Supporting Leninist/Maoist Revolutions

[KC]

I disagree with Leninist and Maoist theory. I disagree with the idea that Leninist and Maoist revolutions will lead to a communist society. However, successful Leninist and Maoist revolutions speed up the development of the underdeveloped countries that they take place in. I support these revolutions based on the fact that they speed up the development of capitalism and bring nearer communist revolution.

What does everybody think about this idea of supporting Maoist/Leninist revolution? Agree or disagree? Why or why not? Discuss.

[Revolution67]

As Karl Marx said a society should have material conditions that would be conducive to take it from Capitalism to Communism. Unless, the pre-requisites for transformation of society to Communism are met, achieving Communism would be impossible. Both Russia and China on the eve of revolution were feudal and industrially backward nations. The conditions necessary for revolution by the proletariat to overthrow the ruling class did not exist. The question is, how long people would have waited for the material conditions to come into existence that would have necessiated revolution. In my opinion, Lenin and Mao tried to take the shortcut route to communism. I might be wrong, but they thought that after the ruling class has been dislodged through a revolution, the state would be used as an instrument to create necessary conditions (i.e. by establishing factories, workplaces and communes) that would take the community to communism and that is where the idea of state ownership came into existence. It was thought to be of transitional nature, but soon acquired the proportions of state capitalism, where the "proletariat elite" assumed the role of the ruling class, while the ordinary workers continued to strive for living at fixed wages and this I suppose led to the downfall of Soviet Union (for good) and transfrmation of China into a whole-heartedly capitalist economy.

Therefore Leninist and Maoist ideas give us a way to bring about a revolution before material conditions come into existence (as empahsised by Karl Marx), as they can very well be created by the government during the "socialist phase". If we go by Marx word, then US should experience a proletarian revolution within a few years and for third world developing nations, they will have to wait for decades if not centuries before the pre-reqs for proletarian revolution can be met.

[KC]

None of that was relevent to the topic at hand.

[Revolution67]

I mean to say that revolutions on the lines of Leninist and Maoist revolutions help in bringing rapid industrialisation to poor and industrially backward nations...in a nut-shell. :)

[KC]

Yes, but the question is: should we support them?

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 12:05 AM
I disagree with Leninist and Maoist theory. I disagree with the idea that Leninist and Maoist revolutions will lead to a communist society. However, successful Leninist and Maoist revolutions speed up the development of the underdeveloped countries that they take place in. I support these revolutions based on the fact that they speed up the development of capitalism and bring nearer communist revolution.

What does everybody think about this idea of supporting Maoist/Leninist revolution? Agree or disagree? Why or why not? Discuss.
I feel the same way, and I too support maoist revolutions. Anything to weaken the grip of imperialism is objectively a good thing for us. We know that these revolutions won't amount to communism, but they are still historically progressive.

[Revolution67]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 03:00 PM
Yes, but the question is: should we support them?
Well, thats pretty hard question to answer. History has shown us that Leninist/Maoist revolutions over the period of time turned into dictatorship of the "elite prolitariat". The primordial intention of freeing people from the shackles of feudal aristocracy was great, but when the protagonists themselves assumed absolute power and with no watch-dog organisation around to monitor and control them, the system collapsed into dictatorship. It is said that "Absolute power corrupts one absolutely" and same has been the case with those associated with Leninist/Maoist revolutions.

In my opinion, once the old system has been replaced and the revolutionaries, instead of assuming power, should make way for persons from the society, who are prominent by the virtue of their intellect, wisdom and commitment to the cause of the masses. The revolutionaries should withdraw from the scene and at the most, should act as watch-dogs for those people whom they have delivered the reigns of governance. This way not only they will remain committed to their cause, but also remain safe from the vices of power and greed.

[redstar2000]

I don't see how anyone could fail to support them...especially American revolutionaries, since these revolutions are often directed against U.S. imperialism.

But it would help if people had a clearer idea of what "support" really means in this context.

It means we want them to win...and that's all.

The left in the U.S. (and perhaps other imperialist countries as well) has been historically vulnerable to the "cheerleading effect".

You know: "The Maoist Party of Shitholia" is "building socialism" and "are the most advanced portion of humanity", blah, blah, blah.

The only thing accomplished by spreading such illusions is...disillusionment.

What happened to all those fire-breathing Maoists of the 1970s? Most of them are gone. The material and class realities of China "blew up in their faces" and they simply couldn't handle that.

When their illusions about China and Mao crumbled, they became "disillusioned" with the whole revolutionary project.

Just like the immensely larger number of Stalinists did during the latter part of Stalin's lifetime.

And I've already seen some of that incipient "cheer-leading" applied to Venezuela...so when Venezuela turns out not to be "building socialism" but rather modernizing Venezuelan capitalism, there are going to be some more disillusioned people leaving the left altogether.

We need to be clear why we want any anti-imperialist struggle anywhere to win.

We want the weakening of western imperialism...especially the United States. We want our own working class to see with unmistakable clarity that our rulers are not "all powerful" and can be defeated.

This is a lesson that must be learned.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Revolution67]

If an experiment failed in the past, that does not mean that experiment is conceptually wrong or for that matter any experiment carried on the basis of the past experiment is bound to falter. To make an experiment successful, a lot of things have to be taken into consideration. Considerations like the human factor, the environment, the material conditions et al. Many people tried flying an airplane before Wright brothers could do it, failed and gave up, but that does not mean that concept of making a man made instrument to traverse through the air was conceptually wrong, it was their flawed approach that did them in.

[celticfire]

Rudra: We Maoists call those 'elite' revisionists. And it was a problem Mao was attempting to solve when he launched the Cultural Revolution.

Why should revolutionaries "withdraw" from the scene? I think revolutionary activity should be creditials in a socialist society, even if it's disagreeing with your own government (ie: Red Guards in China)!

There is no simple solution, and it will be a complex task to get the masses of people to take state power and hold on to it. But don't be quick to dismiss the socialist experience thus far because they were defeated.

All I can say is, I think you've been reading too much from the Red Star2000 papers! LOL! :P

[Revolution67]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 07:01 PM
Rudra: We Maoists call those 'elite' revisionists. And it was a problem Mao was attempting to solve when he launched the Cultural Revolution.

Why should revolutionaries "withdraw" from the scene? I think revolutionary activity should be creditials in a socialist society, even if it's disagreeing with your own government (ie: Red Guards in China)!

There is no simple solution, and it will be a complex task to get the masses of people to take state power and hold on to it. But don't be quick to dismiss the socialist experience thus far because they were defeated.

All I can say is, I think you've been reading too much from the Red Star2000 papers! LOL! :P
Celticfire:

Thanks for your response. As you must have read in in my previous post that why should revolutionaries withdraw from the scene, after the old system has been overthrown, because revolutionaries have already done their job, i.e. dislodging the ruling class from power. If revolutionaries do not withdraw and take power, the result would be the same as in USSR, China and that is what we abhor in general, the state dictatorship. Anyway, that my opinion.

Yes, I have been reading redstar2000papers, as well as highly informative posts written by Lazar and Severian.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by celticfire+--> (celticfire)All I can say is, I think you've been reading too much from the Red Star2000 papers![/b]


WikiPedia entry for 2030
Redstar2000 was widely regarded as a "cranky old bastard" in the early left of this century, but he nevertheless was a constant torment to the remnants of late western Maoism. It's now thought that he influenced thousands of rebellious young people to reject that 20th century superstition...much to the benefit of the revolutionary left of our own era.

:lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[KC]

Redstar, I enjoy your posts that actually have political content. But it seems that in this thread, and perhaps others, you have degenerated more to the general making-fun-of people that don't agree with you than actual political content. I'm not saying that your posts are completely devoid of political content; it just seems that you have to look through all the crap to find it. I know your views on Leninism/Maoism and how absurd you find them to be. How about instead of insulting those that hold these views, you focus your energy on a detailed and indepth criticism of these ideologies that you claim to hold no content?

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 12:23 PM
Redstar, I enjoy your posts that actually have political content. But it seems that in this thread, and perhaps others, you have degenerated more to the general making-fun-of people that don't agree with you than actual political content. I'm not saying that your posts are completely devoid of political content; it just seems that you have to look through all the crap to find it. I know your views on Leninism/Maoism and how absurd you find them to be. How about instead of insulting those that hold these views, you focus your energy on a detailed and indepth criticism of these ideologies that you claim to hold no content?
Well, perhaps I have grown weary of repeating points that I've made "over and over" again in threads extending over the past three years.

If you look on my site, you will see many collections that discuss in exhaustive detail the specifics of western Maoist positions.

Or you can use the "search engine" feature to see if I ever talked about any particular Maoist position on some question.

In addition to which, I may be reacting to the minor "flood" of simple-minded Maoist propaganda that we've been experiencing lately. Instead of substantive argument, we are simply exhorted (at tedious length) to follow their leadership!

That kind of thing provokes ridicule. :lol:

So I'll try to respond to a substantive contribution from them...should that happen.

But I don't want to make any promises. :P

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif