Video: hoxhaist demonstration in Albania 2005

[fogao]

link is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cvf24UvNA0Y

[Cheung Mo]

heh...Hoxhaism has always left a bitter taste in my mouth: Likely because the first Hoxhaist party I became familiar with was Venezuela's Banderas Rojas, an authoritarian party that has worked with the fascist and neo-liberal right to destablise Chavez's government.

[fogao]

misunderstanding

[Prairie Fire]

Fogao

I personally have a bitter taste in my mouth when I think about maoism - an ideology which is no vivid at all today
Cheung Mo isn't a Maoist.

Cheung Mo

heh...Hoxhaism has always left a bitter taste in my mouth: Likely because the first Hoxhaist party I became familiar with was Venezuela's Banderas Rojas, an authoritarian party that has worked with the fascist and neo-liberal right to destablise Chavez's government.

If they truly are, as you say,allied with Fascists and Cappies, they are not Hoxhaist. Hoxha was extremely critical of Mao for Cozying up with the US against the Soviets, and wrote about it in "Revolution and Imperialism".

[Cheung Mo]

They engaged in acts of violence and terrorism against Chavistas during the imperialist coup of 2002 and they backed Rosales and the reactionary elite in December's Presidential election.

[fogao]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 17, 2007 06:07 am
They engaged in acts of violence and terrorism against Chavistas during the imperialist coup of 2002 and they backed Rosales and the reactionary elite in December's Presidential election.
Maybe those in Venezuela, but do not generalize.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

The "Hoxhaist" party in the Dominican Republic built grass roots organizations, that almost functioned like soviets, all across the country years ago. They fought against local problems, but also tried to tie it all in together. They grew pretty big too.

As it always is with this sort of thing.. it's better to judge individuals and organizations on their actions, not labels.. whether self-applied or applied by someone else.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

I personally have a bitter taste in my mouth when I think about maoism - an ideology which is no vivid at all today

care to elaborate?


Mao for Cozying up with the US against the Soviets, and wrote about it in "Revolution and Imperialism".

this is pretty irrelevent but I'll run with it. Just because the PRC and US held a diplomatic summit, doesn't mean shit. That's just what countries do. The Soviets had sabotaged the Soviet Economy in the late 50s and were moving in a very counter-revolutionary trend. Even Hoxha admitted this.

[Prairie Fire]

this is pretty irrelevent but I'll run with it. Just because the PRC and US held a diplomatic summit, doesn't mean shit. That's just what countries do. The Soviets had sabotaged the Soviet Economy in the late 50s and were moving in a very counter-revolutionary trend. Even Hoxha admitted this

Actually,Hoxha was quite critical of the PRC's involvment with the USA. Granted that Hoxha realized, as Lenin said, that occasionally communists would find themselves in situations when they would have to work with capitalism in some way. Still, he recognized also that this must be done on a principaled basis, and by no means should any illusions about capitalism/imperialists powers be sown. The PRC was putting forward the line that US imperialism had been "tamed", and that Soviet social imperialism was the greater threat. By presenting one imperialism as the "lesser of two evils" rather than advocating the overthrow of both of the super powers by the genuine Marxist-Leninist forces, the PRC leadership decived the working class.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

that was hardly the line. The line was that Soviet social-imperialism posed a greater threat in that it was leading oppressed countries away from genuine revolution, into state-capitalism. It was decieving the masses and had to be stopped, while as the USA's ideology was in plain and clear site, and no masses would revolt to create THAT society. the PRC saw them BOTH as fucked up enemies.

[Prairie Fire]

that was hardly the line. The line was that Soviet social-imperialism posed a greater threat in that it was leading oppressed countries away from genuine revolution, into state-capitalism. It was decieving the masses and had to be stopped, while as the USA's ideology was in plain and clear site, and no masses would revolt to create THAT society. the PRC saw them BOTH as fucked up enemies.

But the PRC sided with one over the other. The PRC openly made deals with the United States and Capitalist Europe in the 70's, advocating a united front against Soviet Social-Imperialism.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 09:03 pm

that was hardly the line. The line was that Soviet social-imperialism posed a greater threat in that it was leading oppressed countries away from genuine revolution, into state-capitalism. It was decieving the masses and had to be stopped, while as the USA's ideology was in plain and clear site, and no masses would revolt to create THAT society. the PRC saw them BOTH as fucked up enemies.

But the PRC sided with one over the other. The PRC openly made deals with the United States and Capitalist Europe in the 70's, advocating a united front against Soviet Social-Imperialism.
I'm not so sure about that. Do you have any links?

[Janus]

Check out the PRC's support of rival groups in some of the African civil wars (Angola, Zimbabwe, Mozambique,etc.).

As far as open deals with the US went, they were mainly made to normalize relations as a counter against the Soviets and over the Taiwan issue.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Check out the PRC's support of rival groups in some of the African civil wars (Angola, Zimbabwe, Mozambique,etc.).

Yeah, they backed alot of the same counter-revolutionary groups that the US was backing.. like UNITA in Angola.

[Prairie Fire]

A lot of my information is coming from "Revolution and Imperialism" by Enver Hoxha, admittedly not an impartial source, but still a historical analysis none the less.