Unless we negate the grEat polemics of Marx/Lenin we can not put forford the theory of Communism . What is more saddening that as far as theory(not ideology) is concerned, there is no serious attempt after 1883 or 1924. We have deified Marx/Engales/Lenin and the whole theory has become a dogma and resultant into religion. Yes you have to accept that marxism has been retrograded into the religious form, contents may differ. Whereas the Capitalism/Colon ism/Neo-Capita
Thursday, August 29, 2013
THE TRAVESTY OF MARXISM
Dear comrade realleft,
I have to agree with you to a certain extent, you are right when you say that the vast majority of self-proclaimed 'Communist' parties today are revisionist, i.e., they have revised the theory they claim to adhere too. That is why the theory I adhere too is very different from 'traditional' theories. Sure, I also claim to adhere too Marxism-Leninism, as those revisionists do, but what is the difference between us?
The main difference is that they, as you said, treat Marxism-Leninism as a religious dogma, whenever an issue comes up they start quoting Lenin or Marx on the subject, even when it is obvious that their views cannot be applied to the material conditions of today. They do not advance Marxism-Leninism (or Maoism, Trotskyism, Orthodox Marxism etc.), but stop its advancement.
I have noticed this and thought to myself; 'did Lenin not advance Marxism, but at the same time adhere to its basic principles, that is, the science of Marxism, did he not use the tool of Marxism to analyze the material reality of his era?' the answer to that is yes, in my opinion. I concluded from this that these so-called 'Marxist-Leninists' are in fact opposed to Lenin's theory. As an Orthodox Leninist, I believe we should do the same as Lenin did, use the tool of Marxism to analyze the material reality of today and come to scientific, Marxist conclusions from that analysis, without caring about 'stepping on the toes' of past revolutionary leaders on certain subjects.
As you said, I believe that a single person, or a single group, must do this. The situation we are in today is similar to the situation Lenin was in about 110 years ago, the second international and self-proclaimed 'Marxist theoretician' were vulgarizing Marxism, degrading it to petty reformism, robbing the theory of its revolutionary character. What did Lenin do? Instead of giving up on the theory, instead of joining the majority view of his day, he stood against them, against all odds he started defending Marxism from vulgarizations and degradation's, and in fact succeeded in his task, he not only defended the basic principles and revolutionary character of Marxism, but also advanced the theory.
Why can the same thing not happen today? Sure, it seems unlikely, it seems to be 'against all odds', but I have faith in proletarian intellectuals, I believe a group will come along that will get rid of the vulgarizations of Marxism-Leninism, and I believe this group will be Orthodox Leninist, i.e., using the same method as Lenin, to achieve this task.
I hope that helped. I have a question, can I use your member title and use your post with my reply in my blog? I believe this would make an interesting blog entry.
With comradely greetings,
I have to agree with you to a certain extent, you are right when you say that the vast majority of self-proclaimed 'Communist' parties today are revisionist, i.e., they have revised the theory they claim to adhere too. That is why the theory I adhere too is very different from 'traditional' theories. Sure, I also claim to adhere too Marxism-Leninism, as those revisionists do, but what is the difference between us?
The main difference is that they, as you said, treat Marxism-Leninism as a religious dogma, whenever an issue comes up they start quoting Lenin or Marx on the subject, even when it is obvious that their views cannot be applied to the material conditions of today. They do not advance Marxism-Leninism (or Maoism, Trotskyism, Orthodox Marxism etc.), but stop its advancement.
I have noticed this and thought to myself; 'did Lenin not advance Marxism, but at the same time adhere to its basic principles, that is, the science of Marxism, did he not use the tool of Marxism to analyze the material reality of his era?' the answer to that is yes, in my opinion. I concluded from this that these so-called 'Marxist-Leninists' are in fact opposed to Lenin's theory. As an Orthodox Leninist, I believe we should do the same as Lenin did, use the tool of Marxism to analyze the material reality of today and come to scientific, Marxist conclusions from that analysis, without caring about 'stepping on the toes' of past revolutionary leaders on certain subjects.
As you said, I believe that a single person, or a single group, must do this. The situation we are in today is similar to the situation Lenin was in about 110 years ago, the second international and self-proclaimed 'Marxist theoretician' were vulgarizing Marxism, degrading it to petty reformism, robbing the theory of its revolutionary character. What did Lenin do? Instead of giving up on the theory, instead of joining the majority view of his day, he stood against them, against all odds he started defending Marxism from vulgarizations and degradation's, and in fact succeeded in his task, he not only defended the basic principles and revolutionary character of Marxism, but also advanced the theory.
Why can the same thing not happen today? Sure, it seems unlikely, it seems to be 'against all odds', but I have faith in proletarian intellectuals, I believe a group will come along that will get rid of the vulgarizations of Marxism-Leninism, and I believe this group will be Orthodox Leninist, i.e., using the same method as Lenin, to achieve this task.
I hope that helped. I have a question, can I use your member title and use your post with my reply in my blog? I believe this would make an interesting blog entry.
With comradely greetings,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)