Brezhnevites

[DrStrangelove]

Okay, maybe I'm just stupid, but I've seen a few users throw this word around and I just have to ask. What the hell is a Brezhnevite?

Is it someone how supports the USSR under Brezhnev's revisionism? What is their general opinion on the Warsaw Pact, Yugoslavia, and Albania? What about other nations such as Cuba and the DPRK? Are they "tankies?"

[Robocommie]

I don't think Brezhnevites actually exist. It's mostly, as I understand it, a slur used by Maoists, Hoxhaists and other hardcore anti-revisionists to attack supporters of the Soviets and Soviet policy post-Brezhnev.

[graymouser]

I think it's used in a somewhat crude attempt to describe the politics of the mainline Communist Parties that stuck with the USSR through the Brezhnev period but neither went with the Eurocommunists and didn't embrace the Gorbachev reforms. The CPUSA was a prominent example during the '90s, but their politics have degenerated even from that relatively low standard.

[Rjevan]

What Robocommie says, nobody refers to him/herself as Brezhnevite, it's a term usually used by said tendencies to denounce the following views:

Brezhnevism

Another colloquial word, "Brezhnevism" is a blanket term for supporters of the later Soviet Union and the pro-Soviet line. This form of thinking is a revisionist yet at first alluring ideology based around the belief that Khrushchev was a rightist deviator from Marxism-Leninism but that Brezhnev put a halt to this continued trend and consolidated socialism. It has come to mean basically “Pan-Socialism,” which can be aptly defined as “if a world leader claimed to be socialist and [probably] wasn't named Tito, then he or she probably was, and if he or she claimed to lead a socialist nation under Marxist-Leninist guidelines, then so much the better.” Of course, even this definition is not comprehensive, since many pro-Soviet parties have begun rehabilitation of Tito and Yugoslavia. Brezhnevites generally state that Leonid Brezhnev, Joseph Stalin, Hugo Chavez, Deng Xiaoping, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Nicolae Ceausescu, Enver Hoxha, Mao Zedong and many others were all genuine in their communist views, but that the latter two specifically made mistakes and/or moved too far towards the ultra-left when they split with the USSR. They condemn "Hoxhaism" and Maoism as “sectarian” and its analysis of state-capitalism as ultra-left and en route towards the road of rightism. Similarly, they deny the concept of social-imperialism and defend the invasions of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan in particular as fully justified, while also defending present-day China as socialist. They respond to the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 with disdain, supporting the government's move against the students.

Brezhnevism is strong as a movement primarily because it allows for the acceptance of virtually all communist lines as acceptable and adopting an appealing "call to arms" towards all segments of Marxism-Leninism to unite towards revolution. In the process however, it ignores the fact that Marxist-Leninists do call for unity, just not unity for the sake of unity. Brezhnevites are also engaging in meaningless talk when they discuss "sectarianism," since the issue of whether China is socialist or not (among many other things) can in no way be viewed as a minor issue. Brezhnevism also has at its basis a welfarist appeal to emotion. What makes a country "socialist?" Well, first it claims to be socialist, and it is led by a communist party of some sort. It also provides for the people (however varied the "provisions" be, from the DPRK to Cuba to China). Clearly, the "great concern" a country has for its citizens magically makes it socialist when such is backed up by socialist rhetoric, if we are to believe the Brezhnevites. When this fails, of course, they go into a Trotskyist-like "defense of the gains of the revolution," condemning all criticisms of a "socialist" country as attempts at "counterrevolution."
http://revolutionaryspiritapl.blogspot.com/2010/02/variants-of-revisionism-marxism_27.html

[graymouser]

Brezhnevites generally state that Leonid Brezhnev, Joseph Stalin, Hugo Chavez, Deng Xiaoping, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Nicolae Ceausescu, Enver Hoxha, Mao Zedong and many others were all genuine in their communist views, but that the latter two specifically made mistakes and/or moved too far towards the ultra-left when they split with the USSR.
Have any of the tendencies in what could be called "Brezhnevism" (KKE, Marxism-Leninism Today etc) actually declared Chávez's Venezuela to be a socialist country? It just seems odd to put him in the list unless someone's genuinely putting him on the same level as Castro, Mao etc.

[DrStrangelove]

So it's essentially a slur describing people who are Marxist-Leninist, yet support the USSR's actions under Brezhnev like the invasion of Czechoslovakia, or Marxist-Leninists who claim that the USSR was socialist except under Khruschev and Gorbachev.

On another note, who in their right mind thinks that Deng Xiaoping and Nicolae Ceausescu were "genuine in their communist views?":confused:

[CesareBorgia]

So it's essentially a slur describing people who are Marxist-Leninist, yet support the USSR's actions under Brezhnev like the invasion of Czechoslovakia, or Marxist-Leninists who claim that the USSR was socialist except under Khruschev and Gorbachev.

On another note, who in their right mind thinks that Deng Xiaoping and Nicolae Ceausescu were "genuine in their communist views?":confused:

The same can be said about Mao, Castro, Ho, etc.

[Jose Gracchus]

Brezhnevites are also engaging in meaningless talk when they discuss "sectarianism," since the issue of whether China is socialist or not (among many other things) can in no way be viewed as a minor issue. Brezhnevism also has at its basis a welfarist appeal to emotion. What makes a country "socialist?" Well, first it claims to be socialist, and it is led by a communist party of some sort. It also provides for the people (however varied the "provisions" be, from the DPRK to Cuba to China). Clearly, the "great concern" a country has for its citizens magically makes it socialist when such is backed up by socialist rhetoric, if we are to believe the Brezhnevites. When this fails, of course, they go into a Trotskyist-like "defense of the gains of the revolution," condemning all criticisms of a "socialist" country as attempts at "counterrevolution."

Bing-O. Hits it right on the dot. This is what people (incorrectly) think socialism in its Marxian sense means.

[Ismail]

Hoxha in 1969: "Khrushchev's successors were obliged to change tactics. They discarded into oblivion the noisy slogan and preachings of N. Khrushchev and decided to pass from words to deeds. If the 'merit' of the working out of the general line of modern revisionism belongs to N. Khrushchev, to his successors, the Brezhnev-Kosygin clique, belongs the 'merit' of the full implementation of this counter-revolutionary line.... to curb the discrediting actions of the impatient liberal revisionists at home, to hold under control the revisionist cliques of the other countries, and to re-establish the Soviet dictate on their revisionist partners." (The Party of Labor of Albania in Battle with Modern Revisionism, pp. 489-490.)

Khrushchevism gave impetus to liberals like Imre Nagy and Dubček. Brezhnevism was a reaction to the fact that said liberal tendencies in the various CPs were harmful to Soviet control over said countries. Also unlike Khrushchev-era USSR, which basically was like "MAO AND HOXHA CONDEMN US BECAUSE THEY LOVE STALIN AND HATE FREEDOM," the USSR under Brezhnev moved into a more "theoretical" mood, and actually made some good criticisms of Maoism (albeit from a pro-Soviet PoV) whilst mixing these criticisms in with attempts to justify Soviet revisionism, such as "peaceful co-existence," "state of the whole people," etc. They also publicly softened their line on Albania in the 1970's (especially after the Sino-Albanian split), offering Hoxha a chance to return to the Warsaw Pact and the resumption of normal relations (both of which were promptly rejected by Hoxha.)

As Hoxha said of this in 1980: "The present tactic of the Soviet revisionists is to take advantage of the stands of our Marxist-Leninist Party against Mao Zedong thought. Through this tactic they aim to draw us into their orbit, but neither your party [the PCdoB] nor ours falls readily into their traps. Of course, there are people in the world who do not understand the tactics of the Soviets." (Selected Works Vol. VI, p. 54.)