What tendency does Michael Parenti belong to

[YugoslavSocialist]

What tendency does Michael Parenti belong to?
I know he's a leftist and an anti capitalist. But which one does he belong to?

[Ostrinski]

I believe he is a Marxist-Leninist or what we would refer to more conventionally as a Stalinist. He is certainly very critical of Stalin and his regime in the Soviet Union to say the least but he also generally supports it, defends it, and apologizes for it.

He's written some ok stuff though.

[Let's Get Free]

I'd say he's what's known as a "Brezhnevite."

[Lenina Rosenweg]

I believe Parenti was in the CPUS back in the day and is now affiliated with the Committees of Correspondence, a split from the CP in the 90s. Both groups align towards the Democratic Party, the C of C more so. I know that Parenti supported John Kerry back in '04.

[RadioRaheem84]

Lately I've heard him be very supportive of social democracy. I take it he is a dem soc though.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

It kind of depends. I think it is a weird mix of stalinism, social-democracy, trotskyism and liberalism. Basically a load of shit.
He has written some interesting stuff though.

[human strike]

Guys, put away your label guns and just ask the man (if you really must know). He is easily contactable via facebook (http://www.facebook.com/michael.parenti.9).

[Ocean Seal]

The man is pretty obviously a Marxist-Leninist. His work is good though.

[Prometeo liberado]

I cant take him serious until he makes up his mind on whether or not he wants that goddamn beard or not. Grow it or don't grow it, I don't care. Just get off the fence already.:(

[Sir Comradical]

He's a critical-of-Stalin Marxist Leninist with a sprinkling of Tankie which is kinda where I'm at these days. I've only read two of his books - Blackshirts and the one on Yugoslavia. The latter had serious problems and was far too pro-Serb and even downplayed the Srebrenica massacre.

[Ostrinski]

He's a political scientist that thinks he's also a historian.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Why is this otherwise interesting thread in Philosophy? It should be moved.

Ostrinski, in some cases his historian accounts are nothing less than excellent. Otherwise, I wouldn't have derived key contemporary political conclusions from certain historian accounts of his.

[Manic Impressive]

He's not a stalinist or Marxist-leninist as some prefer to call it. He identifies himnself as a "progressive" that basically means a Social democrat or I'm sure as Revleft's US wing would call him a "ZOMG liberal". He concerns himself with analyzing history and generally applies a Marxist methodology to it. He's defended the Soviet Union from some absurd claims (like Stalin killed 200m people) but then again so have I. Does my objection to ahistorical rubbish make me a Stalinist?

While he does apply marxist methodology to much of his work I have seen little to indicate that he is in fact a socialist. Rather he argues for nationalization and other social democratic reforms.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

He's not a stalinist or Marxist-leninist as some prefer to call it. He identifies himnself as a "progressive" that basically means a Social democrat or I'm sure as Revleft's US wing would call him a "ZOMG liberal". He concerns himself with analyzing history and generally applies a Marxist methodology to it. He's defended the Soviet Union from some absurd claims (like Stalin killed 200m people) but then again so have I. Does my objection to ahistorical rubbish make me a Stalinist?

While he does apply marxist methodology to much of his work I have seen little to indicate that he is in fact a socialist. Rather he argues for nationalization and other social democratic reforms.

Thast's pretty much the stand of the CPUSA and the C of C today.

[RadioRaheem84]

Those being critical of Parenti should first read Land of Idols and Democracy for the Few.

The first being a superb book on the presupposed mythologies in American culture. Absolutely a fascinating expose on what American culture espouses a nation. Gramsci would be proud. Without a doubt his best work.

Democracy for the Few is an exceptional step by step deconstructing of the American system. Makes Chomsky read like a children s book. It's the perfect book to give to your liberal friends who think that leftist scholarship is too wrapped up in theory to provide a rational critique of US Democracy.

Those two books alone put him in my list of exceptional political scientists and US historians.

He also belongs to the trinity of progressive hero historian/political scientists; Chomsky, Parenti, Zinn.

[Manic Impressive]

Don't get me wrong I'm not really criticizing Parenti for his work, by using a Marxist analysis he is very useful and myself and other comrades think very highly of him despite his flaws. He's got many positives, although he should be criticized for where he is wrong, same with Chomsky. We don't need to deal in absolutes all the time.

[RadioRaheem84]

Don't get me wrong I'm not really criticizing Parenti for his work, by using a Marxist analysis he is very useful and myself and other comrades think very highly of him despite his flaws. He's got many positives, although he should be criticized for where he is wrong, same with Chomsky. We don't need to deal in absolutes all the time.

Well of course, but Stalinist? People are going a bit far there.

[Sir Comradical]

Those being critical of Parenti should first read Land of Idols and Democracy for the Few.

The first being a superb book on the presupposed mythologies in American culture. Absolutely a fascinating expose on what American culture espouses a nation. Gramsci would be proud. Without a doubt his best work.

Democracy for the Few is an exceptional step by step deconstructing of the American system. Makes Chomsky read like a children s book. It's the perfect book to give to your liberal friends who think that leftist scholarship is too wrapped up in theory to provide a rational critique of US Democracy.

Those two books alone put him in my list of exceptional political scientists and US historians.

He also belongs to the trinity of progressive hero historian/political scientists; Chomsky, Parenti, Zinn.

What's your take on 'The Anti-communist impulse' if you've read that?

[Os Cangaceiros]

"Democracy for the Few" ain't that great. I read it, didn't get much out of it. Nothing new.

[RadioRaheem84]

I think it depends on the edition. The latest one did read like a regular progressive book. But the earlier ones like the 98 and 02 editions were great.

[RadioRaheem84]

"Democracy for the Few" ain't that great. I read it, didn't get much out of it. Nothing new.

That's one I haven't read.

[Luís Henrique]

Voted "other" just to see the results; I reject the idea of voting about what living people belong to.

Luís Henrique

[RedHal]

FWIW, I listened to a radio interview with him on a progressive show, and when asked by a caller to recommend a party, Parenti suggested the Marcyist Workers World Party.

[EdvardK]

He supported Mikhail Gorbachev’s campaign of perestroika and glasnost until 1990 when it became evident to him that the Gorbachev reforms were leading to the implantation of free-market capitalism and were, as he saw it, bringing hardships to the common people.

[Per Levy]

that guy is a social democrat who doenst like trots and anarchists and is friendly to stalinists.