Differences between schools of thought

[Bluesteel]

Hello all! New member here.

I have taken an interest in learning socialism/communist theory after watching Bernie Sander's race in be Democratic Primary. I liked what he said and felt that he connected to the issues that matter most to me.

What exactly is the difference between socialism, communism, Democratic Socialism, Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism, and Maoism?

I am not sure where I fall in the political spectrum. I seem to fall more in line with Democratic/Eurosocialosm, but at the same time believe in transferring ownership of the means of production.

Thanks!

[ckaihatsu]

Transferring ownership of the means of (mass industrial) production would be your 'left-extent' out of everything you've said in your post.

The more-detailed aspects of it would be 'Who (what types of people) should it be transferred to?', and 'How would those people organize the *use* of that capacity for production among themselves if *private property* ownership was brought to a halt?'

[Bluesteel]

Transferring ownership of the means of (mass industrial) production would be your 'left-extent' out of everything you've said in your post.

I'm not sure what you mean by "left-extent."

The more-detailed aspects of it would be 'Who (what types of people) should it be transferred to?', and 'How would those people organize the *use* of that capacity for production among themselves if *private property* ownership was brought to a halt?'

I would transfer it over to the workers by means of either having the workers seize them, or having the government seize it and give it over to the workers.

[Radical Atom]

From another thread:

Introduction to Marxism:
Marxism and Marxist
Socialism
https://www.marxists.org/subject/students/index.htm

Encyclopedia of Marxism (so you can look up any event, concept, author, historical figure...)
https://www.marxists.org/glossary/index.htm

Marxism on diverse subjects such as education, art, ethics, etc.:
https://www.marxists.org/subject/index.htm

Selected Marxists Archive:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/selected-marxists.htm

Bolshevik Authors:
https://www.marxists.org/subject/bolsheviks/index.htm

Main communist currents:

Left-Communism
https://www.marxists.org/subject/left-wing/index.htm

"Marxism-Leninism" (Stalinism)
Stalinism
https://www.marxists.org/subject/stalinism/index.htm

Trotskyism
Trotskyism
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/index.htm

Maoism
Maoism (aka Mao Zedong Thought)
https://www.marxists.org/subject/china/


Syndicalism and Anarchism (in relation to Marxism)
Anarchism
Anarcho-Syndicalism
https://www.marxists.org/subject/anarchism/index.htm

Disclaimer: I think that these currents, while they are still somewhat useful at delineating one's political legacy or baggage (some of us reject them as labels or "identities" and might only concede to use them for the purpose of brevity in explaining one's tendency), they are partially outdated and as of now and little more than labels since most of these tendencies belong to a specific historical context with specific historical events and controversies and the main reason the left is so irrelevant today is the inability to move past them, the inability to transcend the XXth century and start focusing on the many fights and the open fronts we have now. This is not to say that there is no discussion to be had about the events of the past century, just saying that it should not be our first priority. Even calling oneself a communist or an anti-capitalist is fucking meaningless nowadays, any idiot can do that. There still are social-chauvinists and anti-"cultural marxists" out there for fuck sake.

Also, my advise would be stay the fuck away from the CPUSA or any official "communist" party for that matter, not only for the same reasons from the disclaimer but also because most of them have either largely or completely abandoned any kind of left-wing radical politics. The CPUSA, for instance, has a history of endorsing some of the worst examples of the democrat party such as neoliberal mass murdering warmongers Obama and the Clintons (both of them). "Western" parties are either little more than decaying nostalgia fests or reformist capitalists while the eastern european versions have gone a no less farcical route and become overt reactionaries and fascists instead.

[The Idler]

The simple explanation is;

Socialism/ communism/ democratic socialism are to be used interchangeably because socialism can only be democratic.

Leninism/ Trotskyism/ Maoism are all antitheses of socialism because they entail vanguard parties - much the same as the parties not (falsely) claiming to stand for any sort of socialism.

P.S. stay away from the CPUSA.

[Bluesteel]

From another thread:

Also, my advise would be stay the fuck away from the CPUSA or any official "communist" party for that matter, not only for the same reasons from the disclaimer but also because most of them have either largely or completely abandoned any kind of left-wing radical politics. The CPUSA, for instance, has a history of endorsing some of the worst examples of the democrat party such as neoliberal mass murdering warmongers Obama and the Clintons (both of them). "Western" parties are either little more than decaying nostalgia fests or reformist capitalists while the eastern european versions have gone a no less farcical route and become overt reactionaries and fascists instead.

Yeah, case in point, their endorsement of $hillary.

[Sectarian]

Hello all! New member here.

I have taken an interest in learning socialism/communist theory after watching Bernie Sander's race in be Democratic Primary. I liked what he said and felt that he connected to the issues that matter most to me.

What exactly is the difference between socialism, communism, Democratic Socialism, Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism, and Maoism?

I am not sure where I fall in the political spectrum. I seem to fall more in line with Democratic/Eurosocialosm, but at the same time believe in transferring ownership of the means of production.

Thanks!

Socialism is communism. A classless, stateless society that will be achieved on the basis of the liberation of the productive forces made possible by the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism by the workers, at the head of all the oppressed, led by their vanguard party.

"Socialism" as opposed to communism is defense of the capitalist state.

The "Democratic" in "democratic socialism" is a pledge by these fake socialists of their loyalty to the bosses' bloody, racist bourgeois "democracy."

Marxism-Leninism is the name given to the betrayal of Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin's program of international socialist revolution. It is a euphemism for Stalinism, the conservative, nationalist, anti-revolutionary ideology of the privileged bureaucratic layer that grew out of the isolation and poverty of the Soviet workers state.

Trotskyism is Marxism, Leninism, Communism, and Socialism. But most "Trotskyists" are anti-Trotskyist liberals.

Maoism is a national variant of Stalinism that consolidated as a separate ideological trend as the diverging national, anti-internationalist appetites of the Moscow and Peking Stalinist bureaucracies drove the Peking Stalinists into the open embrace of U.S. imperialism.

[ckaihatsu]

I'm not sure what you mean by "left-extent."

Well, the political orientations you mentioned fall across a *range* of ideologies, so politically, you're 'complex' for now. (Some people even *equivocate* and *vacillate* over time in their main position, so they result in being 'blurry' politically.)

Here's a little handy-dandy guide I whipped up a few years ago:


[3] Ideologies & Operations -- Fundamentals

I would transfer it over to the workers by means of either having the workers seize them, or having the government seize it and give it over to the workers.

Well these are two distinctly different things -- no political takeover happens *for free*, as I'm always glad to remind those of the soft-left regarding ISIS (meaning that its purported "anti-imperialism" is actually religious-sectarian, or 'competitive nationalist' -- any ground it gains at the expense of U.S./NATO imperialism will not just be handed over to anti-imperialists and/or workers).

So the workers have to collectively seize the means of mass industrial production for themselves / ourselves, and not think that some third-party will do it *for* them.

The simple explanation is;

Socialism/ communism/ democratic socialism are to be used interchangeably because socialism can only be democratic.

Leninism/ Trotskyism/ Maoism are all antitheses of socialism because they entail vanguard parties - much the same as the parties not (falsely) claiming to stand for any sort of socialism.

P.S. stay away from the CPUSA.

There's a stereotyping going on here, unfortunately -- that any vanguard party (espousing a pro-worker line) is automatically 'elitist' because it'll somehow inevitably develop its own class-like interests separate from the working class as a whole, because of what happened in the 20th century:

Marxism-Leninism is the name given to the betrayal of Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin's program of international socialist revolution. It is a euphemism for Stalinism, the conservative, nationalist, anti-revolutionary ideology of the privileged bureaucratic layer that grew out of the isolation and poverty of the Soviet workers state.

---

Socialism/ communism/ democratic socialism are to be used interchangeably because socialism can only be democratic.

Also, 'democratic socialism' is pretty weak, as we've just recently seen with Sanders' capitulation away from his initial nominal class-populist rhetoric -- inherently constrained to a nationalistic scope, anyway.

[Bluesteel]

Well, the political orientations you mentioned fall across a *range* of ideologies, so politically, you're 'complex' for now. (Some people even *equivocate* and *vacillate* over time in their main position, so they result in being 'blurry' politically.)

Here's a little handy-dandy guide I whipped up a few years ago:


[3] Ideologies & Operations -- Fundamentals



Well these are two distinctly different things -- no political takeover happens *for free*, as I'm always glad to remind those of the soft-left regarding ISIS (meaning that its purported "anti-imperialism" is actually religious-sectarian, or 'competitive nationalist' -- any ground it gains at the expense of U.S./NATO imperialism will not just be handed over to anti-imperialists and/or workers).

So the workers have to collectively seize the means of mass industrial production for themselves / ourselves, and not think that some third-party will do it *for* them.





There's a stereotyping going on here, unfortunately -- that any vanguard party (espousing a pro-worker line) is automatically 'elitist' because it'll somehow inevitably develop its own class-like interests separate from the working class as a whole, because of what happened in the 20th century:





---





Also, 'democratic socialism' is pretty weak, as we've just recently seen with Sanders' capitulation away from his initial nominal class-populist rhetoric -- inherently constrained to a nationalistic scope, anyway.

Thanks for that awesome chart!

- - - Updated - - -

Does anyone know of any quiz or test that can lead you in your political view point on the spectrum? The one on isidewith.com gave me 90% with the Socialist Party USA and the Green Party. The Political Compass put me at Economic Left/Right: -7.5Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03. How should I interpret these results?

[Sectarian]

Does anyone know of any quiz or test that can lead you in your political view point on the spectrum? The one on isidewith.com gave me 90% with the Socialist Party USA and the Green Party. The Political Compass put me at Economic Left/Right: -7.5Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03. How should I interpret these results?

All the quizzes on line are fatally flawed, because they rest on so many unquestioned assumptions of bourgeois ideology. Above all I have yet to see any quiz that even acknowledges the dividing line in modern revolutionary politics: do you support or oppose giving every amphibian in America a small trumpet?

[ckaihatsu]

Thanks for that awesome chart!

Yeah, no prob -- there's more at this thread:


Political (educational) diagrams, for revolutionaries

tinyurl.com/ckaihatsu-diagrams-revleft
http://www.revleft.com/vb/threads/11...ional-diagrams


...And the image hosting address is postimage.org/ckaihatsu.

Does anyone know of any quiz or test that can lead you in your political view point on the spectrum? The one on isidewith.com gave me 90% with the Socialist Party USA and the Green Party. The Political Compass put me at Economic Left/Right: -7.5Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03. How should I interpret these results?

We happened to just have had a full thread on this topic:


Traditional left-right way of seeing politics doesn't make any sense to me

http://www.revleft.com/vb/threads/19...ny-sense-to-me


My take is that there's no need for any vertical 'libertarian-authoritarian' axis because such tends to overemphasize a present-day *bourgeois-governmental* worldview of political economy (at the expense of a post-capitalist material-*economics*), thereby overstating individual-type concerns about (post-capitalist) 'civil society', at the expense of mass-scale liberated *productivity*.

Finally, that 'libertarian-authoritarian' axis is fully *superfluous* if one simply applies the structural offshoots of *strategies* and *tactics* to any given position or situation on the regular one-dimensional left-right political spectrum. (So, for any given political-economy context, what *means* are used for necessarily-large-scale social concerns, including material productivity -- ? These 'means' can be expressed generically and consistently as 'strategies' and 'tactics' -- anything *not-requiring* this approach, as for lifestyles of the individual, would just be up to the individual, then, by default.)


History, Macro-Micro -- politics-logistics-lifestyle

[The Idler]

Thanks for that awesome chart!

- - - Updated - - -

Does anyone know of any quiz or test that can lead you in your political view point on the spectrum? The one on isidewith.com gave me 90% with the Socialist Party USA and the Green Party. The Political Compass put me at Economic Left/Right: -7.5Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03. How should I interpret these results?

I think your political compass results makes you a libertarian socialist.

[Radical Atom]

Shouldn't you trust more yourself and other people before an incredibly flawed, simplistic and arbitrary political test on the internet? There's nothing wrong with admitting to feel confused on where you stand politically, you are just being honest with yourself; the sectarian "convinced" acolytes are the ones who usually prove themselves to be the ones most politically confused and make fools of themselves in the process. So don't feel like it's something necessarily wrong when it's something that has a simple (not easy) solution.
Not to mention that two politically opposed positions can agree on one issue for entirely different reasons: communists argue for gun ownership to keep the proletariat armed to fight against the present order and undermine the monopoly on violence by the state, while american white ultra-nationalists defend it to protect the status quo: white supremacy, private property, nationalism, conservatism...
Honestly, I don't see those political compass tests as any different from those "What Lord of the Rings race are you?" tests.
Just keep informing yourself, learn and read, and you'll progressively find yourself forming an opinion. The first step is precisely to question everything you know, trying to understand why you take some certain things for granted while others you don't even consider.
A communist must take nothing for granted.