Weirdly, none of the 80 books on the reading list will actually be by Marx himself
Why is that weird? Marx wrote in the 1800s, quite a few things have happened since then.
Because he’s the M in ML
Marx was a social scientist, not a prophet. Marxism is a science, not a dogma. Marx’s work should be studied, I feature his works in my basic Marxist-Leninist study guide, but that does not mean that Marx’s words are holy. Marxist concepts have been extended and explained in ways more applicable to contemporary times, retaining Marxism as the foundation and applying it to present, ever-changing conditions. It’s this flexibility and evolution of Marxism that turns it into a science, rather than a dogma.
One does not need to read On the Origin of Species to be taught and study evolution. Still a good idea to, but if textbooks that study the same basis and carry it forward to the modern day are created, then this is also good.
That’s more or less what every Marxist and Marxist-Leninist really needs to hear.
Sure, I agree, thats’s why Mao wrote Oppose Book Worship. Marxism is a guide to action, and a science that evolves.
Wait til you find out how many books in the Bible were actually written by supernatural beings 😅
That would be Zero but Christians sure are convinced it’s all of them.
Anarchists have their resources too, don’t you think? Even being a anarchist takes some skill, after all.
Thank you for saying that.
Ugh, “I didn’t join the revolution to read” is such a dumb statement.
Reality:
Anarchists have been robbing large oligopoly supermarkets in my city and redistributing the food to “community fridges” for a good couple years now.
That’s cool and all but that’s local tier good-samaritan stuff. While it’s good, it will never overthrow the system.
It’s absurd to not help someone now because you could also do something highly theoretical and better in the future. Both things should happen.
Its a common thing with the
.mlto identity an issue and not act due to purity politics. Ask them about voting in primaries (pushing an existing party left or forming their own).We can do multiple things at once. Some for the short others for the long term.
Its a common thing with the .ml to identity an issue and not act due to purity politics.
No? Marxists argue against purity politics all the time. “Left” anti-communism on the basis of existing socialist states not being perfect wonderlands is one of the biggest problems we have to tackle. Whenever a socialist country makes an error, or has not yet sufficiently advanced to the point of erasing problems caused due to uneven development, this is used as evidence that said socialist country is unworthy of support and therefore imperialist aggression is passively justified. MLs must relentlessly combat this.
Ask them about voting in primaries (pushing an existing party left or forming their own).
Rejecting electoralism as a viable path does not mean doing so on the basis of “purity,” but practicality. Vote in the primaries all you want, the ML argument isn’t that this will make you “sinful,” but that it won’t ever be capable of enacting the change that is necessary.
If I need to change a lightbulb 20 feet in the air, and you come with a 4 foot stepladder, the lightbulb isn’t changing even if you get closer. You have to drive to the hardware store, buy the 20 foot ladder, take it back, set it up, and then change the lightbulb. The stepladder being closer doesn’t actually mean it gets you closer to your goal, that path is a dead-end to begin with, you cannot raise that 4 foot stepladder to a 20 foot lightbulb.
We can do multiple things at once. Some for the short others for the long term.
Sure, and studying theory and applying it to our practice tells us what strategies actually work in the short and long term.
Vote in the primaries all you want
Case in point. This snippet of your language shows that elections are not pure enough and you will not be showing up to help us on this front for a short term relief.
Then you wonder why you get no representation at the table when you explicitly said you don’t want to be heard.
No? My point on elections is that they do not bring short or long-term relief, because candidates are pre-filtered so as to not challenge the status quo. It has nothing to do with purity, and is entirely due to the practical assessment that elections under capitalism cannot answer capitalism’s systemic problems.
I don’t ever wonder why Marxists don’t have electoral representation, we’ve known why for centuries, and it’s because the ruling class fears communists above all else. Just look at the Epstein files, and read about how they refer to the PRC and socialist leaders like Xi Jinping. It’s utter disdain and fear.
Or even how he’s appraised by western intelligence:
Who is “us?” What is your strategy? Is it to vote for whichever pre-filtered candidate is most progressive, and then watch as this candidate loses to the more well-funded pre-filtered establishment candidate? What then? If the only ladders allowed to be available electorally are 4-8 feet tall and you need to change a bulb 20 feet in the air, how do you make progress?
How many stepladders do you need to try before you roll up your sleeves and drive down to the hardware store for an actual ladder?
OK, so what are you doing to make a revolution happen?
I won’t speak for Geneva (Geneva isn’t a Marxist) but Marxists advocate for revolutionary party building. You can’t force a revolution into happening, but you can absolutely prepare for one and build the organ needed to carry it out. Herr’s a good diagram:
This explains the role of the party in forming a vanguard. This is the historically proven revolutionary strategy that has established socialism in many countries around the world.
