Marxism - Classical vs. Orthodox

[Rafiq]

I would like to start a discussion... Or even a debate regarding these two different types of Marxism.

To start:

- What are the most important differences between them?

- Are there still Classical Marxists around today?

- What is the main criticism of Orthodox Marxism that is held by many Leninist-Marxists? Did Lenin himself specifically write any text regarding it? Perhaps it has something to do with Karl Kautsky?

- What is the main criticism of Classical Marxism held by Orthodox Marxists?

That's all.

[pastradamus]

I would like to start a discussion... Or even a debate regarding these two different types of Marxism.

To start:

- What are the most important differences between them?

- Are there still Classical Marxists around today?

- What is the main criticism of Orthodox Marxism that is held by many Leninist-Marxists? Did Lenin himself specifically write any text regarding it? Perhaps it has something to do with Karl Kautsky?

- What is the main criticism of Classical Marxism held by Orthodox Marxists?

That's all.

Interesting questions really I must say.

Welll, to reply to the questions.

Classical Marxism is the Marxism limited to the Engels and Marx, their ideas and writings. Orthodox Marxism (2nd International) is what happened after Marx withs regards the likes of Luxenberg and Kautsky. That which opposed Orthodox Marxism was regarded as Kautsky as "revisionism" as it was more progressive and accepting of certain capitalist concepts and so he detested the likes of Bebel and Bernstein.

Later the next divide came as a result of Kautskys (and so the orthodox movements) arguments and non-acceptance with the Bolshevik revolution and its methods. The Bolshevik revolution in turn gives rise to two concepts 1) Leninism and 2) Trotskyism (these are the two people with which Kautsky had polemics and theoritical disputes with). The fusion of Lenins imput into Marxism became known as Marxist-Leninism which basically was the acceptance that a non-devoloped society could become a Communist one by short-circuiting the ideas of the communist manifesto and adapting these to a nation in turmoil such as Russia at that time.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I would like to start a discussion... Or even a debate regarding these two different types of Marxism.

To start:

- What are the most important differences between them?

- Are there still Classical Marxists around today?

- What is the main criticism of Orthodox Marxism that is held by many Leninist-Marxists? Did Lenin himself specifically write any text regarding it? Perhaps it has something to do with Karl Kautsky?

- What is the main criticism of Classical Marxism held by Orthodox Marxists?

That's all.

The most fundamental difference between Marx-Engels and Orthodox Marxism is the latter's more advanced understanding of what a mass party-movement is (that is, institution-based).

A criticism that could be lobbied at Orthodox Marxism from the "Classical Marxist" school is the downgrading of the Minimum Program. The Marx-Engels Minimum Program, in its totality, means the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Ever since The Social Revolution, the minimum program as a whole meant something less.

[Personally, I subscribe to both the Marx-Engels minimum program and the Kautskyan minimum program. The former is crucial, but the latter is for immediate, intermediate, and threshold demands before the question of the DOTP arises.]


That which opposed Orthodox Marxism was regarded as Kautsky as "revisionism" as it was more progressive and accepting of certain capitalist concepts and so he detested the likes of Bebel and Bernstein.

Bebel was part of the Orthodox Marxist tendency all throughout, though he compromised a lot by siding with those who wanted peasants in the SPD.

[pastradamus]

[Personally, I subscribe to both the Marx-Engels minimum program and the Kautskyan minimum program. The former is crucial, but the latter is for immediate, intermediate, and threshold demands before the question of the DOTP arises.]
.

Indeed, such is my disagreement with the Orthodox standpoint in that I dont believe that the creation of the Socialist International was of any use other than to slow down marxist progress and demigrate what sould have been action taken involving the working class into a bunch of middle-class discussion halls.

Not to say that I dont have anything but respect for the likes of Kautsky - this seems to be my only issue.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Indeed, such is my disagreement with the Orthodox standpoint in that I dont believe that the creation of the Socialist International was of any use other than to slow down marxist progress and demigrate what sould have been action taken involving the working class into a bunch of middle-class discussion halls.

Not to say that I dont have anything but respect for the likes of Kautsky - this seems to be my only issue.

Huh? Comrade, "Educate! Agitate! Organize!" is the key slogan! Today we see the (hyper-)"activism" so prevalent on the left, so many headless chickens and not enough clear heads, particularly in the sphere of public policy! They have "Agitate! Agitate! Agitate!" or at best "Agitate! Educate! Organize!"

The alternative culture of the pre-war SPD and inter-war USPD (cultural societies, recreational clubs, etc.) were rock-solid.

[RED DAVE]

Huh? Comrade, "Educate! Agitate! Organize!" is the key slogan! Today we see the (hyper-)"activism" so prevalent on the left, so many headless chickens and not enough clear heads, particularly in the sphere of public policy! They have "Agitate! Agitate! Agitate!" or at best "Agitate! Educate! Organize!"You are so full of shit it's pathetic. Maybe one of these days you'll actually do some organizing and agitating and know what it's like.


The alternative culture of the pre-war SPD and inter-war USPD (cultural societies, recreational clubs, etc.) were rock-solid.Yeah, rock solid reformist.

RED DAVE

[Die Neue Zeit]

You are so full of shit it's pathetic. Maybe one of these days you'll actually do some organizing and agitating and know what it's like.

I've already discussed more contemporary methods of agitation beyond cheap sloganeering, ranging from a more advertising-based approach ("marketing" to the average worker) to "shock jocks" to demagoguery and conspiracy theories (http://www.revleft.com/vb/religion-evil-article-t159465/index.html) (both for the most culturally backward workers).

[o well this is ok I guess]

"shock jocks" Explain, please.

[Die Neue Zeit]

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/20/marxist-contrarians-on-the-british-riots/


Turning from the ridiculous to the ridiculouser, there’s Slavoj Zizek’s (who were you expecting, Mike Davis?) latest think piece on the London Review titled “Shoplifters of the World Unite”. It provides stiff competition with Heartfield’s “Britain Needs a Better Way to Get Rich Than Looting” as contrarian title of the year. When Marxists harp on rioters shoplifting or why Britain needs to work on “getting rich”, one wonders whether they are interested in changing peoples’ minds or rather getting them to say things like “Can you believe what Zizek just wrote in the London Review?” In the U.S. we call such people shock jocks. Whether Marxism has any need of their talents is an open question.

[Zederbaum]

That which opposed Orthodox Marxism was regarded as Kautsky as "revisionism" as it was more progressive and accepting of certain capitalist concepts and so he detested the likes of Bebel and Bernstein.
Just to note that Bebel was close to Kautsky til his death, often using him as the theoretical stick to clear paths he wanted to go. In fact there's a noticeable correlation with the decline of Kautsky's prestige in the party after 1913 since he depended on a de facto alliance with Bebel for organisational influence.

DNZ
The alternative culture of the pre-war SPD and inter-war USPD (cultural societies, recreational clubs, etc.) were rock-solid.
Yeah, rock solid reformist.

RED DAVEReformist as curse-word. You're rendering the term meaningless.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

advertising-based approach ("marketing" to the average worker)

How condescending do you want to be, comrade?

[Iron Felix]

What? Wouldn't Classical Marxism be the the Orthodox? What kind of language is that?

I don't know of Classical Marxism, or Orthodox Marxism. There is Marxism, then there are movements that followed it and either added something to it, or revised it.

[RED DAVE]

You are so full of shit it's pathetic. Maybe one of these days you'll actually do some organizing and agitating and know what it's like.
I've already discussed more contemporary methods of agitation beyond cheap sloganeering, ranging from a more advertising-based approach ("marketing" to the average worker) to "shock jocks" to demagoguery and conspiracy theories (http://www.revleft.com/vb/religion-evil-article-t159465/index.html) (both for the most culturally backward workers).We know what your discussions of this are worth: about as much as your union card.

What? You don't have one? But you're going to discuss "contemporary methods of agitation." Tell you waht, Comrade, why don't you go out and do some "contemporary methods of agitation" and let us know what happens.

RED DAVE

[Q]

What? Wouldn't Classical Marxism be the the Orthodox? What kind of language is that?

I don't know of Classical Marxism, or Orthodox Marxism. There is Marxism, then there are movements that followed it and either added something to it, or revised it.
The problem with that take on the term "Marxism", is that it is imprecise and it could become to mean anything. Pastradamus gave a useful answer:


Classical Marxism is the Marxism limited to the Engels and Marx, their ideas and writings. Orthodox Marxism (2nd International) is what happened after Marx withs regards the likes of Luxe[mburg] and Kautsky. That which opposed Orthodox Marxism was regarded as Kautsky as "revisionism" as it was more progressive and accepting of certain capitalist concepts and so he detested the likes of Bebel and Bernstein.

As for Red Dave's ranting: I kindly request you cease from posting inhere if you're insisting in your incompetence regarding engaging with ideas you happen to disagree with. Go post in Chit-Chat, seems to be more your alley.

[Zanthorus]

two different types of Marxism.

I think it is questionable that there really is two identifiable and easily differentiated schools of thought within Marxism which can be labelled 'classical' and 'orthodox'. Often when I have seen people use 'classical' Marxism as a label it has been in much the same way as one would use 'orthodox' Marxism to point to the classic theorists of Marxism. A quick google search for example reveals Isaac Deutscher's definition:


Isaac Deutscher distinguished between what he called the “classical Marxist” tradition, “the body of thought developed by Marx, Engels, their contemporaries, and after them by Kautsky, Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky [and] Rosa Luxemburg”, and that of “vulgar Marxism”, “the pseudo_Marxism of the different varieties of European social democrats, reformists, Stalinists, Khrushchevites and their like”http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=514&issue=121

John Ree's book on the 'classical Marxist' tradition also identifies it with figures such as Luxemburg and Lukacs. Perhaps the difference would be that 'orthodox' Marxism is generally used more to refer to the Marxism that predominated in the first half of the 20th century and was enshrined in second and third international orthodoxy, whereas 'classical' Marxism is sometimes used by the speaker or writer to differentiate a purer Marxist strain that developed somewhere outside orthodoxy. In either case both seem to encompass such a variety of thinkers that it would be absurd to consider them as 'tendencies' and compare and debate them in the same way we would compare, for example, Trotskyism and Anarchism (I'm actually probably as skeptical of the usefuleness of the latter enterprise as I am of the former).

[RED DAVE]

As for Red Dave's ranting: I kindly request you cease from posting inhere if you're insisting in your incompetence regarding engaging with ideas you happen to disagree with. Go post in Chit-Chat, seems to be more your alley.I suggest, as an alternative, that you consider having aerial intercourse with Earth's large natural satellite.

i will post when and where and on what subjects I choose. If you can't handle criticism, go crying home to mama

RED DAVE

[RED DAVE]

I think it is questionable that there really is two identifiable and easily differentiated schools of thought within Marxism which can be labelled 'classical' and 'orthodox'.I think that the big problems are two-fold: (1) can we find definitions that are useful and, of course (2) politics.

If we define classical Marxism as the work of Marx, Engels and their immediate successors, e.g. Plekhanov, Kautsky and even DeLeon, we find a problem in that the work of Plekhanov and Kautsky leads to political betrayal. If we call Plekhanov and Kautsky orthodox and add Luxemburg, we again have the same problem. If we define orthodoxy as only Plekhanov and Kautsky and a few others who were alive when Marx and Engels were alive, do we have a useful definition?

Just some thoughts.

RED DAVE

[pastradamus]

Huh? Comrade, "Educate! Agitate! Organize!" is the key slogan! Today we see the (hyper-)"activism" so prevalent on the left, so many headless chickens and not enough clear heads, particularly in the sphere of public policy! They have "Agitate! Agitate! Agitate!" or at best "Agitate! Educate! Organize!"

The alternative culture of the pre-war SPD and inter-war USPD (cultural societies, recreational clubs, etc.) were rock-solid.

You win this argument brother! :lol:

[pastradamus]

Just to note that Bebel was close to Kautsky til his death, often using him as the theoretical stick to clear paths he wanted to go. In fact there's a noticeable correlation with the decline of Kautsky's prestige in the party after 1913 since he depended on a de facto alliance with Bebel for organisational influence.

DNZReformist as curse-word. You're rendering the term meaningless.

Yep. I never looked into Bebel too much so please excuse my ignorance. I'll have to put my hand up for that one. :)

[Ryan the Commie Girl]

What about an Orthodox Marxist-Leninist? :)