New member

[Chris]

Good evening. Got directed here from another forum, so hey. I come from Norway.
I'm a Marxist-Leninist, starting to veer towards Anti-Revisionism (although not completely convinced of Anti-Revisionism yet) and a member of the Communist Party of Norway.
My occupation is being a student, as well as being a farmhand.

[Q]

Welcome.

On what aspects do you still disagree with anti-revisionism?

[Arlekino]

Greetings comrade.

[Widerstand]

Ahoy Comrade!

[Chris]

Thank you all.


Welcome.

On what aspects do you still disagree with anti-revisionism?
First off, I must admit that my knowledge of the more advanced marxist theories are limited. I have read the Communist Manifesto, an Introduction to Political Economy, the Basics of Marxism-Leninism and a few others dealing with Marxism-Leninism. Outside of that, most of my knowledge comes from party study circles and discussion with marxists and a few anarchists of different shades. One reason I'm interested in this forum is to learn more.

One aspect of Anti-Revisionism I disagree with is that many of them seem to either follow Maoism or Hoxhaism. Maoism I am strongly opposed to, while Hoxhaism I know very little about but what I know isn't good.
Secondly sometimes Anti-Revisionists have come across as quite dogmatic and sectarian. Not everything Khruschev and the revisionists did was negative, some of it might even have been necessary (however, the overall effect was disastrous, especially the liberalisation). Personally, I think the far left should cooperate to a greater extent than it does now.

But overally, I'm far more sympathetic to Anti-Revisionism than Khruschevism, Trotskyism or any of the other derivations.

[Q]

First off, I must admit that my knowledge of the more advanced marxist theories are limited. I have read the Communist Manifesto, an Introduction to Political Economy, the Basics of Marxism-Leninism and a few others dealing with Marxism-Leninism. Outside of that, most of my knowledge comes from party study circles and discussion with marxists and a few anarchists of different shades. One reason I'm interested in this forum is to learn more.
Fair enough.


One aspect of Anti-Revisionism I disagree with is that many of them seem to either follow Maoism or Hoxhaism. Maoism I am strongly opposed to, while Hoxhaism I know very little about but what I know isn't good.
Secondly sometimes Anti-Revisionists have come across as quite dogmatic and sectarian. Not everything Khruschev and the revisionists did was negative, some of it might even have been necessary (however, the overall effect was disastrous, especially the liberalisation). Personally, I think the far left should cooperate to a greater extent than it does now.
Yes, many users here are super-dogmatic and sectarian towards other users.


But overally, I'm far more sympathetic to Anti-Revisionism than Khruschevism, Trotskyism or any of the other derivations.

I don't think there is any consistent "Khruschevist" tendency still out there. As for Trotskyism, I happen to disagree with you on that I don't think it's much more of a "derivation" than the "anti-revisionists" are ;)

Both currents have their origins in the Russian revolution and its immediate aftermath, with Trotskyist currents often basing themselves on the first four congresses of the Comintern.

[Widerstand]

I'm curious now, would the Frankfurt School's Marx-Critique be considered revisionist? I would think so.

Also, what don't you like about Maoism?

[Nolan]

Welcome!

Hoxhaism isn't intended to be a separate tendency, but its often treated like one since so many other things lay claim to Marxism-Leninism and anti-revisionism. In fact we just had a fine specimen recently.

[Marx Lenin Stalin Mao]

New member +1. Greetings!

[Zanthorus]

Welcome :)


I'm curious now, would the Frankfurt School's Marx-Critique be considered revisionist? I would think so.

This depends on your conception of revisionism. When the Second International leaders - Kautsky, Bebel, Luxemburg, Lenin and so on - talked about revisionism it wasn't just Bernstein's critique of Marxist theory that ired them. If a critique of Marx counts as revisionism, then Rosa Luxemburg, one of the strongest writers in the anti-Bernstein/Jaurès/Millerand etc debates, would have to be counted as a revisionist for implicitly calling Marx and Engels position on the mass strike tactic into quesiton. The 'revisionists' did much more than call aspects of Marxist theory into question, they abandoned the terrain of independent class politics. They advocated participation in governments with liberal and democratic bourgeois parties to gain piecemeal social reforms and defend 'democracy' from 'rightists'.