jookyle

jookyle
Groucho Marxist

27th April 2012
8th August 2015 23:02
Avatar

More 30 Friends

More Albums

jvjhby
23rd August 2013

Recent Visitors

The last 10 visitor(s) to this page were:

This page has had 5,563 visits

Tab Content: jookyle's Activity; About Me; Friends

Tab Content: All; jookyle; Friends; Photos

Older Activity

No Recent Activity

31

Positivist - 23rd August 2012 22:27 View Conversation

I haven't received your article if you've sent it.
Positivist - 20th August 2012 12:57 View Conversation

Yea man sounds cool. I'm down south in evesham. It may be hard though with school coming up as I don't end up finishing up my day until 4 or 5 thanks to cross country but I'm sure we'll be able to fit it in a weekend sometime.
Art Vandelay - 25th July 2012 07:48

Socialism is impossible in one country though; I understand when you say it was a necessity, but it simply is impossible (as expounded by Engels in the principles of communism). I realize that the revolution was failing to spread and that not much else could have been done, the material conditions were not ripe for proletarian revolution world wide. But to claim that you can create socialism in one country is not only absurd but indeed a direct rejection of what Marx and Engels thought (not that I hold them to be infallible or anything). The whole idea is that through globalization, nation states have become more and more intertwined, thus what happens in one nation-state affects the other; which will speed up the process of global proletarian revolution much faster than any other preceding classes revolutions.
Art Vandelay - 25th July 2012 07:10

Well I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on socialism in one country; which, not only would I consider to be a corner stone of Stalinism (yes I know its technically marxism-leninism but I don't call it that) and also consider it to be a fundamental break with marxist thought.
Art Vandelay - 25th July 2012 06:52

No for sure, which is why I stated you were "one of the more level headed" of them. Still though, quite interesting seeing as how you seem to be a pretty intelligent guy and quite frankly there are not too many intelligent M-L's around here (that doesn't mean there are not in real life). Anything in particular which attracts you to the ideology (if you do not mind me asking)?
Art Vandelay - 25th July 2012 06:42

You are a marxist-leninist arn't you? You seem like one of the more level headed ones.
Art Vandelay - 19th July 2012 01:44

The one of Lenin? Any reason in particular? If you haven't noticed yet, I like using cartoons of famous leftists.
Positivist - 13th July 2012 03:09 View Conversation

Haha thanks! Just trying to have some fun with the historical ignorance that a lot of leftists still have today.
Brosa Luxemburg - 8th July 2012 04:11 View Conversation

The Bolsheviks were trying to say one part of the party came up with the theory and the other part would agitate on the street. Bordiga claimed that this was an incorrect tactic and developed "organic centralism" which held that all members of the party would participate in both "theorizing" and "agitation". So, really, there isn't a difference between organic centralism and democratic centralism besides historical differences. I would say I am both a democratic centralist and a organic centralist.
Brosa Luxemburg - 8th July 2012 04:08 View Conversation

Well, there really isn't much of a difference between the two terms. Organic centralism developed in opposition to the Bolsheviks trying to use democratic centralism to split the party into two different tasks pretty much. Actually here is a Bordiga quote "It would be a fatal error to consider the party as dividable into two groups, one of which is dedicated to the study and the other to action; such a distinction is deadly for the body of the party, as well as for the individual militant. The meaning of unitarism and of organic centralism is that the party develops inside itself the organs suited to the various functions, which we call propaganda, proselytism, proletarian organisation, union work, etc., up to tomorrow, the armed organisation; but nothing can be inferred from the number of comrades destined for such functions, as on principle no comrade must be left out of any of them." To be continued...