Excellence. No Marxist should ever put any weight into the great man theory of history…but Lenin, wow, what an absolute leviathan of his time. His words, his teachings, his compassion for the workers, his drive and effort, all still pierce our hearts and minds to this day.
The great man concept came from the fact that there were revisionists who sucked up to further their own goals and careers but even then we also need to consider the material conditions that the Soviets were in, with constant famines from the past, two great wars which they survived extermination from the fascists, after all of that it is surprising for sure that the Soviets were still not collapsed considering the power that western imperialism accumulated from the blood of the rest of the world and threw everything at communism as they obviously fear the aspect of a successful socialist state So because of the material conditions they were in the people would obviously see great leaders like Lenin and Stalin as great men as its just natural for people who were downtrodden masses in the past to worship those who saved them from poverty, but sadly this cult of personality was used against the Soviets by revisionists
Yep, and there are multiple/many examples/kinds of it (class reductionism). There are the people that say communists shouldn't support/be involved in the struggle for LGBTQ+ rights, for example (those people often just being LGBTQ-phobic, ofc). Then there are the people like Politsturm, who say we shouldn't support the P@lestinian resistance (and they basically end up running cover for Isn'treal - it's pretty gross).
My takeaway: ML's should enter into most all protest and agitation movements, that aren't reactionary, eith the goal of engaging with the proletariat and trying to push them beyond just liberal ideology, to go to the people and show why they must go further instead of sticking to the side and shouting at people to come on over.
Thank you for shedding light on the MUG caucus. My hope is that we can get DSA to endorse Green candidates and increase membership of both the Green party and the DSA with scientific socialists, but with the way the Greens talk about green capitalism and with MUG and DSA's distorted vision of democracy it looks disheartening, but it is within our grasp. Everyday we are discovering new reasons why this is true.
The begining portion is a bit out of date since feudal autocracy has basically been entirely eliminated in almost every country by the dawn of the 21st century but the latter portion still remains quire relevant to this very day.
Do you have any plans to record Hoxha's "The Khruschevitess" or for that matter, any more Hoxha at all? I find the attitudes about his anti-clericalism in Albania amusing, and frankly I don't blame him for doing what he did. Religion in general is an incredibly shitty set of tools for understanding anything.
FinBol is working on The Khruschevites currently, so I'm laying off that one. I definitely plan to do more of his major and minor works, yes -- at least what's on the APL reading list: www.americanpartyoflabor.com/reading-list
It is true that we have to be strong Marxists per Lenin. Meanwhile, a year after Lenin wrote this, in the US this editorial appeared: The capitalist class, in the despair of its approaching doom, misrepresents socialism as an arbitrary scheme of society, whose adoption would destroy individuality! “Socialism,” it declares, “would degrade us all to one dead level regardless of individual aptitude or merit. Capitalism, on the other hand, exalts the individual, promotes his rights and duties, and all else that appertains to him and his happiness. Down with socialism! Up with capitalism!” How does capitalist fact verify capitalist contention? In the promotion of capitalist enterprise the stock corporation plays a most important part. The stock corporation is a collective means of capitalizing great industries. Without the stock corporation, the trust and other large aggregations of capital made necessary by industrial evolution would be impossible. As a collective means of capitalizing industry, the stock corporation has rendered the individual capitalist superfluous, by merging him into the stockholder, and by making stocks, not individuals, count in voting on its policies and affairs. Likewise has the stock corporation made it possible for a few-those controlling a majority of the stocks-to dominate the minority stockholders, who may be and generally are the majority of the stockholders, in their interest, thus trampling on the individuality of the many in the mire of economic aggrandizement of the few. The newspapers of the day, in printing the protest of Gustave Loeb against the reorganization plan of the shipbuilding trust, are now giving point to these facts-are, in brief, throwing a strong light on the triumph of “individuality” under capitalism. Loeb denounces the reorganization plan as a confiscation of the property of the bondholders, and calls upon the other bondholders to refuse to give their assent to it. Should they, however, give their assent, his property will be confiscated-where then is his individuality? Should they not give their assent, what becomes of the property and the individuality of those favoring reorganization? In neither case is there any appeal to individuality or a recognition of individual rights. The appeal is to a majority of bonds, controlled by a few. Should these decide for reorganization, then reorganization it will be. Should they decide against reorganization, then reorganization it will not be. The individual will not count, but the majority of the bonds of the few controlling the corporation will. Capitalism is a fraud within a fraud. Proclaiming itself individualistic, it organizes collectively in order to promote the aims of a few. Socialism, on the other hand, is genuineness itself. Believing that industry is collective in organization and operation, it proclaims itself in favor of collective ownership and control. By these means it would secure to labor the products of its toil, now confiscated by the few, and, in this way, preserve to the workers, the majority of the population, a greater individuality than that which they now attain. With freedom from the economic pressure due to the capitalist control of industry, such as socialism alone can provide (since it is in accord with evolution), individuality will achieve proportions hitherto unattained.
50 seconds ago..... The algorithm has been trained properly
Excellence. No Marxist should ever put any weight into the great man theory of history…but Lenin, wow, what an absolute leviathan of his time. His words, his teachings, his compassion for the workers, his drive and effort, all still pierce our hearts and minds to this day.
The great man concept came from the fact that there were revisionists who sucked up to further their own goals and careers but even then we also need to consider the material conditions that the Soviets were in, with constant famines from the past, two great wars which they survived extermination from the fascists, after all of that it is surprising for sure that the Soviets were still not collapsed considering the power that western imperialism accumulated from the blood of the rest of the world and threw everything at communism as they obviously fear the aspect of a successful socialist state
So because of the material conditions they were in the people would obviously see great leaders like Lenin and Stalin as great men as its just natural for people who were downtrodden masses in the past to worship those who saved them from poverty, but sadly this cult of personality was used against the Soviets by revisionists
Thank you for articulating the context in your annotations
based
Once again I greatly appreciate your work uploading and reading these documents
I see.
Definitely a must know piece.
"Class Reductionism" is a good concept to understand and have in the toolkit.
Thank you.
Yep, and there are multiple/many examples/kinds of it (class reductionism).
There are the people that say communists shouldn't support/be involved in the struggle for LGBTQ+ rights, for example (those people often just being LGBTQ-phobic, ofc). Then there are the people like Politsturm, who say we shouldn't support the P@lestinian resistance (and they basically end up running cover for Isn'treal - it's pretty gross).
Yes definitely. Class reductionism vs race reductionism is a big point of contention in American communist circles
Incredibly relevant little gem. Lenin is truly timeless.
"Really you can never read to much Lenin" haha love this
Excellent reading choice
Thank you.
Good text, thanks again for the audiobooks
Covering 'Materialism and Empirio-Criticism' would be dope at some future point. Thanks for the upload!
My takeaway: ML's should enter into most all protest and agitation movements, that aren't reactionary, eith the goal of engaging with the proletariat and trying to push them beyond just liberal ideology, to go to the people and show why they must go further instead of sticking to the side and shouting at people to come on over.
Thank you for shedding light on the MUG caucus. My hope is that we can get DSA to endorse Green candidates and increase membership of both the Green party and the DSA with scientific socialists, but with the way the Greens talk about green capitalism and with MUG and DSA's distorted vision of democracy it looks disheartening, but it is within our grasp. Everyday we are discovering new reasons why this is true.
The begining portion is a bit out of date since feudal autocracy has basically been entirely eliminated in almost every country by the dawn of the 21st century but the latter portion still remains quire relevant to this very day.
Common Lenin W
Do you have any plans to record Hoxha's "The Khruschevitess" or for that matter, any more Hoxha at all? I find the attitudes about his anti-clericalism in Albania amusing, and frankly I don't blame him for doing what he did. Religion in general is an incredibly shitty set of tools for understanding anything.
FinBol is working on The Khruschevites currently, so I'm laying off that one. I definitely plan to do more of his major and minor works, yes -- at least what's on the APL reading list: www.americanpartyoflabor.com/reading-list
It is true that we have to be strong Marxists per Lenin. Meanwhile, a year after Lenin wrote this, in the US this editorial appeared:
The capitalist class, in the despair of its approaching doom, misrepresents socialism as an arbitrary scheme of society, whose adoption would destroy individuality!
“Socialism,” it declares, “would degrade us all to one dead level regardless of individual aptitude or merit. Capitalism, on the other hand, exalts the individual, promotes his rights and duties, and all else that appertains to him and his happiness. Down with socialism! Up with capitalism!”
How does capitalist fact verify capitalist contention?
In the promotion of capitalist enterprise the stock corporation plays a most important part. The stock corporation is a collective means of capitalizing great industries. Without the stock corporation, the trust and other large aggregations of capital made necessary by industrial evolution would be impossible.
As a collective means of capitalizing industry, the stock corporation has rendered the individual capitalist superfluous, by merging him into the stockholder, and by making stocks, not individuals, count in voting on its policies and affairs. Likewise has the stock corporation made it possible for a few-those controlling a majority of the stocks-to dominate the minority stockholders, who may be and generally are the majority of the stockholders, in their interest, thus trampling on the individuality of the many in the mire of economic aggrandizement of the few.
The newspapers of the day, in printing the protest of Gustave Loeb against the reorganization plan of the shipbuilding trust, are now giving point to these facts-are, in brief, throwing a strong light on the triumph of “individuality” under capitalism.
Loeb denounces the reorganization plan as a confiscation of the property of the bondholders, and calls upon the other bondholders to refuse to give their assent to it. Should they, however, give their assent, his property will be confiscated-where then is his individuality? Should they not give their assent, what becomes of the property and the individuality of those favoring reorganization?
In neither case is there any appeal to individuality or a recognition of individual rights. The appeal is to a majority of bonds, controlled by a few. Should these decide for reorganization, then reorganization it will be. Should they decide against reorganization, then reorganization it will not be. The individual will not count, but the majority of the bonds of the few controlling the corporation will.
Capitalism is a fraud within a fraud. Proclaiming itself individualistic, it organizes collectively in order to promote the aims of a few.
Socialism, on the other hand, is genuineness itself. Believing that industry is collective in organization and operation, it proclaims itself in favor of collective ownership and control.
By these means it would secure to labor the products of its toil, now confiscated by the few, and, in this way, preserve to the workers, the majority of the population, a greater individuality than that which they now attain.
With freedom from the economic pressure due to the capitalist control of industry, such as socialism alone can provide (since it is in accord with evolution), individuality will achieve proportions hitherto unattained.