Revisionism

[Dimentio]

I wonder how the word "revisionist" became a substitute for "****". There is a hypothetic difference between different forms of revisionism. Some (most of them) might be harmful, while some might have progressive impact.

The only way to develop society is to experiment anyway, and then we do need different theory structures.

[Die Neue Zeit]

In order to better understand modern revisionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_revisionism), one must understand the origins (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Bernstein).

IMO, given the usually unjustified mud-slinging, those who understand this term best should strive to avoid calling self-styled comrades "revisionists," and instead determine whether the views those comrades hold dear are revisionist.

[And can someone please call me out whenever I make the immature mistake of calling someone a revisionist instead of attacking their views as such? Thanks.]

[Hit The North]

Apart from our crazy gang of Hoxhaists who throw the term around like it's going out of fashion, Jacob Richter is the only other individual on revleft who uses the term "revisionist" as far as I can see.

So, for instance, this is a very silly thread: http://www.revleft.com/vb/revisionist-trotskyism-revolutionary-t70170/index.html (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revisionist-trotskyism-revolutionary-t70170/index.html)
where the word revisionism is used to designate stances which don't conform to Jacob's own brand of quite strange "Efurtian Leninism" - whateverthefuckthatis.

[Dros]

I wonder how the word "revisionist" became a substitute for "****". There is a hypothetic difference between different forms of revisionism. Some (most of them) might be harmful, while some might have progressive impact.

The only way to develop society is to experiment anyway, and then we do need different theory structures.

Revisionism is a word that has a very specific meaning. It does not mean **** and I don't think people use it that way. It describes those elements within a Communist party that do not advocate Communism. Dengists and Krushchevites, those who support them, those affiliated with them, and those with similar ideas are revisionists.

People say that anti-revisionists (Maoists use the term to CZ) use it too much. If you think the term is being abused, ask the person who used it to justify why they used the term. You might be surprised to find that it isn't being abused after all. If they can't, then you have proved that one person doesn't understand what revisionism is.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Jacob Richter is the only other individual on revleft who uses the term "revisionist" as far as I can see.

Go ask Ben Seattle, DrFreeman09, and other "Leninist Marxist" comrades outside the stale Trotsky-versus-Stalin crap. :rolleyes:


So, for instance, this is a very silly thread: http://www.revleft.com/vb/revisionist-trotskyism-revolutionary-t70170/index.html (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revisionist-trotskyism-revolutionary-t70170/index.html)
where the word revisionism is used to designate stances which don't conform to Jacob's own brand of quite strange "Erfurtian Leninism" - whateverthefuckthatis.

The content there is anything BUT silly, and I don't have my own "brand": the heritage of revolutionary Marxism is a combination of straight-up "orthodox" Leninist Marxism, "Luxemburgism," and "Connollyism." :glare:

[The fact that your revisionist guru isn't there says a lot about the sheer deficit of his theoretical contributions to revolution, and even when there were any, they tended to lean towards revisionism.]

FYI, "Erfurtian" refers to the [albeit reformist] Erfurt program of the German Social-Democratic party in 1891 and Kautsky's more radical commentary (The Class Struggle) which, in spite of their appeasement of the authorities, had a profound influence on Lenin and the rest of the Bolsheviks (and probably even the German Spartacists, too).

[Lenin II]

While it is true, hypothetically, that revisionism can have a progressive impact, I'm not sure if such a circumstance has existed. Certainly Trotskyism has given us nothing to look up to, and the jury's still out on Maoism (we'll see where China goes, certainly the revisionist-revisionist regime over there is not socially progressive). As to the exact definition of revisionism, it is subjective, depending on which dead person you name yourself after.

If you're a Hoxhaist, Mao was a revisionist for corrupting Marxism-Leninism. If you're a Maoist, Hoxha is a revisionist for rejecting the Cultural Revolution and denouncing Mao. Let's not even get started on the Trotsky-Stalin thing. I think most of us can agree on a few fundamentals, however, such as Khrushchev.

Personally, I've never met any Marxist who labeled himself a "revisionist."

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ The jury is NOT out on Maoism: it is a revisionist tendency, based merely on its "New Democracy extension" (read: revision) of Lenin's "revolutionary democracy" material by including actual bourgeois elements. Then there's the "Social-Revolutionary-with-Chinese-characteristics" issue of sidelining the working class and favouring the peasantry, even if Mao hadn't concocted his notion of "New Democracy."

[Maoism is a unique, Chinese combination of Menshevism and "Social-Revolutionary-ism."]

Although you're a member of our user group (as of this post), I WILL eventually come around towards attacking Marxism-Leninism as revisionist in greater detail (that is, in greater detail than this post here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1070204&postcount=18)) once I've got source material.