Can somebody explain the logic used to brand others as revisionist or counterrevoluti

[Outinleftfield]

They're got to have reasons. What does maoism say about hoxhaism and vice versa? What about titoism? Trotskyism? Kruschevism? There's got to be something about the other ideologies that they point at and say "because of this this isn't really socialism". I've seen a lot of discussions on here saying one ideology doesn't like another or considers it revisionist or counterrevolutionary, but there is rarely any explanation given for their reasoning.

[Ismail]

Hoxhaists generally just see Maoism (as in, the ideology, not necessarily the Maoists; Hoxhaists and Maoists as people generally get along) as a distortion of Marxism-Leninism, which Hoxha explained in his book Imperialism and the Revolution (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/imp_rev/toc.htm) (and as Bill Bland explained in his book Class Struggles in China (http://www.revleft.com/vb/bill-blands-class-t126903/index.html?p=1649860)).

See also the two links in my signature ("The Economics of Revisionism (http://www.mltranslations.org/Ireland/ico.htm)" and "An Open Letter to the 'New Communist Party' (http://www.mltranslations.org/Britain/SovietBB.htm)") for info on why Maoists and Hoxhaists condemn Khrushchev and Brezhnev. See also "On Khrushchov's Phoney Communism (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/1964/phnycom.htm)" by Mao.

As for Titoism, a brief critique of it by Mike Ely of Kasama as part of an article on the origins of the Balkan Wars can be found here: http://kasamaproject.org/2009/04/06/how-capitalism-caused-the-balkan-wars/

Criticism of Trotskyism is a field of its own. Leninism or Trotskyism? by Harpal Brar, Another View of Stalin by Ludo Martens, and various other works (plus Stalin's own criticisms of Trotskyism which can be found in his Collected Works (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/collected/index.htm) available online) are quite hard to not find.

There are probably hundreds of Trotskyist criticisms of "Stalinism," a basic Google search should be sufficient. As for a Maoist critique of Hoxhaism, see "Enver Hoxha Refuted (http://www.wengewang.org/read.php?tid=22331#36173)" by N. Sanmugathasan. Leninist.biz (http://leninist.biz/) has plenty of 1960's-80's Soviet texts translated into English which condemn Maoism as "ultra-left" and such.

[Outinleftfield]

Any Krushchevist criticism of Mao or others?

[Kléber]

Trotsky basically argued that the definition of socialism in the USSR after 1936 was false and used to cover up for a murderous exploitative bureaucracy which politically disenfranchised the working class, and turned the Comintern from an agency of world revolution into a lifeless arm of Soviet foreign policy. As far as Trotsky's works go, for his criticism of "socialism" in the USSR check out The Revolution Betrayed (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1936/revbet/index.htm). For his view of Comintern policy see The Third International After Lenin (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1928/3rd/index.htm), and Problems of the Chinese Revolution (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/pcr/index.htm). There is also an overview (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/china/index.htm) of his writings on China. An overview of his analysis of the rise of fascism, which is based on a scathing attack on Social-Democratic and Communist Party policies, can be found here (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/germany/index.htm).

Trotskyists mostly consider Maoism to be an eclectic bourgeois nationalist ideology that emerged in the specific conditions of the Second United Front, revised Marxism in favor of "New Democracy" (which Trotskyists see as a euphemism for bourgeois rule), but also incorporated a sprinkling of ultraleft pseudo-anarchist rhetoric to cover up for its rightist deviations. A collection of Trotskyist writings about the Chinese Revolution and Maoism is available here (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/china.htm). The Peng Shuzi (http://www.marxists.org/archive/peng/index.htm) and Chen Bilan (http://www.marxists.org/archive/chen/index.htm) archives have some noteworthy articles.

[Ismail]

Any Krushchevist criticism of Mao or others?http://leninist.biz/en/1970/MTEC326/index.html

(Khrushchevite & Brezhnevite criticisms of Maoism at the time were the same, they condemned Maoism as an "ultra-left" deviation from Marxism-Leninism)

[Cooler Reds Will Prevail]

For the sake of helping you fit in at RevLeft, "revisionist" or "counterrevolutionary" basically means anybody that disagrees with you.

But in reality, revisionism, when applied to an individual or organization, means that said individual or organization has revised the fundamentals of Marxism to the point where it no longer represents a revolutionary communist line. Of course Marxism has been revised, corrected, and adapted over time, but the foundation has remained the same. So folks like Khrushchev, who stated that the Soviet Union was no longer a "dictatorship of the proletariat" but a "state of all people", or who say that the USSR would achieve communism in __ years when it was adopting peaceful coexistence with the US, are revisionists.

Now, Stalinists would extend this to Trotskyists, Trotskyists would extend this to Maoists, et cetera, et cetera, ad nauseam. I dislike the cavalier use of these labels, but what can you do.