiotic but to simplify the why the revisionists took over is due to the fact that they were capitalist in roaders or secret burecratic cliques, is just demonizing or simplyifing the reasons why they came to power.
its like you guys are thinking Clearly these guys are revisionists and thus we must purge then quickly while paradoxically doing the same stalinist or maoist positions that gave these revisionists political jusification to take over. If we kill and purge them enough certainly it wont just be like putting a cap on a near imploding bottle.
and inb4 someone says cuba or nk mate even cuba is slowly going towards dengism, while nk had expressed interest in dengism is the past but couldnt pursue it because the us rejected them. But even then now the nk state is slowly introducing elements of capitalism again.
Anonymous 2022-01-03 (Mon) 23:56:04 No. 672802
>>672478 That's a cheap response. Arrogance among communist parties is partly what leads to revisionism and led to the restoration of capitalism in the Warsaw Pact republics. They are not immune just because they carried out a revolution.
Of course we need to carry out revolution ourselves, that is worth far more than any words. But unless we correctly understand why socialism was liquidated we cannot achieve success, and I find the Anti-Revisionist explanation by far the most convincing and hopeful for the future. I don't know what you mean with the CPUSA as from my knowledge they remained strongly pro-Soviet until Gorbachev and Perestroika.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 00:38:51 No. 672880
>>671999 >No proletariat the world over have ever, or since, come closer to communism than the Chinese workers during the GPCR, and that is a material fact. That is its contributions. The proletariat doesn't exist in communism and trying to communize without sufficient productive forces is not communism. If you are solely looking at the relations of production and not the productive forces, the uncontacted tribe of North Sentinel Island is probably "closer" to communism than China during the Cultural Revolution.
>ICOR Which has really bad parties like the MLPD from Germany in it. They also support US imperialism in Syria.
>Chinese revisionist historical and material falsifications and platitudes. What the fuck is a "material falsification". I swear to god you guys just string words together that the most communist without making any sense.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 10:49:52 No. 673305
Anti-Revisionists of the NCM-type are sects
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 10:52:13 No. 673307
>>672880 > If you are solely looking at the relations of production and not the productive forces, the uncontacted tribe of North Sentinel Island is probably "closer" to communism than China during the Cultural Revolution. So did this guys country
I don't know why more leftcoms don't take him and his theory seriously
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 10:57:09 No. 673310
>>673308 You know Cambodia got obliterated by the US during those years, right?
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:03:17 No. 673311
>>673310 you know polpot did dumb stuff like force people to move out of the cities and into rural communes, even when it doesnt make any logical sense to do so right?
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:07:14 No. 673312
>>673311 Yes he did dumb things, but let's not gonna act like the khmer rouge were full on retarded while based stalin didn du nuffin wrong, which is the point of this thread I guess and why "anti-revisionists" are in the same tier of trots when it comes to braindead cultish behaviour
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:10:58 No. 673314
>>673312 >but let's not gonna act like the khmer rouge were full on retarded while based stalin didn du nuffin wrong well heres the thing i dont like stalin and i agree i dont like anti revisionists either
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:19:58 No. 673315
>>673312 MLMs tend to defend Pol Pot to some degree. He was allied with China too against Vietnam.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:20:05 No. 673316
>>673311 >you know polpot did dumb stuff like force people to move out of the cities and into rural communes, even when it doesnt make any logical sense to do so right? The USA was pretty much firebombing those cities in effect even if not in ammunition loads lad
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:26:16 No. 673318
>>673316 yes but the solution is not to move them out to rural communes that fuck over the economy.
vietnam got attacked by us bombs and you dont see ho chi minh saying hehehe im gonna do dumb extremist stuff and move a lot of north vietnamiese people to rural communes.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:31:44 No. 673323
>>673318 So the poor kid makes a mistake in judgment in a crisis I don't think that's a reason to utterly condemn him
He was young he tried shouldn't we blame the people dropping bombs a bit more?
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:33:55 No. 673325
>>673311 >polpot did dumb stuff like force people to move out of the cities and into rural communes, even when it doesnt make any logical sense to do so right? But it does. The civil war turned cities into wastelands with no food supplies left and evacuating them was deemed the best option. Phnom Penh was literally weeks away from starvation when the KR captured it.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 11:35:42 No. 673326
>>673323 I condemn because his mistake led to certain death rates in cambodia
but yeah i blame the usa too
>>673325 hmm
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 16:05:33 No. 673534
>>673342 Thanks for the bump
Anonymous 2022-01-05 (Wed) 16:23:07 No. 675145
>anti-revisionist >stalin
Anonymous 2022-01-05 (Wed) 18:09:30 No. 675352
Posting some communist news sites that take a Maoist perspective. Don't always agree but they're interesting nonetheless.
https://www.redspark.nu/en/ http://www.wyzxwk.com/ Anonymous 2022-01-06 (Thu) 16:02:32 No. 677901
I called myself a Maoist for so long, but after reading Hoxha it’s very obvious who was correct. The one thing I don’t know how to reconcile is revolutionary optimism. The future seems so bleak. How to Hoxhaists retain revolutionary optimism?
Anonymous 2022-01-06 (Thu) 17:11:52 No. 678002
>>677901 Communists have pulled off revolutions before when things seemed even worse. Marxism-Leninism demonstrates the revolutionary history and struggles of the proletariat.
Anonymous 2022-01-07 (Fri) 11:31:22 No. 679564
>>679548 ftfy "retard-retard solidarity"
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 02:51:19 No. 681000
>>680996 The most relevant forms of Marxism-Leninism exist in China, Cuba, DPRK, Laos, and Vietnam.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 03:04:13 No. 681028
>>680941 One of the best American communists.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 03:08:07 No. 681036
>>681000 Only Cuba and the DPRK have anything to teach these days.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 03:29:05 No. 681058
>>680996 >Maoists >Serious MLs How do you reconcile this with all the shit Maoist China did?
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 03:39:22 No. 681067
>>681058 The positives outweigh the negatives.
Mao did make some major mistakes, far more than Lenin or Stalin (the 70-30 thing is bullshit, more like 98-2 for Stalin). But Maoist China was still such a gigantic improvement and in comparison to modern China, much better for workers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naDMFxOggFg&list=PLCr5Mmf-b6BDFZM_Rs8Ur67KqKNoPweCh Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 11:23:01 No. 681562
>>680941 A centrist for most of his life as a Communist who was not as bad as Browder but that's not a high bar at all. He ultimately sided with the turn of the CPSU to Khrushchev's modern revisionism which made the "rescue" of the CPUSA from Browder's liquidationist actions look like a Pyrrhic victory in hindsight.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 12:26:24 No. 681598
>>681067 >98-2 why give them the two points anyway if you've decided to balls-out lie it's not like it makes your drivel any more believable
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 16:06:35 No. 681797
>>681598 Because everyone makes mistakes. Stalin himself admitted that, but the mark of a true communist is not being afraid of mistakes, and striving for improvement and correction.
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 06:10:09 No. 682819
>>680941 Take a shot every time Maupin says "ummm" or "you know."
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 06:26:11 No. 682857
>>680941 This video is 100% hagiography.
>>681562 This.
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 06:30:24 No. 682861
>>681797 I guess liquidating nearly the entirety of the opposition, then liquidating most of the liquidators is just another way of "not being afraid of mistakes, and striving for improvement and correction."
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 06:41:54 No. 682882
>>677920 I was hanging around some Trots one time and they flew some bigwig in their org in for a "conference" and I went out to dinner with them afterwards. Well, I was flirting with this trans girl who was there and she told me (I don't remember how this came up exactly) that she hooked up with a Hoxhaist, and I snarked "was it in a bunker?" And then she laughed and also gave me her number and the bigwig Trot heard everything and she seemed really offended. That org broke up and imploded shortly thereafter on a national scale.
Anyways that's my Hoxhaist story.
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 01:19:44 No. 684319
>>681028 There are no good "American communists."
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 01:29:28 No. 684341
>>684328 America will never be communist and all American communists have been sellouts. The only hope are the Afrikan nation and the indigenous.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) Sage !61KGLATVW. 2022-01-10 (Mon) 15:27:38 No. 685246
>>677901 I'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
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 16:57:08 No. 685331
>>685246 >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. Have you ever wondered trots sell papers and Maoists give out red books because they don't actually have any revolutionary potential?
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 17:02:14 No. 685333
>>685131 This thread has like 5 self-bumps. Funny how nobody, but the usual weirdos cares about your sectarian LARP
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 17:46:17 No. 685397
>>685333 Notice how people shittalking this thread have not offered any arguments whatsoever, just whining
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 19:22:01 No. 685514
Self-Reliance under Socialism. The Case of Albania
https://sci-hub.se/https://www.jstor.org/stable/424349 >>685246 Maoists and Hoxhaists need to reunite. I regard Maoists as great communists.
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 19:27:29 No. 685519
>>685397 Notice how none of the states or experiments you hold dear are alive anymore? 1 self-bump is already pathetic enough, but several in one thread? Nobody cares about your sects offline. Trust me
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 19:51:47 No. 685549
>>685519 You're just objectively wrong on that one, buddy
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 22:20:05 No. 685737
>>685397 It's because you can't argue with people who rely completely on tautology.
Anonymous 2022-01-10 (Mon) 23:31:24 No. 685837
>>669645 cockshott now associates w/cpb(ml), a bunch of moribund geriatrics playing up the most chauvinistic attitudes of britains labour aristocracy by hating on the immigrants.
has good form for this tho. he's an armchair organiser whose marxism-leninism has historically included defending the partition of ireland, the british monarchy, and israel. i personally would not consider BICO's pre-Twitter "hot take" narcissistic intellectualism to be any flavour of anti-revisionist, but ymmv.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 2022-01-11 (Tue) 00:49:58 No. 685975
>>685837 Actually, Cockshot is a member of the ALBA party these days, which was supposedly a left wing split from the SNP lead by Alex Salmond, but has basically come to nothing. I voted for them purely on the basis of Cockshott being part of them (kek) it was a mistake, but voting is useless anyway where I live SNP just gets all the seats.
Anonymous 2022-01-11 (Tue) 12:11:27 No. 686693
>>685975 he has previous, with the scottish workers party, & i kno he's familiar with alba, but if personal correspondence is anything to be believed he's in with cpbml too.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 2022-01-11 (Tue) 12:36:45 No. 686710
>>686693 Nah man like he’s a literal paid up member, he’s fb friends with a bunch of people I know he regularly gets in flame wars it’s kek
Sage !61KGLATVW. 2022-01-11 (Tue) 12:39:20 No. 686712
>>686693 >workers party of Scotland Never heard of these before, but
Kek
Anonymous 2022-01-11 (Tue) 13:34:26 No. 686748
Mao was fucking idiot and social imperialist who wanted to colonize Albania just like Tito, Khruschev and Brezhnev. Fuck him
Anonymous 2022-01-14 (Fri) 20:53:19 No. 691391
>>686748 Most of the time I hold a fairly mixed view of Mao
and think Hoxha was much more correct.
But when I see Dengtardism/Khrushchevism, I have to defend the big chairman you know?
Unique IPs: 79