What can I do?

[Red Puppy]

Comrades, I need guidance. I am recently a new supporter of Marxism. I've got a basic understanding and I'm working on going more in depth of course.

My questions are simple enough. What can I do to further the Communist movement? What can I do to help over throw the capitalist pigs and toss aside the shackles of poverty and oppression as a young proletariat in rural America?

Is there anything?

[Faux Real]

Engage in public discussion, attend local leftist events, and distribute propaganda/graffiti/art etc..

Oh, and keep learning.

[Raúl Duke]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 10, 2007 06:30 pm
Comrades, I need guidance. I am recently a new supporter of Marxism. I've got a basic understanding and I'm working on going more in depth of course.

My questions are simple enough. What can I do to further the Communist movement? What can I do to help over throw the capitalist pigs and toss aside the shackles of poverty and oppression as a young proletariat in rural America?

Is there anything?
Start a "protracted people's war" in the country side and than win the cities.

:D :P :D

Well in seriousness you should try to get involved with other radicals in your area

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 03:46 pm
Start a "protracted people's war" in the country side and than win the cities.

:D :P :D
That too! :lol:

[Lenin II]

Read everything you can get your hands on. It will properly equip you for an argument with cappies. Join a local communist party if you can find one that corresponds to your views appropraitely. Subscribe to some newspapers. Distribute flyers and newspapers for any party you can join.

[Red Puppy]

Thanks, Comrades!


Start a "protracted people's war" in the country side and than win the cities.

I like this idea! :lol:

But to Lenin II, could you possibly compile a list of recommended reading while we're here?

[Red Rebel]

Originally posted by "Red Puppy"
I am recently a new supporter of Marxism.

Learn.


But to Lenin II, could you possibly compile a list of recommended reading while we're here?

Manifesto of the Communist Party, Wage Labour and Capital, State and Revolution, Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Man and Socialism in Cuba, and the list can go on and on and on.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 10, 2007 06:06 pm
Thanks, Comrades!


Start a "protracted people's war" in the country side and than win the cities.

I like this idea! :lol:
The flaw with it is that the cities must me won first, or simultaneously.

The "countryside encircling the cities" is Mao's theory on guerrilla warfare in China. I don't think it'll work in industrialized nations like America.


Red Puppy, if you haven't checked out marxists.org (http://www.marxists.org) yet, you should. A lot of good reading there. Also click on the Enver Hoxha Reference Archive link in my signature. Hoxha was a resistance fighter and revolutionary leader in Albania 1944-1985.

[Red Puppy]

All of you have been so helpful, thanks again, comrades.

[which doctor]

Why are you a Marxist?

[Red Puppy]

Why am I a Marxist? It's a tough question to answer simply, but allow me to try. I, as a young worker have very little experience in the working world. But I'm no fool, I understand and research very many things, and I simply know the exploitation of the working class is there and waiting, and capitalism is right along side it to entangle me into it's poison-barbed grasp. Having seen and observed the past, I grow tired at even such a young age as mine of seeing the mistakes of the past repeated. Believing that if this continues there will be a point where it is impossible to reverse such things, I began to study once more.

Marxism, as I understand it, (and I'm still learning, so be patient and please correct any mistakes I make) solves the problems of these struggles by abolishing the classes that are ruining society as I know it, and placing the power in the workers themselves, the majority of the population--it just seems the most logical choice to make.

[Sam_b]

I would definitely encourage you to read Lenin's The State.

Welcome aboard, comrade! It's gonna be tough, but you'll never leave :P

[Red Puppy]

Will do!

[Q]

Trotsky, Luxemburg and Gramsci are also interesting sources to learn from.
Their work can be found on Marxists.org

[Guest1]

Check out

http://www.marxist.com/
http://www.socialistappeal.org

The second link is to the American section of the International Marxist Tendency, who are involved in the unions and working to build a Marxist tendency that can gain the ear of the masses.

Events in the US have exposed the Capitalist system, whether we look at New Orleans or the mortgage crisis, and the American social system is rotting from the inside. The opportunities for Marxists are enormous, if we use the right methods. We can't shout from the sidelines, we must be there in the unions, and helping to build a party of labor that can express working class interests. We must be there and show that the battle for reconstruction for New Orleans, the battle to save millions of workers' homes and all other immediate battles for progressive gains are only part and parcel of a greater struggle to overthrow Capitalism and place production and society in the hands of the working class.

Give the American section an e-mail.

[Marsella]

Having a job beats reading a tonne of theory.

You don't have to read Capital to understand how capitalism works, or to figure out how the workplace would run post-capitalism. Having a job allows you to be practical about what you are learning, to actually help organize your fellow workers and make some well needed cash. Sitting in your basement memorizing word-for-word What is to Be Done, helps nobody.

And it [a job not reading WITBD!] certainly beats selling papers.

Nothing annoys me more than a college student Marxist who has never worked a hard day&#39;s in his/her life, yet fantasizes about being the leader of a proletarian revolution. <_<

If you want to learn about Marxism, yet don&#39;t find reading 200 pages of academic wankerage particularly fun, then I would suggest checking out The REDSTAR2000 Papers (http://rs2kpapers.awardspace.com/index-2.html).

[KC]

"I would recall to Comrade Lieber that our organizational principle is not broad autonomy but strict centralisation."
-Martov

:lol:

[Marsella]

Originally posted by Zampanò@December 11, 2007 04:29 pm
"I would recall to Comrade Lieber that our organizational principle is not broad autonomy but strict centralisation."
-Martov

:lol:
Sorry, but I have absolutely no idea what you mean... :wacko:

Are you trying to be funny?

:lol:

[KC]

I just think it&#39;s funny that your username on here is Martov, yet you are opposed to what he advocated.

[sanpal]

A bit for learning

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNIST PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION (http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/6579/)

[blackstone]

Get involved in community organizations and participate in things in the grass roots level.

Participate is keyword, don&#39;t burn yourself out comrade.

Leave alone any Communist groups. They are minute.

[Red Puppy]

I do have a job, albeit not for long. Its a seasonal job, but it works. Before that, I worked at a carnival and cut grass&#33;

:lol:

But I plan to be a teacher once I get out of college. Possibly in a foreign country.

Thanks again, I&#39;m making a list of stuff to read. I want to go the the library and actually pick up some solid books because reading a lot online gives me headaches.

[CuantaInjusticia]

Hello everyone&#33; I&#39;m a newbie here and on the same boat as Red Puppy. I have definitely taken all of these comments I have read into consideration and they are all so very helpful but sometimes it almost feels as though I am the only person in my community who believes in a economically/socially just world. I get a bit discouraged and enraged and I&#39;m still fairly new to this so it&#39;s become difficult for me to adjust. Does anyone live in or around NYC that knows of any sort of community organization I could become a part of? Any help would be really appreciated :D

[rouchambeau]

I really, really concur with what Blackstone and Martov have said. Get involved with something you are passionate about. Reflect on your experiences, and don&#39;t just tow some party line.

Of course, it&#39;s good to study works like Capital, but never substitute for studying what you could just as well learn by being involved with something.

[RedFred]

I&#39;m also new to communism and have been reading some of the manifesto, but I found it hard to understand fully, so I stopped. I would also like to read Das Kapital, but I&#39;m afraid that I will have the same experience with that one..

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 06:35 pm
I&#39;m also new to communism and have been reading some of the manifesto, but I found it hard to understand fully, so I stopped. I would also like to read Das Kapital, but I&#39;m afraid that I will have the same experience with that one..
Das kapital is three huge fucking volumes of math and archaic economics.

Why don&#39;t you just watch paint dry?

[CuantaInjusticia]

I actually purchased the manifesto recently and I do plan on reading it, hopefully I don&#39;t run into the same complications as you RedFred, Currently I&#39;m reading the most comprehensive and amazing Ernesto Guevara biography I have ever come across called Che Guevara:A Revolutionary Life so that&#39;s going to take me some time. I think all of you are right when you stress the fact that we must all become proactive and involved within our communities and such, this way our beliefs and what we stand for serve some sort of a purpose. I will be spending my holiday doing some volunteer work in the Dominican Republic..hopefully it will be a time of serious reflection, first hand research, as well as a real learning experience. It&#39;s a start&#33;

"We must strive every day so that this love of living humanity will be transformed into actual deeds, into acts that serve as examples, as a moving force." - El Comandante

[RedFred]

I really wish I had more time for reading, going to school, work, friends and sports just take to much of my time. Also I have the problem that I can&#39;t gather my thoughts on two books at the same time. And thats a problem when you are studying..

Hope you have a good trip to the Dominican Rep, CuantaInjusticia

[CuantaInjusticia]

Yeah I seem to have that problem as well RedFred, but now that Classes are done with and it&#39;s finals week..I can pretty much immerse myself in leisure activity whatever it may be. Thanks&#33; and Hopefully you catch a break and get the opportunity to try and learn more etc.

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 07:57 pm
Yeah I seem to have that problem as well RedFred, but now that Classes are done with and it&#39;s finals week..I can pretty much immerse myself in leisure activity whatever it may be. Thanks&#33; and Hopefully you catch a break and get the opportunity to try and learn more etc.
I have the same problem...just keep reading when evver you can.

[Sam_b]

Das kapital is three huge fucking volumes of math and archaic economics.

Why don&#39;t you just watch paint dry?

You don&#39;t need to get all the equasions in order to understand it.

Its not a beginner&#39;s introduction, but a must for Marxists.

[Tower of Bebel]

Join workers and students struggles, support your comrades and try to peruade them of your ideas not only by theoretical knowledge but also by earning their trust through struggle :) for basic demands and much more.

[Eleftherios]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 11, 2007 12:32 am
Check out

http://www.marxist.com/
http://www.socialistappeal.org

The second link is to the American section of the International Marxist Tendency, who are involved in the unions and working to build a Marxist tendency that can gain the ear of the masses.

Events in the US have exposed the Capitalist system, whether we look at New Orleans or the mortgage crisis, and the American social system is rotting from the inside. The opportunities for Marxists are enormous, if we use the right methods. We can&#39;t shout from the sidelines, we must be there in the unions, and helping to build a party of labor that can express working class interests. We must be there and show that the battle for reconstruction for New Orleans, the battle to save millions of workers&#39; homes and all other immediate battles for progressive gains are only part and parcel of a greater struggle to overthrow Capitalism and place production and society in the hands of the working class.

Give the American section an e-mail.
You should definitely do that. If you are interested in learning more about Marxism and the various types of Marxist, I suggest you look at this as well:

http://marxists.org/

EDIT: Also, check out the third link in my signature if you want to help out the revolution in Venezuela

[PigmerikanMao]

Kill a land owner :mellow:

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 11, 2007 12:06 am
Thanks, Comrades&#33;


Start a "protracted people&#39;s war" in the country side and than win the cities.

I like this idea&#33; :lol:

But to Lenin II, could you possibly compile a list of recommended reading while we&#39;re here?
Lenin&#39;s "The State and the Revolution," "What Is To Be Done?" and "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky&#39;s "Should America Go Communist?" "What is National Socialism" "The Permanent Revolution" and especially "Terrorism and Communism"
Stalin&#39;s "Anarchism or Socialism?" and "The National Question"
Mao&#39;s little red book, titled "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Fidel Castro&#39;s "History Will Absolve Me"
Che&#39;s "Guerrilla Warfare"

[Red Puppy]

Lenin&#39;s "The State and the Revolution," "What Is To Be Done?" and "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky&#39;s "Should America Go Communist?" "On National Socialism" "The Permanent Revolution" and especially "Terrorism and Communism"
Stalin&#39;s "Anarchism or Socialism?" and "The National Question"
Mao&#39;s little red book, titled "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Fidel Castro&#39;s "History Will Absolve Me"
Che&#39;s "Guerrilla Warfare"

Noted, in order of importance?

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 11, 2007 09:05 pm

Lenin&#39;s "The State and the Revolution," "What Is To Be Done?" and "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky&#39;s "Should America Go Communist?" "On National Socialism" "The Permanent Revolution" and especially "Terrorism and Communism"
Stalin&#39;s "Anarchism or Socialism?" and "The National Question"
Mao&#39;s little red book, titled "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Fidel Castro&#39;s "History Will Absolve Me"
Che&#39;s "Guerrilla Warfare"

Noted, in order of importance?
Not really, just listed by author. It&#39;s incredibly difficult to choose but one of the essays. I can give you them in the order I read them, which is the following:

Trotsky- "Should America Go Communist?"
Lenin- "The State and the Revolution"
Mao- "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Castro- "History Will Absolve Me"
Che- "Guerrilla Warfare"
Trotsky- "The Permenent Revolution"
Lenin- "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky- "What is National Socialism"
Trotsky- "Terrorism and Communism"
Lenin- "What Is To Be Done?"
Stalin- "Anarchism or Socialism?"
Stalin- "The National Question"

[Lenin II]

Das kapital is three huge fucking volumes of math and archaic economics. Why don&#39;t you just watch paint dry?

I believe this is one of the problems with Marx&#39;s works. The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital are interesting, but with their archiac language and dense Charles-Dickens-style writing they are hard to read and somewhat outdated, not to mention incorrect. The collapse of capitalism that Marx predicted did not happen. In these days, Marxism-Leninism is a much more modern and logical ideology that takes into account the material and political conditions of the time, and rather than depending on speculation, advocates a violent overthrow of the ruling classes in favor of the dictatorship of the proletariat. But of course, that&#39;s just my opinion.


Nothing annoys me more than a college student Marxist who has never worked a hard day&#39;s in his/her life, yet fantasizes about being the leader of a proletarian revolution.

Ah yes, nothing&#33; Not even a bourgeoisie land owner, George Bush, a skinhead beating a homosexual senseless or Western imperialism&#33; Watch what you say to yourself, Martov. Whose side are you on, anyway? What kind of ageism is this? What does it matter if they have “worked hard” or not? Must they be able to have an impressive resume in order to recognize injustice? It shouldn’t matter if they are a college student, a grown man, a small child or a high school dropout. And what is a “hard day” anyway? So this is the requirement of joining the leftist movement from now on? That one must have labored up to a certain amount before one is “worthy” to have an opinion?

[Raúl Duke]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 10, 2007 07:06 pm
Thanks, Comrades&#33;


Start a "protracted people&#39;s war" in the country side and than win the cities.

I like this idea&#33; :lol:

But to Lenin II, could you possibly compile a list of recommended reading while we&#39;re here?
Let me suggest some Left Communist books since I don&#39;t see any mention...

Than again I know only of one: Workers Councils by Anton Pannekoek

On Marx you should take a look at the Manifesto (since it talks of how history is all about class struggle, etc and is basically a text that most Marxists have read), The Civil War in France, and maybe the 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon since it presents the history of the events surrounding Louis Napoleon through Historical Materialism.

In Anarchism, which you might not be interested at all (although it won&#39;t hurt to mention), I only suggest 2 writers: Kropotkin and Daniel Guerin. The books I suggest is "Anarchism: From Theory to Practice" (Daniel Guerin) and for Kropotkin I might suggest (although not certain if I should since I only have read a book of collected pamphlets from him) the Conquest of Bread.

[Tower of Bebel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 08:52 am
Having a job beats reading a tonne of theory.

You don&#39;t have to read Capital to understand how capitalism works, or to figure out how the workplace would run post-capitalism. Having a job allows you to be practical about what you are learning, to actually help organize your fellow workers and make some well needed cash. Sitting in your basement memorizing word-for-word What is to Be Done, helps nobody.

And it [a job not reading WITBD&#33;] certainly beats selling papers.

Nothing annoys me more than a college student Marxist who has never worked a hard day&#39;s in his/her life, yet fantasizes about being the leader of a proletarian revolution. <_<

If you want to learn about Marxism, yet don&#39;t find reading 200 pages of academic wankerage particularly fun, then I would suggest checking out The REDSTAR2000 Papers (http://rs2kpapers.awardspace.com/index-2.html).
And would you suggest everyone to get a job as soon as possible?

Everyone should do what he or she can do and it is up to the communists to get organized in order to get a variety of people togehter with different backgrounds and different ways of spreading ideas though working places, unions, colleges and other places.

Selling papers it part of &#39;educating&#39; the workers, just like reading theoretical works that make you able to write articles and do both conversations and speeches.

You do not need to be a victime of capitalism to understand what capitalism is.

[Marsella]

Originally posted by Zampanò@December 11, 2007 04:41 pm
I just think it&#39;s funny that your username on here is Martov, yet you are opposed to what he advocated.
Well I have read everything that which Julius Martov has written (at least on Marxists.org). That quote is not to be found in any of those documents. Perhaps you could link it, or quote it in full? In fact, he argues quite strongly against a small minority gaining power:


Not only must such a dictatorship adapt itself to a democratic régime, but it can only exist in the framework of democracy, that is, under conditions where there is the full exercise of absolute political equality on the part of all citizens. Such a dictatorship can only be conceived in a situation where the proletariat has effectively united about itself “all the healthy elements” of the nation, that is, all those that cannot but benefit by the revolutionary transformation inscribed in the program of the proletariat. It can only be established when, historic development will have brought all the healthy elements to recognize the advantage to them of this transformation. The government embodying such a “dictatorship” will be, in the full sense of the term, a “national government.” Source:Marx and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (http://www.marxists.org/archive/martov/1918/xx/marxdp.htm)

And also:


Some people presume that if a compact revolutionary minority, animated by the desire to establish socialism, seizes the machinery of government, and concentrates in its own hands the means of production and distribution and the control of the organization of the masses and their education, it may – in pursuance of its socialist ideal – create an environment in which the popular mind will little by little be purged of its old heritage and filled with a new content. Only then, it is averred, can the people stand erect and move by their own strength on the road to socialism.

If this utopia could be followed to the end, it would lead to a diametrically opposite result, though we considered it only from the angle of Marx’s observation that the “educator has himself to be educated.” For the practice of such a dictatorship, and the relations established between the dictatorial minority and the mass, “educate” the dictators, who may be everything we want them to be but cannot direct social evolution toward the construction of a new society. We do not need to demonstrate that such an education can only corrupt the masses, that it can only debase them. Source: The Ideology of &#39;Sovietism&#39; (http://www.marxists.org/archive/martov/1919/xx/sovietism.htm)

And yes, I do support the role of a communist party as an organizational one. I do not support one which takes over the state and proclaims socialism from above. A party which I support can be as centralist as it wants because at the end of the day, power is not its aim, but rather the organization and education of workers. Yet, I think a party where the members hold the power is far more beneficial. Perhaps you should check out my profile to see what Julius Martov thought of the Leninist type of party.

However, I think that a revolution, or at least a proletarian one, is one of broad autonomy. The workers in their respective workplaces each have their own capitalist to deal with, to manage their factory individually. So yes, broad autonomy may be a good definition. Its self-emancipation after all.

As for my username, it is close enough to my real name. I agree with some of what Julius Martov had to say and disagree with some. That might seem unusual to a Leninist.

And all of this begs the relevance, if any, of your post to the purpose of this thread. Did you just want a chance to make an inane and incorrect comment and try to score a ‘personal point?’ Well, that’s just revealing of your sad personality, I suppose.

Next time just PM me and save yourself the embarrassment.

LeninII

Ah yes, nothing&#33; Not even a bourgeoisie land owner, George Bush, a skinhead beating a homosexual senseless or Western imperialism&#33; Watch what you say to yourself, Martov. Whose side are you on, anyway? What kind of ageism is this? What does it matter if they have “worked hard” or not? Must they be able to have an impressive resume in order to recognize injustice? It shouldn’t matter if they are a college student, a grown man, a small child or a high school dropout. And what is a “hard day” anyway? So this is the requirement of joining the leftist movement from now on? That one must have labored up to a certain amount before one is “worthy” to have an opinion?

Wow, that has to be the biggest straw man I have ever seen. :lol:

And besides, all of those things you listed do not annoy me. I think I would be a tad more than simply annoyed at Western imperialism, or homophobic attacks. :rolleyes:

It is not ageism to attack teenagers who fantasize about being the leader of a revolution. I would attack a middle aged person who thought such as well.

My jibe was specifically at college students who have never had contact with the working class, yet want to free them from their shackles as if they were poor sheep.

Hard work is when you come home so exhausted that you go straight to bed, or get ready to go to your next job.

My point was this: get involved with the workers themselves. The best way to do that is, surprise, to become a worker yourself.

Don&#39;t watch from the sidelines. :)


And would you suggest everyone to get a job as soon as possible?

I would reckon that by the time you turn 14 you should get a job. It only has to be part-time if you have a study load.


Everyone should do what he or she can do and it is up to the communists to get organized in order to get a variety of people togehter with different backgrounds and different ways of spreading ideas though working places, unions, colleges and other places.

Yep. Let&#39;s not forget the working class though.


Selling papers it part of &#39;educating&#39; the workers, just like reading theoretical works that make you able to write articles and do both conversations and speeches.

I truly wonder if it is. Whom buys papers? Probably those already interested in radical politics. Are they increasing in popularity? Have they lead to substantial change in the consciousness of the working class in the past 50 years? I think the best way would be to go to the workers themselves. The best way to do that is in your own workplace.

When I talk to workmates, I rarely mention the word communism. All you have to do is raise subtle topics about &#39;I wonder how much the boss earned today?&#39; or &#39;How much was all that product you made today worth?&#39; followed by &#39;How much did you earn today?&#39; Workers are pretty aware they are being ripped off&#33; And when a worker&#39;s rights are trodden on (e.g. not paid correctly) then that provides an opportunity of solidarity.


You do not need to be a victime of capitalism to understand what capitalism is.

But the victims of capitalism will be the ones who overthrow it.

[apathy maybe]

First let me say, don&#39;t let ignorant people dissuade you from anarchism. Read and think about it before you make up your mind.

An Anarchist FAQ. http://www.infoshop.org/faq/index.html
Heaps of really good information about anarchism.

Making Sense of Anarchism
http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=6421

What makes an Anarchist, Anarchist?
http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=28053


Oh, and ask lots of question here.

[Red Puppy]

This forum is the most helpful I&#39;ve ever been on&#33; :D

[Guest1]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 12, 2007 01:34 am
First let me say, don&#39;t let ignorant people dissuade you from anarchism.
This will dissuade you from anarchism:

Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/index.htm)

It&#39;s also very important not to get sucked into placing faith in Redstar2000&#39;s stuff. While a smart guy, he had a long history in the American movement and was understandably burned out and jaded after the collapse of the movement in the 70&#39;s.

He believed that revolution wasn&#39;t going to happen for another 400 years, and I don&#39;t blame him, I would believe the same if my generation burned out like that.

It&#39;s pointless to even be here though if you believe revolution is not going to happen.

[Marsella]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 12, 2007 01:34 am
First let me say, don&#39;t let ignorant people dissuade you from anarchism.
This will dissuade you from anarchism:

Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/index.htm)

It&#39;s also very important not to get sucked into placing faith in Redstar2000&#39;s stuff. While a smart guy, he had a long history in the American movement and was understandably burned out and jaded after the collapse of the movement in the 70&#39;s.

He believed that revolution wasn&#39;t going to happen for another 400 years, and I don&#39;t blame him, I would believe the same if my generation burned out like that.

It&#39;s pointless to even be here though if you believe revolution is not going to happen.

Drop a zero and you may be correct.

In other words, during our lifetime.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by Lenin [email protected] 12, 2007 07:12 am

Stalin- "Anarchism or Socialism?"
Stalin- "The National Question"
Great recomendation there, Lenin 2 - IF THAT IS YOUR REAL NAME&#33;

But seriously, that stuff is absolute fucking bollocks. Why not just read the Cat in the Hat? Much more interesting, and there&#39;s probably more contributions to socialism in there than anything written by Stalin.
Fact.

Anyway, to the crew interested in texts, I recomend The Joy of Revolution, Society of the Spectacle (Guy Debord), Anarchy (Malatesta), Critique of the Gotha Programme (Marx), The Civil War in France (Marx), and Workers Councils (Anton Pannekoek).

Those are fantastic texts.
Much more Libertarian Marxist, though. But much more relevant than Stalin or any of that other drivel some might recommend you (trust me, Stalin&#39;s thoughts on anarchy were about as accuracy as a drunk playing pin the tail on the donkey)

[Guest1]

Actually, Stalin&#39;s work on the national question was pretty much dictated to him by Lenin, and is decent.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 09:23 am
Drop a zero and you may be correct.

In other words, during our lifetime.
Nope, definitely not for several hundred years was always his response.

I will look up a quote off these forums if you&#39;d like.

[blackstone]

Originally posted by Che y Marijuana+December 12, 2007 09:06 am--> (Che y Marijuana &#064; December 12, 2007 09:06 am)
[email protected] 12, 2007 09:23 am
Drop a zero and you may be correct.

In other words, during our lifetime.
Nope, definitely not for several hundred years was always his response.

I will look up a quote off these forums if you&#39;d like. [/b]
You sure? I could have sworn he said in the advanced capitalist nations it would occur in under in his estimates, in under a 100 years. Maybe he thought 400 in a place like Eritrea or Malawi.

[Marsella]

While it could be 50 years or more into the future before major proletarian revolutions (most probably in western Europe) actually begin to build communist societies, we still love to speculate about the possible features of such societies.

I yield to temptation just as readily as the next person, so here is a small collection of posts on this endlessly fascinating subject.

What will things be like when we are free at last?

and


Brazil and Mexico are not really "third world" countries any more...call them "second world" if you like.

In my opinion, those countries have already become sufficiently developed as to be entering their "Age of Reform"...where capitalism is modernized in preparation for those countries to become "players" in their own right. In fact, I expect them to become imperialist countries...perhaps by 2050 or even somewhat sooner.

What this means is that a Marxist in those countries will probably get "caught up" in reformist struggles...because it&#39;s actually possible to win real reforms. It will "look like" things are leading "in a revolutionary direction"...even though that&#39;s not really what&#39;s actually happening.

Unfortunately, proletarian revolution remains a century or maybe two centuries in the future there. A Marxist there could talk about communism...but it would sound completely wacko to 99.999% of his/her listeners.

So, proletarian revolution remains a century away in under-developed capitalist countries, and would presumably be shorter in advanced capitalist countries.


Now, let&#39;s jump forward to, say, 2075...when the western portion of the European Union (or whatever it&#39;s called by then) has a communist revolution. By sheer coincidence, at that very point in time, Afghan Maoist armies inflict a final humiliating defeat on the occupation forces there and enter Kabul in triumph, proclaiming a "Democratic Dictatorship of the Proletariat & the Peasantry" (a common Maoist formula, if I&#39;m not mistaken).

I cannot find the direct quote where RS2K states that a proletarian revolution in the western world may be possible in 60 years, but I am 100% certain he said so.

The point is, RS2K never said a proletarian revolution was not possible, he maintained the conditions for it may take several decades.

[Guest1]

Yep, in a debate with me on Revolution or Academics?, Why the left is stuck. (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=51026&view=findpost&p=1292091175)

He said:


Originally posted by Redstar2000+--> (Redstar2000)
Che y Marijuana
To you, revolution is 400 years away, and even if it wasn&#39;t, you wouldn&#39;t see it. You&#39;ve become jaded and politically suicidal and you want everyone else to follow you off the cliff.

I may well appear to be "jaded"...it&#39;s because of practical experience. I&#39;ve seen the outcome of poor theory and wildly unjustified expectations first hand. I think it is better to tell people the truth -- that successful proletarian revolution in North America is probably unlikely before the end of this century.

You undoubtedly imagine that you and the political group you support at this moment can "do it faster". Fine...but no one here is under any obligation to share that belief.[/b]

[Marsella]

Well it seems that you first raised the argument that RS2K maintained that a revolution was 400 years away. He stated &#39;that successful proletarian revolution in North America is probably unlikely before the end of this century.&#39;

300 years makes a difference, no?

And besides, none of this was reflected in what he wrote on his site. The contrary was stated.

If you disagree with him politically, by all means say so.

But putting words in someone else&#39;s mouth (who can&#39;t even respond?) to cover up a lack of serious criticism indicates an infantile disorder which you so much despise.


He believed that revolution wasn&#39;t going to happen for another 400 years

:rolleyes:

[blackstone]

LOL, your the one who said it was 400 years away, not him.

What a strawman.

[Guest1]

So I was off in my memory of a conversation I had more than a year ago.

Fact remains he considered it a question of at least a century, which makes our work useless considering he did not believe unions had a revolutionary role, and did not believe that the struggle for partial reforms (strikes leading to minimum wage, etc...) were a part of the revolutionary struggle.

In otherwords, for the next century, our role is to talk amongst each other, waiting for the day when the revolution will fall from the sky.

As for him not being able to respond, neither can Lenin. If you have ideas on the revolution, and people talk about them after you&#39;re no longer around, you should expect debate.

Unless you&#39;re saying Redstar2000 would have preferred a personality cult where no one was ever allowed to say he was wrong, cause it "defiled his memory".

[blackstone]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 12, 2007 11:09 am
So I was off in my memory of a conversation I had more than a year ago.

Fact remains he considered it a question of at least a century, which makes our work useless considering he did not believe unions had a revolutionary role, and did not believe that the struggle for partial reforms (strikes leading to minimum wage, etc...) were a part of the revolutionary struggle.

In otherwords, for the next century, our role is to talk amongst each other, waiting for the day when the revolution will fall from the sky.

As for him not being able to respond, neither can Lenin. If you have ideas on the revolution, and people talk about them after you&#39;re no longer around, you should expect debate.

Unless you&#39;re saying Redstar2000 would have preferred a personality cult where no one was ever allowed to say he was wrong, cause it "defiled his memory".
I don&#39;t think me nor Martov ever implied that you can&#39;t disagree with redstar. In fact, Martov, said, "If you disagree with him politically, by all means say so."

By all means be critical of anyone&#39;s theories and politics.

Just make sure you criticize what the person actually says though. :blush:

[Marsella]

So I was off in my memory of a conversation I had more than a year ago.

Selective memory I see.


Fact remains he considered it a question of at least a century, which makes our work useless considering he did not believe unions had a revolutionary role, and did not believe that the struggle for partial reforms (strikes leading to minimum wage, etc...) were a part of the revolutionary struggle.

I very much doubt everything you said. I have never read anything he said about disagreeing with unions - or at least militant ones.

I myself belong to a union.

I never applied to join it, I never have met any representative of it.

The union is in fact part of the wage-setting system where I live.

They are part of the state. So yes, I quite strongly disagree with that &#39;union.&#39;

And yes, he was against reformism, but not against the type you argued.

Marx and Engels presumably thought that proletarian revolutions were a long way away (in their time) in backwards countries, Russia being an example.

Would they simply argue that everything was futile? Of course not.


In Germany, they fight with the bourgeoisie whenever it acts in a revolutionary way, against the absolute monarchy, the feudal squirearchy, and the petty-bourgeoisie.

But they never cease, for a single instant, to instill into the working class the clearest possible recognition of the hostile antagonism between bourgeoisie and proletariat, in order that the German workers may straightway use, as so many weapons against the bourgeoisie, the social and political conditions that the bourgeoisie must necessarily introduce along with its supremacy, and in order that, after the fall of the reactionary classes in Germany, the fight against the bourgeoisie itself may immediately begin.


In otherwords, for the next century, our role is to talk amongst each other, waiting for the day when the revolution will fall from the sky.

<_<


As for him not being able to respond, neither can Lenin. If you have ideas on the revolution, and people talk about them after you&#39;re no longer around, you should expect debate.

Sure, I refer to what he has written many times, just as I criticize Lenin&#39;s ideas and actions.

But setting up an incorrect statement and then attempting to debase that argument is another thing.


Unless you&#39;re saying Redstar2000 would have preferred a personality cult where no one was ever allowed to say he was wrong, cause it "defiled his memory".

Really, your stupidity begs belief. No-one here is setting up a personality cult. If you are into that sort of thing I suggest the RCP. And I&#39;m sure that RS2K really preferred a personality cult. <_<

I just believe in intellectual honesty.

If this is the extent of your arguing, silly strawman fallacies, ad hominems and outright lies, then I suggest reconsidering your next post.

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by Lenin [email protected] 12, 2007 07:12 am

Stalin- "Anarchism or Socialism?"
Stalin- "The National Question"
Great recomendation there, Lenin 2 - IF THAT IS YOUR REAL NAME&#33;

No, it&#39;s not my real name. :P Are you implying I should legally have it changed to Stalin II? Perhaps.


But seriously, that stuff is absolute fucking bollocks. Why not just read the Cat in the Hat? Much more interesting, and there&#39;s probably more contributions to socialism in there than anything written by Stalin.

Yes, Stalin was not a good writer. Of all the Marxist writers I have read, in terms of sheer writing talent, Stalin is the worst. BUT his writings contain an important historical perspective and way of thinking that has permeated many members of the left since its inception. The theses contain the basic ideas of Marxist-Leninist anti-anarchism and nationality, etc.


Fact.

Opinion.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 11, 2007 04:05 pm

Lenin&#39;s "The State and the Revolution," "What Is To Be Done?" and "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky&#39;s "Should America Go Communist?" "On National Socialism" "The Permanent Revolution" and especially "Terrorism and Communism"
Stalin&#39;s "Anarchism or Socialism?" and "The National Question"
Mao&#39;s little red book, titled "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Fidel Castro&#39;s "History Will Absolve Me"
Che&#39;s "Guerrilla Warfare"

Noted, in order of importance?
I would advise you not to read any of those. Most of them aren&#39;t even relevant to a modern communist revolution. You probably won&#39;t even understand them. Remember, practice makes the best theory. ;)

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Originally posted by FoB+December 12, 2007 11:39 pm--> (FoB @ December 12, 2007 11:39 pm)
Red [email protected] 11, 2007 04:05 pm

Lenin&#39;s "The State and the Revolution," "What Is To Be Done?" and "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky&#39;s "Should America Go Communist?" "On National Socialism" "The Permanent Revolution" and especially "Terrorism and Communism"
Stalin&#39;s "Anarchism or Socialism?" and "The National Question"
Mao&#39;s little red book, titled "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Fidel Castro&#39;s "History Will Absolve Me"
Che&#39;s "Guerrilla Warfare"

Noted, in order of importance?
I would advise you not to read any of those. Most of them aren&#39;t even relevant to a modern communist revolution. You probably won&#39;t even understand them. Remember, practice makes the best theory. ;) [/b]
Isn&#39;t it important to read anything you can get ahold of?

[which doctor]

Originally posted by petey+December 12, 2007 06:42 pm--> (petey @ December 12, 2007 06:42 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 11:39 pm

Red [email protected] 11, 2007 04:05 pm

Lenin&#39;s "The State and the Revolution," "What Is To Be Done?" and "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky&#39;s "Should America Go Communist?" "On National Socialism" "The Permanent Revolution" and especially "Terrorism and Communism"
Stalin&#39;s "Anarchism or Socialism?" and "The National Question"
Mao&#39;s little red book, titled "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Fidel Castro&#39;s "History Will Absolve Me"
Che&#39;s "Guerrilla Warfare"

Noted, in order of importance?
I would advise you not to read any of those. Most of them aren&#39;t even relevant to a modern communist revolution. You probably won&#39;t even understand them. Remember, practice makes the best theory. ;)
Isn&#39;t it important to read anything you can get ahold of? [/b]
Not if you don&#39;t understand it.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Not to stray from the topic but doesn&#39;t FoB stand for Fall Out Boy?

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 07:58 pm
Not to stray from the topic but doesn&#39;t FoB stand for Fall Out Boy?
No, I can&#39;t stand that band. FoB is an acronym for my previous name. If you look through some of my older posts you will find out exactly what it stands for.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 13, 2007 12:05 am
Actually, Stalin&#39;s work on the national question was pretty much dictated to him by Lenin, and is decent.
His work on anarchism was a load of garbage.
He is a scar on the back of socialism. I&#39;d rather not pick at the scab.

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by FoB+December 13, 2007 12:51 am--> (FoB @ December 13, 2007 12:51 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 06:42 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 11:39 pm

Red [email protected] 11, 2007 04:05 pm

Lenin&#39;s "The State and the Revolution," "What Is To Be Done?" and "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
Trotsky&#39;s "Should America Go Communist?" "On National Socialism" "The Permanent Revolution" and especially "Terrorism and Communism"
Stalin&#39;s "Anarchism or Socialism?" and "The National Question"
Mao&#39;s little red book, titled "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung"
Fidel Castro&#39;s "History Will Absolve Me"
Che&#39;s "Guerrilla Warfare"

Noted, in order of importance?
I would advise you not to read any of those. Most of them aren&#39;t even relevant to a modern communist revolution. You probably won&#39;t even understand them. Remember, practice makes the best theory. ;)
Isn&#39;t it important to read anything you can get ahold of?
Not if you don&#39;t understand it. [/b]
A little cynical of our new comrade, are we?


His work on anarchism was a load of garbage. He is a scar on the back of socialism. I&#39;d rather not pick at the scab.

I&#39;ll avoid getting into a huge pro-Stalin rant here, because there are many, many other threads for that. But elaborate for me, if you can, why his work on anarchism was inaccurate. Certainly it was hostile, but it seems like he made his sectarian point well.


Isn&#39;t it important to read anything you can get ahold of?

Yes, it is. Never stop-Marxism is a science, and there is always something new to read.

[Red Puppy]

Not if you don&#39;t understand it.

I am insulted. Don&#39;t assume that just because I&#39;m a high schooler I&#39;m not intelligent enough to understand.

Today, I was able to make it to the library and blow all my cash on a book by Marx. I looked for a little Lenin, but forgot Mao&#39;s full name and couldn&#39;t find anything and completely forgot Che and Trotsky... :blush:

What I picked up was "Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 Karl Marx & the Communist Manifesto"

Barnes and Nobles had no Lenin at all&#33;&#33; I&#39;ll get some via the internet instead.

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by Che y Marijuana+December 12, 2007 03:18 pm--> (Che y Marijuana @ December 12, 2007 03:18 pm)
apathy [email protected] 12, 2007 01:34 am
First let me say, don&#39;t let ignorant people dissuade you from anarchism.
This will dissuade you from anarchism:

Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/index.htm) [/b]
I&#39;ll have to have a browse through that. But I suspect that it is merely the work of a person ignorant of what anarchism really entailed (or else the work of someone who opposed anarchism for their own benefit).

If indeed it is about anarchism at all. I had always understood that it was about "left-communism", but I haven&#39;t actually read it.

[Tower of Bebel]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 13, 2007 07:55 am

Not if you don&#39;t understand it.

I am insulted. Don&#39;t assume that just because I&#39;m a high schooler I&#39;m not intelligent enough to understand.

Today, I was able to make it to the library and blow all my cash on a book by Marx. I looked for a little Lenin, but forgot Mao&#39;s full name and couldn&#39;t find anything and completely forgot Che and Trotsky... :blush:

What I picked up was "Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 Karl Marx & the Communist Manifesto"

Barnes and Nobles had no Lenin at all&#33;&#33; I&#39;ll get some via the internet instead.
Don&#39;t forget that you can read many marxist works on www.marxists.org, the marxist internet archive.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by Lenin 2
No, it&#39;s not my real name. :P Are you implying I should legally have it changed to Stalin II? Perhaps.

Idols are a waste of time.



Yes, Stalin was not a good writer. Of all the Marxist writers I have read, in terms of sheer writing talent, Stalin is the worst. BUT his writings contain an important historical perspective and way of thinking that has permeated many members of the left since its inception. The theses contain the basic ideas of Marxist-Leninist anti-anarchism and nationality, etc.

In this context, Stalin&#39;s politics are irrelevant, and out-dated, and belong in history, as a healing wound on the back of socialism. Anti-anarchist politics are not something someone new to socialism should be introduced too, for they&#39;re generally pathetic attempts at discrediting anarchists - Stalin&#39;s "anarchism or socialism?" being a classic example of this pathetic tendency.

In other words; keep your bullshit sectarianism out of it. S/he should choose his own path, free from slanderous inaccurate propaganda.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by apathy maybe+December 13, 2007 09:25 pm--> (apathy maybe @ December 13, 2007 09:25 pm)
Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 12, 2007 03:18 pm

apathy [email protected] 12, 2007 01:34 am
First let me say, don&#39;t let ignorant people dissuade you from anarchism.
This will dissuade you from anarchism:

Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/index.htm)
I&#39;ll have to have a browse through that. But I suspect that it is merely the work of a person ignorant of what anarchism really entailed (or else the work of someone who opposed anarchism for their own benefit).

If indeed it is about anarchism at all. I had always understood that it was about "left-communism", but I haven&#39;t actually read it. [/b]
You&#39;ll be shocked to know that it&#39;s rubbish.

I know&#33; I was shocked too when I read it&#33;

This text is kind of like the equivelent of Bakunin&#39;s pathetic attempts to discredit Marx.
You&#39;re both as crap as each other (people who believe Bakunin&#39;s crap on Marx, and people who believe Lenin&#39;s crap on anarchism)

[Red Puppy]

Reading a lot on my computer strains my eyes and gets a bit painful sometimes, so I prefer to buy actual books. Das Kapital cost 20&#036;, and it was less than an inch thick, I was like: "No way&#33;" :o

[Bilan]

I&#39;ll avoid getting into a huge pro-Stalin rant here

YAY&#33;


But elaborate for me, if you can, why his work on anarchism was inaccurate. Certainly it was hostile,


There was a discussion about the paper in &#39;learning&#39; in the text section. Look it up, I cant be arsed looking it up again. :lol:


but it seems like he made his sectarian point well.

Foolish you are, young skywalker.
Stalin was about as accurate as a drunk playing darts.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 13, 2007 10:08 pm
Reading a lot on my computer strains my eyes and gets a bit painful sometimes, so I prefer to buy actual books. Das Kapital cost 20&#036;, and it was less than an inch thick, I was like: "No way&#33;" :o
I can relate to that. I try not to read to much on the net, it hurts...so much.
Some stuff on the net is always good to read though.
short stuff, like The Society of the Spectacle (http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/debord/index.htm).

[Marsella]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 13, 2007 09:38 pm
Reading a lot on my computer strains my eyes and gets a bit painful sometimes, so I prefer to buy actual books. Das Kapital cost 20&#036;, and it was less than an inch thick, I was like: "No way&#33;" :o
That&#39;s what libraries are for mate. If you can&#39;t get &#39;em at your school library, then maybe a local university library or your public library. Trying to read and understand Capital off your computer screen is quick way to induce insanity.

Oh yeah, and there is this (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=46656&st=0) thread on the first section of Das Kapital; no more complex than a quadratic equation.

[Red Puppy]

That&#39;s what libraries are for mate.

I like to own my own copy... :blush: I&#39;m checking the internet used books shop, which I&#39;m sure I could get a little paperback of it cheap.

Though I doubt we&#39;d have any books at the school library, since not only do they censor most books, (No Mein Kampf in a high school, not that I support the book itself, but I wanted to read it to help me in a Facing History and Ourself class...) they are a few centuries behind.

There&#39;s a library down town, though that is four stories. It rocks. I might give in and just go there&#33; :lol:

[which doctor]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 13, 2007 12:55 am

Not if you don&#39;t understand it.

I am insulted. Don&#39;t assume that just because I&#39;m a high schooler I&#39;m not intelligent enough to understand.
Don&#39;t be insulted. Lots of that stuff I couldn&#39;t even understand. The Communist Manifesto is pretty easy to understand and short though, so you shouldn&#39;t have problems reading it. Lots of those books that were suggested have little or no relevance to our time and I don&#39;t want you to waste your time on them.

[Red Puppy]

Lots of those books that were suggested have little or no relevance to our time and I don&#39;t want you to waste your time on them.

I see your point and thanks for the concern, but I have all the time in the world at the moment to read as I please between my schooling and working. I believe that no learning experience is a waste of time, comrade. ;)

[Lenin II]

Originally posted by Proper Tea is [email protected] 13, 2007 12:04 pm
In this context, Stalin&#39;s politics are irrelevant, and out-dated, and belong in history, as a healing wound on the back of socialism. Anti-anarchist politics are not something someone new to socialism should be introduced too, for they&#39;re generally pathetic attempts at discrediting anarchists - Stalin&#39;s "anarchism or socialism?" being a classic example of this pathetic tendency.

In other words; keep your bullshit sectarianism out of it. S/he should choose his own path, free from slanderous inaccurate propaganda.
Irrelevant and outdated? And I don&#39;t suppose that applies to, say, Emma Goldman? I was not aware that "outdated" was synonymous with "does not get Proper Tea&#39;s stamp of approval." Why don&#39;t you take your own advice--keep YOUR bullshit sectarianism out of it, and let him read whatever essay he wants to.

[Bilan]

Irrelevant and outdated?

Indeed&#33;


And I don&#39;t suppose that applies to, say, Emma Goldman?

Of course it does&#33; Some of her politics are certainly outdated - it&#39;s been a while since I read any Emma Goldman, so I certainly can&#39;t give you anything specifically - but the nature of the system is very, very different from what it was then, and especially in comparison between say America - where I assume you&#39;re from - and Russia in 1917. Completely different economic systems, social structures, political strucutres, etc.



I was not aware that "outdated" was synonymous with "does not get Proper Tea&#39;s stamp of approval."

teehee. Come on, as if that wasn&#39;t comical to write&#33;
But anyway, yes, when you&#39;re reccomending theory to someone, and it&#39;s outdated, what the hells the point of reading it, if only to get a historical perspective on a completely different situation?
If you want to understand Communist theory - both Libertarian and non - then read the more important texts, so as to understand how socialism, communism, anarchism can be properly practiced and achieved.
Na&#39;mean?



Why don&#39;t you take your own advice--keep YOUR bullshit sectarianism out of it, and let him read whatever essay he wants to.

ey, by all means. I&#39;m not saying he should never read it - historical perspective is important, but not as introduction to revolutionary politics.

[Sam_b]

BUT his writings contain an important historical perspective and way of thinking that has permeated many members of the left since its inception. The theses contain the basic ideas of Marxist-Leninist anti-anarchism and nationality, etc.


They&#39;re only important (especially &#39;Nationalism&#39;) if you supported his Tsarist Russifications of Georgia, Ukraine and the other SRs. He wasn;t a Leninist, as you can see from his nationalisation arguments put in practice, and i&#39;m still convinced that the term Marxism-Leninism is a term to try and reconcile his atrocities in the name of Bolshevism.

[Lenin II]

teehee. Come on, as if that wasn&#39;t comical to write&#33;

It really was. Not gonna lie. :P


But anyway, yes, when you&#39;re reccomending theory to someone, and it&#39;s outdated, what the hells the point of reading it, if only to get a historical perspective on a completely different situation?

Simply because the conditions described do not match the material conditions in every way does make them irrelavant. Bolshevik theories are still valid to this point. History forms the present, and the present is formed by history. And to be frank, I&#39;ll take Lenin over Bob Avakian any day.


They&#39;re only important (especially &#39;Nationalism&#39;) if you supported his Tsarist Russifications of Georgia, Ukraine and the other SRs.

There was no such thing as a &#39;Russification&#39;. Of course there was a tendency of Russians moving to these regions, but this wasn&#39;t &#39;government policy&#39; to the point of it being only good for &#39;Russification&#39;, you should keep in mind that Stalin was a Georgian himself.


He wasn;t a Leninist,

Opinion, not fact. This argument is bullshit so there is nothing to refute.


and i&#39;m still convinced that the term Marxism-Leninism is a term to try and reconcile his atrocities in the name of Bolshevism.

Kindly explain to me how an entire idealogy can be centered around that. And not all Marxist-Leninists are pro-Stalin. This is a clear attempt to start a debate on whether Stalin was a counter-revolutionary or not. This is niether the time nor the place.

[Bilan]

It really was. Not gonna lie. :P

Then all is well. :)


Simply because the conditions described do not match the material conditions in every way does make them irrelavant. Bolshevik theories are still valid to this point. History forms the present, and the present is formed by history. And to be frank, I&#39;ll take Lenin over Bob Avakian any day.

It&#39;s not because they don&#39;t match in every way, it&#39;s because they hardly match at all. We&#39;re talking about almost a century ago, in one of the most economically (and politically) backward nations. Whilst now, we&#39;re in a completely different era of economic and political structure - particularly due to the changing nature of the global economy, with respect to neoliberalism, globalisation, Western imperialism, etc.
So, it&#39;s not just slight change, it&#39;s drastic.
Some of their theories are still relevant, of course, and would in no way try to pursuade one from not reading them, but rather, try and pursuade them to read things which are more relevant to them, their life and times, as well as how to practically organize - and to try and understand different and possible ways of organizing for a post revolutionary society, and how it would be organized.
Historical perspective is secondary to that. Surely you agree?

[Sam_b]

There was no such thing as a &#39;Russification&#39;

Forcing the Russian language on the SRs instead of their native tongues?

[Zhou]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 06:35 pm
I&#39;m also new to communism and have been reading some of the manifesto, but I found it hard to understand fully, so I stopped. I would also like to read Das Kapital, but I&#39;m afraid that I will have the same experience with that one..
The Manifesto is definitely a much easier read than Kapital, that&#39;s for damn sure...

[Bilan]

Originally posted by Zhou+December 16, 2007 05:40 am--> (Zhou @ December 16, 2007 05:40 am)
[email protected] 11, 2007 06:35 pm
I&#39;m also new to communism and have been reading some of the manifesto, but I found it hard to understand fully, so I stopped. I would also like to read Das Kapital, but I&#39;m afraid that I will have the same experience with that one..
The Manifesto is definitely a much easier read than Kapital, that&#39;s for damn sure... [/b]
It&#39;s also one of Marx&#39;s worst texts, IMO.
The Civil war in France is amazing.
On the Paris Commune is amazingly well written, too.