marx and the vanguard

[Blasphemy]

did marx say that there should be a vanguard to lead a revolution?

[redstar2000]

Troublemaker! :-D

I suspect there might be a few fragments of Marx and/or Engels that could be twisted into an "endorsement" of a "vanguard leadership"--I expect our resident Leninists to produce them (with careful documentation).

But the spirit of their work is clearly proclaimed in words they never repudiated: the emancipation of the working class must be the work of the workers themselves.

That's good enough for me!

[Revolution Hero]

I see that you, redstar, don't know what vanguard is.

"the emancipation of the working class must be the work of the workers themselves"

Vanguard consists of the most educated representatives of the proletariat. Well - educated workers should lead other comrades. Isn't it clear?

PROLETARIAN VANGUARD FORMS THE COMMUNIST PARTY, MEANS PARTY LEADS THE REVOLUTION.

Each revolution is the mass movement and the proletarian vanguard makes it to be this way.

[Palmares]

Can we honestly get anywhere without the vanguard? If we did not have them, the proletariat would be far to gullible to do anything. Hope lies with the vanguard.

[sibling]

Could Castro and Che be considered the members of the vanguard of the revolutions/attempts in the Americas?

[redstar2000]

Fidel and Che did not CLAIM to be a "vanguard"--that's an after-the-fact conclusion. Even less did they ever say or imply that Cubans (or anyone) had to "follow" them or be relegated to historical irrelevence. They didn't become Leninists until AFTER the revolution.

The proletariat is "far too gullible to do anything". It's really WRONG to consider the proletariat in a period of reaction (like this one) forever condemned to being demoralized, cynical, passive, or gullible. The same person in a revolutionary period is very different from the way they were in a reactionary period; the same applies to classes.

The question that Blasphemy raised: did Marx say that there should be a vanguard to lead the revolution? Right now, the vote is 1 NO and 3 Abstentions.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

The vanguard will steal the power from the needy proletarian classes.

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from redstar2000 on 1:48 am on Nov. 19, 2002
Right now, the vote is 1 NO and 3 Abstentions.


Did you count my reply for the abstention? I answered YES. Advise you to read my reply one more time.
Cthenthar also agreed that the PROLETARIAN VANGUARD plays an important role in the socialistic revolution.
So, if you wish to count the votes , then they are
2-YES;
2-NO;
1-ABSTENTION.

Counting the votes in this case is the good way to find out , who really knows Marx's , Engels's and Lenin's teaching.
You better read Marx and Lenin, redstar!

(Edited by Revolution Hero at 2:07 am on Nov. 19, 2002)

[Palmares]

Well said Revolution Hero. The people of the world can be split into the following;

*The 85 % (The brainless masses)
*The 10 % (Educated capitalists/blood-suckers of the poor)
*The 5 % (The vanguard)

The 85 % need to be shown the light by the 5 %, otherwise they will follow the capitalist systems of the 10 % blindly.

[redjordi]

Let Marx and Engels speak for themselves:

"The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only:

(1) In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality.

(2) In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.

The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement. "

This is from the Comunist Manifesto.

According to this, Communists are the most advanced section of the proletarian movement in every country.

redjordi
http://www.marxist.com

[BOZG]

*The 85 % (The brainless masses)
*The 10 % (Educated capitalists/blood-suckers of the poor)
*The 5 % (The vanguard)

You're not a member of the Nation of Islam are you? :biggrin:


I agree with victorcommie and redstar. The vanguard is far too corruptable. Revolution must come directly from the people themselves, not from their leaders.

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from BornOfZapatasGuns on 3:08 am on Nov. 20, 2002

*The 85 % (The brainless masses)
*The 10 % (Educated capitalists/blood-suckers of the poor)
*The 5 % (The vanguard)

You're not a member of the Nation of Islam are you? :biggrin:


I agree with victorcommie and redstar. The vanguard is far too corruptable. Revolution must come directly from the people themselves, not from their leaders.

You agree with victorcommie and redstar , but disagree with Marx, Engels and Lenin. I am sure that you do this only because of your misunderstanding of the theory of the socialistic revolution.

Socialistic revolution are done by the people, proletarian vanguard can't fight against the exploiters alone. But proletarian vanguard does prepare the masses for the great struggle by educating workers, explaining them whom they need to fight and why.
Without the dominant role of the vanguard the world wouldn't have ever witnessed Great October Revolution and other revolutions , which happened later.
The masses need leadership, they find it , presented by the vanguard.

Corruption and communism are antagonistic, just like capitalism and communism.

[redstar2000]

Marx and Engels should indeed be permitted to speak for themselves. You will carefully note that NOWHERE do they use the word "lead" with regard to the proletarian revolution.

The phrase "push forward" is ambigious; it could in this context mean simply that communists by virtue of their resoluteness and understanding of the final goal serve to radicalize other working class parties. That's what I think it DOES mean...but I'm sure our resident Leninists will translate that phrase into "lead" and then, quickly, into "command".

Phrases like "the brainless masses" are not helpful and very remote from a Marxist understanding of history in general and revolution in particular. The "masses" when examined closely turn out to be individual human beings JUST LIKE US except they don't know as much as we do YET. That does NOT make them contemptable retards to be manipulated to suit our convenience. To argue otherwise would make us no better than capitalists or any other ruling class.

"The masses need leadership," barks Sgt. RH. To which I reply, "yeah, sarge, like a fish needs a bycycle."

The wannabe general RH also disputes my vote count. Has he forgotten that awesome quote from J.V. Stalin:
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." For shame. :-D

Did Marx say that there should be a vanguard to lead the revolution: 0 Yes; 2 No; 4 Abstentions (To count as a "yes" vote, you must submit a relevant quotation with a verifiable source.)


(Now that I think of it, I'm not sure Marx and Engels ever used the word "vanguard" at all...maybe I should check that one out.)

(Edited by redstar2000 at 9:43 am on Nov. 20, 2002)

[BOZG]

The use of a vanguard will always result in an upper class. We live in a society with a mentality to thirst for power, there is very little hope that a vanguard would give up their leadership in order to become "regular" people.



Without the dominant role of the vanguard the world wouldn't have ever witnessed Great October Revolution and other revolutions , which happened later.

Without the dominant role of the people, the USSR fell as a miserable hell hole while without the dominant role of the people, the PRC remains a miserable hell hole

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Cthenthar, you reffered to the masses as 'brainless', I find this sort of innacuracy offensive. The masses are not 'brainless', as you call them. They are opressed and have no conditions for for the necessary quantities of food, water, healthcare, and also education.

[Palmares]

I meant in the sense they (the masses) are easily swayed in opinion. I am sorry if you thought otherwise. I am not a member of the Nation of Islam, they are fools. I used this African-American theory as an example of my opinion. Of course the vanguard is corruptible, but who isn't? Everyone has a weak point or limit. We are all human. I ask everyone, are you not of the vanguard? Or are you rich educated people? If you are of the proletariat and actually know what you are talking about in these forums, are you not part of the vanguard? Say what you may in this discussion, but do not patronise me.

[Sol]

I agree with Redstar. The spirit of Marx's, and especially Engel's, works are democratic. I think Marx would have seen the results of a one party, vanguard system like those used in Russia, China, Cuba, etc. and denounced them. Look at the results each produced.

Was the Paris Commune led by a vanguard? I think this would tell us a whole lot more than just rehashing the same old dogma over and over. I mean, Leninism is supposedly based on Marx, which should tell you how easily theory can be twisted.

[Blasphemy]

guys, i thank you for the enlightening arguments, but i kinda really need to know if marx and engels ever mentioned that a vanguard is necessary for the revolution... i'm not asking for opinions, but for facts... thanks...

[redstar2000]

Was the Paris Commune led by a vanguard? No, certainly not in any "Leninist" sense of the word. In fact, there were hardly any Marxists present at all.

As far as I understand it, most of the workers who took part in the Commune were either followers of Proudhon or were what might be called proto-syndicalists, for want of a better term.

It was the Paris Commune that both Marx and Engels endorsed as the first "dictatorship of the proletariat"...in spite of the total absence of anything resembling a "vanguard party".

But get the word first hand: Karl Marx, The Civil War in France.

http://www2.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/archive/m...rance/index.htm (http://www2.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/archive/marx/works/1871/civil-war-france/index.htm)