Theory of Productive Forces?

The group description contains this:

if the Soviet Union had remained on this same course (see also the article Theory of Productive Forces);

What article is it referring to? I googled it and there's a lot of articles with that name.

It's a partial copy and paste from the Wikipedia article on anti-revisionism put up by whomever the earlier group leader was.

I think we should create our own description, and I'd be willing to do it.

I'm okay with this.

do it.

Yes please.

I'll wait for GallowsBird's response.

I think that is a great idea. As long as it is a general description of the M-L movement, our aims and goals et cetera all is good.

I can't remember who it was that made the original description (Palingenesis?), it was before I was a member.

Should I go the "inclusive" route and talk about how, by itself, Marxism-Leninism is a general term that can encompass many different states and parties claiming adherence to it, or use it the way 99% of RevLefters do to refer to "Stalinists" of the pro-Mao and pro-Hoxha varieties?

I think the more general inclusive way is better.

I'm confused by the question. By the latter, are you trying to suggest you're just going to write something to troll Revlefters who call us Stalinists?

I'm confused by the question. By the latter, are you trying to suggest you're just going to write something to troll Revlefters who call us Stalinists?

No, I mean I'd write something like "Marxism-Leninism is the triumphant banner of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, against the Soviet, Titoite, and other revisionists...." even though in reality pretty much every "socialist" government has described their party as "Marxist-Leninist," from the USSR of the 20's to the USSR of the 80's, from Maoist China to modern-day China, from Vietnam and Cuba to the DPRK up until the 90's, etc.

I think the more general inclusive way is better.

Agreed. As long as we don't start excluding M-L tendencies we disagree with but are generally regarded as M-L (i.e Maoism, Hoxhaism etc). It should be more of a description of what Marxism-Leninism entails and the methods, tactics and theories connected to it.

Yes, GallowsBird, agreed.

Alright, here it goes.
===
Marxism-Leninism is a general term that encompasses those who claim adherence to the line of Marx, Engels and Lenin in opposition to Trotskyism. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia defined it in the 1970's as "the scientific system of philosophical, economic, and sociopolitical views that constitutes the world outlook of the working class; the science of the cognition and revolutionary transformation of the world, the science of the laws of development of society, nature, and human thought, the science of the laws of the revolutionary working-class struggle for the overthrow of capitalism, and the science of laws of the constructive activity of the working people in building socialist and communist society."

Throughout the 20th Century virtually every party which was at the head of the state power and proclaimed adherence to scientific socialism classified itself as Marxist-Leninist, from the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to the Communist Party of China, from the Party of Labour of Albania to the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, as well as the parties of the rest of Eastern Europe, Vietnam, Cuba, etc.

The 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956 marked the first major schism within the ranks of the international Marxist-Leninist movement when it denounced much of the work of J.V. Stalin and introduced a number of theses which came to be disputed by the parties of China and Albania. By the 1960's both parties declared that the policies of the Soviet leadership from Khrushchev onwards had led to the restoration of capitalism in the USSR and a change in its foreign policy from proletarian internationalism to social-imperialism (using Lenin's definition "socialism in words, imperialism in deeds.") Both parties declared their opposition to what was termed Soviet revisionism (the term revisionism being described in the GSE as "the antiscientific revision of the tenets of Marxism-Leninism. An opportunist trend within the revolutionary working-class movement that, under the pretext of creatively assimilating new phenomena, revises the basic tenets of Marxist theory, which have been confirmed in practice.")

In China Marxism-Leninism was proclaimed to have been developed to the point that a qualitatively higher stage was reached, that of Mao Zedong Thought. In a number of other countries ideological differentiations under the banner of Marxism-Leninism became apparent, most obviously the cases of Yugoslavia with its opposition to what it termed "bureaucratic socialism" and its support for "workers' self-management," the DPRK with the Juche idea, and Cuba with its "foco" strategy of guerrilla warfare which was presented as a legitimate road for the victory of the working-class and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

In 1978 the Party of Labour of Albania came out against Maoism and declared it an anti-Marxist current. The ascendancy of Deng Xiaoping Theory within China further alienated the Chinese party from the international communist movement and hailed what many consider to be either the restoration of capitalism in the country or otherwise its move towards a barely-disguised form of capitalism in contrast with earlier state-capitalism which, as in the USSR, was said to be shrouded by a façade of socialist phraseology.

Starting in the late 1980's a number of parties began to openly embrace the social-democratic ideology, with the "death of communism" in 1991 serving as a pretext for an especially significant shift in this direction, most notably by pro-Soviet parties. In 1992 the Constitution of the DPRK was amended to remove mention of Marxism-Leninism in favor of the Juche idea, while the states of China, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba still proclaim adherence to Marxism-Leninism in some form. Maoist and pro-Albanian parties, however, consider these parties as Marxist-Leninist in name only.

Hmm. I hate to be critical, but I gotta say, should we maybe include something that is more related to what Marxism-Leninism stands for as a social theory? Obviously none of the information in Ismail's paragraph is in dispute, but it's more of a history lesson than an explanation of what Marxism-Leninism actually is.

We could always include a link to the 1970's GSE article: http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictiona...rxism-Leninism

There's not much to dispute content-wise except the obvious praise for the post-1956 CPSU and its line, but that can just be brushed aside.

We could also link to Stalin's The Foundations of Leninism which is pretty much the founding text of Marxism-Leninism: http://marx2mao.com/Stalin/FL24.html

Some constructive criticism: it is a bit on the long side for a group description and as Questionable said it was more of an history of Marxist-Leninist movements rather than a general description of Marxism-Leninism.

Feel free to suggest amendments, although personally I'd just put a "Suggested Reading" list at the bottom.

I really like it. I would only give a few links for suggested readings

Is this dead? I would have liked seeing an user-created description.

I think mine, whatever faults people may find in it, is probably superior to what we have up right now. Just add this at the bottom:

=Further Reading=
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictiona...rxism-Leninism (1970's Soviet summary)
http://marx2mao.com/Stalin/FL24.html (Stalin's work on the relationship between Marxism and Leninism)
http://leninist.biz/en/1963/FML734/index.html (1963 Soviet exposition)

Even though a complete historical background on MLism has most of the political and social practices of our tendency implied all over it, and also in spite of the fact that Marxist political practice must have a very concrete historical ground to base itself, otherwise it would be anti-materialist and thus un-marxist, a definition of Marxism-Leninism that doesn't cleary talk about key concepts such as anti-imperialism, the worker-peasant alliance, the struggle against revisionism and so on, is obviously incomplete.

... hence where the "further reading" bit comes in. Unless you want the description to be huge.

...yeah but then we could simply say fuck it and make the description just a bunch of further readings.

Partially based on the MLM group description I wrote this very simple draft, I wish we could cobine with what Ismail wrote, edit some stuff here and there (specially because english is not my first language) and make it perfect:

Marxism-Leninism is the scientific revolutionary doctrine based around the works of Marx and Engels, developed by Lenin and put to practice by the October Revolution in 1917, it is as well characterized by the defense of Josef Stalin as a revolutionary figure who played a major role in some of the most critical moments in the history of the worker's movement. The objective of Marxism-Leninism is simple, to guide the forces of labour in their inevitable victory against capital.

Key theoretical aspects of Marxism-Leninism are:

• The philosophical foundations of Marxism-Leninism are Historical and Dialectical Materialism, whereas Marxist political-economy serves as it's scientific foundation.

• Proletarian Revolution and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat must be carried out and lead by a vanguard party composed by the most advanced and class counscious elements amongst the working class. Alliances with other potentially revolutionary classes such as the peasantry must be made if historical necessity calls for it.

• Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism, consequently it is in the interest of all revolutionaries the victory of national-liberation struggles in oppressed countries as a way to undermine world bourgeois rule.

• Marxism-Leninism dismisses all attempts to discredit legitimate revolutionary organisations, countries and historical figures, no matter if they are waged by so-called communists or open advocates of capitalism. Thus it rejects the Orthodox Marxism of the Second International, Trotskyism, Left-Communism and Anarchism as either ultra-leftist or rightist deviations.

I am open to criticisms. After all we are commies and should create things collectively.

I think if we were to combine Roach's list of key theoretical aspects with Ismail's brief history lesson/ suggested readings we would have something remarkable here.

Being a lightweight I do not have all that much to contribute, my only thoughts would be pointing out some of the distinctions between Maoism and (for lack of a better word) Hoxhaism. Also it might not hurt to go in depth with Stalin's USSR; perhaps do a short critique of the political/ social/ economic aspects of it- maybe even collectively decide what should have been done at certan points now that we can examine it in hindsight. Overall I am impressed by this, I would like to keep the creative juices flowing here.

Well I like aspects of both Roach's and Ismail's descriptions and if anyone is happy I could edit both into the description.

I don't think we should go into too much detail about the differences between "Maoism" and "Hoxhaism" however as there are groups for both tendencies that point out where they differ in their descriptions.

I agree with Comrade Samuel that we should have perhaps a little more on the USSR during Stalin's (and Lenin's) era as the history section starts during the post-Stalin era at the moment.

We could have something short and simple like:

During the early years of the USSR particularly under Stalin's leadership in which many of the ideas of Marxism-Leninisn were implemented as policy, the USSR went from an insignificant and backwards country, to a superpower that could compete with the USA and other capitalist powers. Key to this was the Marxist-Leninist theory of 'Socialism in one country' and, of course, the building up of the industrial and agricultural sectors of the USSR.

In 1941 an attempt was made by Nazi Germany to stop the tide of socialism and the German Wehrmacht were sent to invade Russia in an operation known as Barbarossa. The invaders were repelled at a high cost but the USSR did go from strength to strength.

However after Stalin's death there was a struggle in the Soviet leadership between those who supported Stalin's legacy and those that denounced it.

Then we could lead into the beginning of Ismail's section and the description Roach has given (or maybe that would be better before history).

I still think my proposal for group description is good.

I have tried to compromise with everyone and have done a hack jo.... tried to splice them together as best I can repressenting thus a collective description. It may need some more work to make it flow better and I may need to trim it here and there due to length.