Why use one word when 43 will do?

[Goose]

Especially if they're really big words.

Is it Lenin's fault, for interpreting 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' as meaning we need a vanguard party of middle class intellectuals (obviously the 'middle' class doesn't exist in terms of ownership of production, yadda yadda, but I use the term in its accepted form.)?

Is it just because we're (and I use 'we' in a loose sense) a bunch of self-aggrandising pseudo-intellectual tossbags?

Why can't we just call someone a twat, instead of a lickspittle running dog of the imperialist conspiracy? I mean, really, a twat's a twat, right?

[Charles Xavier]

The communist party is working class its members and intellectuals are working class.

Lenin did not own any Factories, he lived in poverty, he was one of the greatest minds the working class ever sprung.

You are a troll.

[Colonello Buendia]

well he was a lawyer, and if you accept the current definitions of class he'd be middle class professional

[KrazyRabidSheep]

I do agree that many self proclaimed communists enjoy ranting off long winded and archaic terms/phrases/etc.

Often, you find a member who can quote all sorts of communist theorists, but their understanding of what they quoted is questionable at best.

I prefer to use plain, modern speech when discussing any topic, and I only rely on an archaic term when I deem needed (hence I use the term "workers" rather then "proletariat" 99% of the time, for example.)

I mean, after all, if this is supposed to be the revolution for the people, shouldn't it use the language of the people?

That said, sometime people chose to use the older terminology, and that's fine, as long as they understand what they're saying, and say it in a way that others can understand (preferably without an encyclopedia handy!)

Lastly, I question why this thread belongs in "politics"; it seems more "learning" or "chit chat" material to me.

[Charles Xavier]

I do agree that many self proclaimed communists enjoy ranting off long winded and archaic terms/phrases/etc.

Often, you find a member who can quote all sorts of communist theorists, but their understanding of what they quoted is questionable at best.

I prefer to use plain, modern speech when discussing any topic, and I only rely on an archaic term when I deem needed (hence I use the term "workers" rather then "proletariat" 99% of the time, for example.)

I mean, after all, if this is supposed to be the revolution for the people, shouldn't it use the language of the people?

That said, sometime people chose to use the older terminology, and that's fine, as long as they understand what they're saying, and say it in a way that others can understand (preferably without an encyclopedia handy!)

Lastly, I question why this thread belongs in "politics"; it seems more "learning" or "chit chat" material to me.

Proletariat is more specific than worker. A peasant is a worker but not a proletariat.

Theory is specific because it needs to be. Propaganda on the other hand should be easy to read.

If you think Lenin is hard to understand, try Engels, or Dimitrov, Juan Carlos Mariategui, even Stalin is very clear to read. Theory is there to answer questions that come up in practice, its a guide to action.

[chimx]

Default
The communist party is working class its members and intellectuals are working class.

Lenin did not own any Factories, he lived in poverty, he was one of the greatest minds the working class ever sprung.

Lenin lived in self-imposed poverty. He was raised in a very "middle class" family. I believe his father was a well-to-do bureaucrat for the Russian school system.

[Ken]

I do agree that many self proclaimed communists enjoy ranting off long winded and archaic terms/phrases/etc.


i am new to this forum, i cant help but laugh whenever someone says proletariat or bourgeoisie repeatedly in a sentence.

[biscuits]

I'm new too, but I've been looking around and I've never seen so many middle class white kids with other peoples chips on their shoulders screaming 'troll' and banning people with different opinions. I was hoping for more, but I want none of it. There's some disgracefully ignorant people on here.

[La Comédie Noire]

Article I wrote back in March I think




The one thing on the left I find most common is the inability of anyone to speak in plain terms. Rather, they use grandiose terms and ancient slang to make their point. I will be the first to admit, it sounds impressive! In fact when I was new to the left one of the first things I noticed was how intellectual everyone sounded.
However as time went by I found more and more these strange terms were a mark of inexperience rather than intellect. The best have always said it plainly. Marx himself was praised for simplifying difficult concepts. It holds true on this very board. The most respected members have a knack for putting things in plain English. I know they know what they are talking about because I know what they are saying, you know?
So I figure, why can’t everyone on the left be like that? Well our "Comrades" as progressive as they claim to be have a problem with letting go of the past. Take any Left publication. Why would you ever write a paper supposedly appealing to the masses in a language only a very small minority can understand?
I’m not underestimating the worker’s ability to think, I just seriously doubt the amount of time they have to absorb antique English. It takes time to learn, some less than others, but it still takes time. And what you say in that language may not always speak to someone, no matter how clearly you explain it. Arcane language invites arcane concepts. It’s not the workers who can’t seem advance, it’s the language!
The problem is a large majority of people on this board are self taught. They pick up the communist manifesto, or what have you, and just go with it. Don’t get me wrong there’s nothing wrong with that! It’s just when human beings are learning something new they begin by repeating it. It takes time before someone starts to think critically about what they are absorbing and apply it to the real world, whether it’s the Materialist Conception of History or Algebra.
So what we end up with is a bunch of articles that read like first draft rejects of a dyslexic Lenin. Its progress, people are learning, but it’s not all around progress. It may convince and even impress our "E comrades" but your average worker won’t understand much less care what you are talking about. Make no mistake; Marx said it’s the mass workers who have the potential for revolution. So it makes sense to appeal to them as much as possible.
Of course, the solution is simple. We need to bring Communism into the 21st century, for real! It doesn’t take much, only a little imagination next time you set out to write an article or make a post.
For instance, when arguing contemporary issues use contemporary facts to back up your claim, sometimes quotes just won’t due. Show that Imperialist bastard why his system is a fucking failure; the evidence is everywhere you just have to look. No one is going to care if some Leninist from 80 years ago "got it right" however if you can say this Bourgeoisie article from today says "your system is a fucking failure", that’s really saying something.
Same goes for vocabulary. It’s your job as an essayist to communicate a message to your readers in a coherent manner. It has to be digestible to a large international audience, not just a few intellectuals. Don’t be afraid to say "factories and shit" when you are talking about the means of production. Actually that’s how someone literally explained what means of production was to me and I got it instantly. It happens all the time, you explain something in grandiose terms and people stare at you like you have a penis sticking out of your forehead then you explain it again in simpler(better?) terms and the "why didn’t you just say that in the first place?!" reaction is instantaneous.
When it comes right down to it purposely speaking in higher terms is arrogant. You cease to use language to communicate and begin using language to lift yourself up to a higher plain. You start speaking from a podium at people. It’s self promotion in the guise of communism! Workers already have people above them, they are called bosses, and do you want to become one? I would sincerely hope not.
So why don’t we cut the crap and say what we mean in the first place?

[biscuits]

I hear that Comrade, is plain & open minded speaking something that get's as penalised as it seemed to me round here? Is there any point me sticking about?

[Fedorov]

I agree that there a wide love in the far left to use rather distanced rhetoric, perhaps its a little in the realm of snobery to speak on a "higher" platform that others, but thats me thinking aloud. The trick is to know who yourtalking to, if its someone who is obviously oblivious to such terms its better to just avoid them as a whole. But don't go to childish conclusion that Lenin just ammused himself to annoy others with "complicated" words.

[Goose]

Article I wrote back in March I think




Well thank fuck for that. I've thus far been called a troll, a middle class liberal, ignorant, and accused of making up my job/personal history on the basis largely it would seem of not using the terms 'lickspittle' or 'deformed workers state' sufficiently, and not sounding like I once read a copy of Living Marxism in 1992 and learnt it by rote in case someone invented internet forums a few years later.

You've renewed my faith in humanity.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

This should be in Theory, I think!

[Fedorov]

Agreed, this has nothing to do with politics.

[biscuits]

quick, someone move it! I also want assurances that this isn't a duplicated argument in the thread it gets moved to, and a warning or partial ban on everyone involved. Including me.

[Goose]

PS, for those that missed it, I was actually paraphrasing Gorbachev's "Why use one word when six will do" comment on how the machinations of Soviet bureaucracy needed to be de-bureaucratised there at the start.

I don't know how that affects whether this should be in theory or politics though, and will defer to a greater mind for that.

(Could be waiting some time ;))