"Another issue I have with Marxist-Leninism and Maoism as well, is that more or less seem to suffer from Great Manism and immediately result to direct quotes from Great Men as opposed to reaching the same conclusion that others have reached through their own research and analysis." If you study the most prominent Maoist movements, you will see that cult worship is something that is next to absent in them, and that Maoist groups generally take nothing as granted until their practice confirms its validity.
Though I appreciate your efforts, I think that the situation in Nepal goes a little beyond petty sectarianism. Class forces are involved in the inner party struggle. We do not have even near-accurate information about the condition or strength of the party, so I prefer not to make strong comments about it.
Another issue I have with Marxist-Leninism and Maoism as well, is that more or less seem to suffer from Great Manism and immediately result to direct quotes from Great Men as opposed to reaching the same conclusion that others have reached through their own research and analysis.
I attempted to answer DAVE's questions in the thread related to Nepali Maoism. I only hope that my analysis on Nepalese Maoism is up to par.
My main criticisms of Leninism though are the suppression of the God Movement, not allowing Individual Menshevik's to be implemented into the USSR's Political System (As long as they'd work within the Soviet Constitution) and the dissolution of the Workers Councils. Not to mention the handling of certain incidents such as the Sailors Rebellion. (Which Lenin should have pushed for negotiation between the Toilers and the Soviet Republic at all costs in my opinion, however-- It was the Russian Civil War and depravity was common place.)
If Maoism however is to allow for the implementation of a People's Congress that is to alternatingly elect a Worker's State Leader and not simply allow for a Great Man to hold power, I see no issue with Maoism. It would need to allow for: *A Proletarian Court System (And the respect of the Proletarian Court system in which no Great Man or any other being is immune from the effects of Proletarian Humanist legality. *The State to take ownership over the means of Production, but in this case for the Working Class according to a Socialist Constitution to be noted as being the State and them forming councils in order to decide the relations of labor that they engage in. *Humanistic behaviors and a Proletarian Culture to be built. (Unsuppressed, not structured around Great Men and offering an alternative to the previous culture. Mainly these are the only things, I see as needing to be allowed.
I'm massively familiar with Marxist-Leninism, however I'm getting more familiar with Maoism. The only complaints of Maoism that I have other than Mao's collaboration with Imperialism happen to be the Great Man Leadership that Mao had gained and abused. (Whether for good or bad.) As the Great Man Leadership type of power structure itself doesn't allow for the empowerment of the Proletariat.
Are you familiar with the basic principles of Marxism-Lennism and Maoism ?
And yes, I massively agree that in order for success to occur that a region must be seized on a massive scale in order for there to be true success towards the transformation to Communism while the Socialist State still exists ensuring the protection of the People during this transition.
I see more or less, Marxist-Leninism and even Maoism serving as the People's Fort during the transition phase towards Communism serving the People's interest and ensuring their protection during this time at all costs.
