Hoxha, Albania and the model socialist republic.

[apathy maybe]

From then on, Hoxha's Albania turned in on itself as Hoxha, having alienated every ally and workers' government, declared that Albania not only would become a model socialist republic on its own, but that it was the only socialist country left in the world.

I am interested in discussing with members what they think of this statement. Personally I find it, and the fact that Albania is not, and never was a "model socialist republic", a damning criticism of, so called, "Hoxhaism".

I am also interested in members opinions on whether the focus on a single person (Hoxha) is Marxist or not. After all, history is changed by classes of people, and yet a single person was changing the course of history? Is this focus Marxist? Is Marxism wrong in this single case?

[Lenin II]

I'll address the idea that Albania the only socialist country in the world at the time. By that of course, he was announcing his vervant anti-revisionism against the USSR, China and Cuba. I don't necessarily agree with this, since while I am an anti-revisionist myself, I believe revisionists can be more progressive than raw capitalism, but the fact is it was to be expected from an orthodox such as Hoxha.


I am interested in discussing with members what they think of this statement. Personally I find it, and the fact that Albania is not, and never was a "model socialist republic", a damning criticism of, so called, "Hoxhaism".
And why was it not the model Marxist-Leninist state? It held the correct line in the face of imperialist powers and widespread revisionism.

I am also interested in members opinions on whether the focus on a single person (Hoxha) is Marxist or not. After all, history is changed by classes of people, and yet a single person was changing the course of history? Is this focus Marxist? Is Marxism wrong in this single case?
Theoretical contribution by these people make it completely legitimate to label yourself after them.

[Cryotank Screams]

Theoretical contribution by these people make it completely legitimate to label yourself after them.

What theoretical contributions did Hoxha make to Marxist-Leninism?

[Comrade Rage]

What theoretical contributions did Hoxha make to Marxist-Leninism?
A couple of the things I like most about his socio-economic line:
His struggles against opportunism
Refutation of Mao's theory of 'three worlds'
among other things.

[Lenin II]

What theoretical contributions did Hoxha make to Marxist-Leninism?
He updated anti-revisionist Marxism-Leninism for the current age and showed that a nation could hold the correct line against imperialist powers.

[apathy maybe]

And why was it not the model Marxist-Leninist state? It held the correct line in the face of imperialist powers and widespread revisionism.He said socialist, I said socialist... It is my opinion that "Marxist-Leninist" does not encompass all that is socialism. Indeed, to my mind a "model socialist state" is one that would include a fair amount of equality of power within that state. A state that is democratic (at least in the sense of the word as it is used by the bourgeois, but preferably more so), has an equality of property distribution (with slight differences due to "need") etc. Did Albania have these things?


Theoretical contribution by these people make it completely legitimate to label yourself after them.I wasn't asking why you named your ideology after a person. I asked if you thought that a single person has the power to change history in a country. If Hoxha had have been killed shortly after (say) 1945, would the history of Albania been significantly different? If so why?


A couple of the things I like most about his socio-economic line:
His struggles against opportunism
Refutation of Mao's theory of 'three worlds'
among other things.
Please define "opportunism" for those of use who don't know what it means. Do Maoists considered "three worlds" to have been refuted? (I personally think, without having read either Mao's work, or Hoxha's refutation of it, that at the time it was a reasonable conclusion to draw. Now, I think it isn't the case, though.)


He updated anti-revisionist Marxism-Leninism for the current age and showed that a nation could hold the correct line against imperialist powers.
Hoxha died in 1985, can you explain how he updated "..." for the current age?

[Cryotank Screams]

His struggles against opportunism How does this differ theoretically from Marxist-Leninism?
Refutation of Mao's theory of 'three worlds' But wouldn't this mean that he rejected a Maoist theory from an orthodox Marxist-Leninist standpoint?
He updated anti-revisionist Marxism-Leninism for the current age and showed that a nation could hold the correct line against imperialist powers.This implies that he upheld an orthodox Marxist-Leninist line while others may have deviated and it doesn’t suggest that Hoxha made any theoretical contributions to Marxist-Leninist theory like say Trotsky or Mao.

[spartan]

The only thing that i have seen Hoxha contributing to, is in his critiscism of Revisionism and Socialist states not upholding Marxism-Leninism.

He probably did more than that, though that is what he was most famous for (As far as i can tell, though i would be the first to admit that i am not well read up in this specific area).

[Cryotank Screams]

The only thing that i have seen Hoxha contributing to, is in his critiscism of Revisionism and Socialist states not upholding Marxism-Leninism.

But that isn't contributing it's critiquing deviations of ML.

[spartan]

But that isn't contributing it's critiquing deviations of ML.

Ah yes i see what you mean.

I guess that he didnt contribute anything to Marxism-Leninism then (Though like i said before i am not well read up on this area of things).

I suppose that the only thing a Marxist-Leninist can learn from Hoxha is how to run a Marxist-Leninist state without succumbing to Revisionism?

[Lenin II]

He said socialist, I said socialist... It is my opinion that "Marxist-Leninist" does not encompass all that is socialism. No arguments here. Because it was a Marxist-Leninist state, I assumed you were referring to that branch of socialism.

Indeed, to my mind a "model socialist state" is one that would include a fair amount of equality of power within that state. A state that is democratic (at least in the sense of the word as it is used by the bourgeois, but preferably more so), has an equality of property distribution (with slight differences due to "need") etc. Did Albania have these things? He gave women equal rights, allowed them government positions, paying jobs, etc. Literacy went from the lowest in Europe to almost absolute zero illiteracy. He avoided the famine usually associated with collectivization. He unified the Albanian people. Now a large majority call themselves Albanians, rather than Gheg [north] or Tosk [south].

I wasn't asking why you named your ideology after a person. I asked if you thought that a single person has the power to change history in a country. If Hoxha had have been killed shortly after (say) 1945, would the history of Albania been significantly different? If so why? There’s a bit of conflict between those who think history will happen anyway, and those who think history is dependant on people. Ironically, Trotsky took the latter. “If Lenin wasn’t here, I doubt the revolution would have happened the way it did.” I think a bit of both. History if generally moving towards a certain path (socialism, classless society), but leaders do affect such things.

Please define "opportunism" for those of use who don't know what it means. Anti-communism and revisionism.

Do Maoists considered "three worlds" to have been refuted? (I personally think, without having read either Mao's work, or Hoxha's refutation of it, that at the time it was a reasonable conclusion to draw. Now, I think it isn't the case, though.) I don’t see how it is a reasonable conclusion or ever was. The workers in Canada are not being paid the full value of their labor, and are thus exploited by their bosses just as much as the workers in poorer countries. Simply because the nation is richer does not change the fact that its economic system is unjust. Hoxha refuted this theory, which i have never met a Maoist that supported, in his volume, 'Imperialism and the Revolution."


Hoxha died in 1985, can you explain how he updated "..." for the current age? Well, what he said was certainly more modern that what people a hundred years ago said. It was recent enough for him to mock the imperialist policies of President Carter.

How does this differ theoretically from Marxist-Leninism? One doesn’t have to differ to contribute.

But wouldn't this mean that he rejected a Maoist theory from an orthodox Marxist-Leninist standpoint? I suppose. What’s your point?

This implies that he upheld an orthodox Marxist-Leninist line while others may have deviated and it doesn’t suggest that Hoxha made any theoretical contributions to Marxist-Leninist theory like say Trotsky or Mao. I’ll avoid any burns on the two for now.

The only thing that i have seen Hoxha contributing to, is in his critiscism of Revisionism and Socialist states not upholding Marxism-Leninism. Contributions can be made through foreign policy and intolerance of revisionism. Condemnation and exposing of incorrect views within the party are a contribution to theory and process of action. He also updated views on monopoly capitalism and the alliance of capitalism with revisionist regimes.

Ah yes i see what you mean. I guess that he didnt contribute anything to Marxism-Leninism then (Though like i said before i am not well read up on this area of things). I suppose that the only thing a Marxist-Leninist can learn from Hoxha is how to run a Marxist-Leninist state without succumbing to Revisionism? This is not true, and even if it were, this is a bad thing why? “I guess the only thing one can learn from this fireman is how to put a fire out!”

[Ismail]

Most anti-revisionists are Maoists. Hoxhaists believe two things:
A. Anti-Revisionism (but also including Maoism as revisionist)
B. The belief that each nation has the right to decide its own destiny. (one of Hoxha's main criticisms of Soviet policy towards Warsaw Pact states)

We also consider the USSR under Lenin and Stalin and Albania under Hoxha to be the only Socialist states. (in ideology and foreign policy, not in economics since the USSR didn't begin changing its economic system until the 60's and Albania in 1987)

In regards to B, Hoxha (like Stalin, Lenin, Engels, and Marx before him) viewed a classless society as inevitable, and that in most cases we should let class struggle happen in a nation on its own unless financial/military aid is given by imperialist powers.

[Cryotank Screams]

One doesn’t have to differ to contribute.

My point was that arguing against 'opportunism' isn't necessarily a contribution more than it is arguing from an orthodox ML standpoint against deviations.


What’s your point?

Point being that Hoxha didn't make any major theoretical contributions to ML theory nor did he extend ML theoretically.



Theoretical contribution by these people make it completely legitimate to label yourself after them.

[Panda Tse Tung]

In defence of the Hoxhaists, i will state that in my opinion it is quite a logical thing to label yourself a 'Hoxhaist', for stating your a Leninist is quite vague, Trotskites also use this label. Saying anti-revisionist would be vague too for Maoists use that label too, thus labeling yourself a 'Hoxhaist' is quite logical.

[apathy maybe]

In regards to B, Hoxha (like Stalin, Lenin, Engels, and Marx before him) viewed a classless society as inevitable, and that in most cases we should let class struggle happen in a nation on its own unless financial/military aid is given by imperialist powers.

Class-less society is inevitable, and to get there we shall have a large centralised state! Oh, and workers do have nationalities, and that crap about no nations, no borders is 'petit-bourgeois' rubbish.

Is that what you are saying?

[Lenin II]

Point being that Hoxha didn't make any major theoretical contributions to ML theory nor did he extend ML theoretically.
Did I not already say that one doesn't have to differ to contribute? Anyway, in a time when most of the Marxist movements were heading towards revisionism, it is a contribution to take up a hardline stance. Albania did more to expand socialism than even the USSR in the realm of price controls, nationalization, cultural revolution, militant atheism and sealing the gap between the worker and party official.

[Ismail]

Class-less society is inevitable, and to get there we shall have a large centralised state! Oh, and workers do have nationalities, and that crap about no nations, no borders is 'petit-bourgeois' rubbish.

Is that what you are saying?I'm saying that there is no alternative to a socialist state. The "no nations, no borders" bit comes when we move into a Communist society and the capitalist states have been defeated or are in a very small minority.

[spartan]

Did I not already say that one doesn't have to differ to contribute?

Yes but the point is what did Hoxha add to Marxism-Leninism?

Did he add anything new to Marxism-Leninism?

Or did he just stick to how Marxism-Leninism originally was, instead of following all the other states around him by going Revisionist?

What ever way you look at it this cant be considered a contribution (i.e. adding something new) to Marxism-Leninism.

[S R]

I am interested in discussing with members what they think of this statement. Personally I find it, and the fact that Albania is not, and never was a "model socialist republic", a damning criticism of, so called, "Hoxhaism".

I am also interested in members opinions on whether the focus on a single person (Hoxha) is Marxist or not. After all, history is changed by classes of people, and yet a single person was changing the course of history? Is this focus Marxist? Is Marxism wrong in this single case?


The quote being:
Originally Posted by


From then on, Hoxha's Albania turned in on itself as Hoxha, having alienated every ally and workers' government, declared that Albania not only would become a model socialist republic on its own, but that it was the only socialist country left in the world.
The statement in my opinion takes Albania and Hoxha out of its historical context in combatting revisionism and imperialism. It is revisionism and imperialism that worked to isolate Albania, just as they tried to the isolate the Communist movement in the Second International, the capitalist encirclement of the USSR, and so forth.