Source: [marxmail] Lenin on the Train
The anniversary of Lenin is a moment to reflect on history, the history of marxism, and its failures.
But the day after the birthday we need to move on from Leninism. The fascination with Lenin can forestall the need, necessity, of a new left with a new framework. A close look shows that Lenin’s moment was very distant from ours and the marxism he espoused should be upgraded to something better. In the final analysis his cadre despised liberalism and democracy, grew in the shadow of tsarism and gave that a kind of rebirth in the false view of communism that came to the fore.
Lenin must be seen in the context of the infamous Civil War that ended up spoiling everything and injected a terrifying and unreasonable violence by all parties, a factor suppressed from sentimental readings of history, and which cursed the whole of bolshevism throughout.
We need to be thinking in a different, which is the reformism versus revolution debate: we can take the revolutionary question in a different way, and in any case the issue of revolution is more to do with historical circumstance than the deliberate intention of revolutionaries. If the revolution comes a new system is going to be a difficult and tricky passage and needs to quite forget leninism….
Speaking a revolutionary socialist one can criticize Lenin and the bolsheviks if only because time has moved on and we are out of time to defend the failures of the marxist past. We confront a very…
Speaking a revolutionary socialist one can criticize Lenin and the bolsheviks if only because time has moved on and we are out of time to defend the failures of the marxist past. We confront a very different situation than that of Tsarist Russia the world of Lenin had to deal with.
That context is misleading to the left now and will lead to false conclusions.
We confront a stage of mature capitalism (mature to rotten, some might say), and not an industrializing monarchic armed with a hopeless muddle of theory about the need to industrialize first followed by Lenin’s (intelligent) refusal of such nonsense. The whole context of the early socialist world will mislead us now.
It is a mistake to constantly defend the past here. Drop the past and start over, time is short and Lenin is not our model.
150 years ago on 22 April, Vladimir Lenin, the great Marxist and leader of the Russian Revolution, was born. For over a century, there has been a sustained campaign to slander his name and distort his ideas, ranging from bourgeois historians and apologists to various reformists, liberals and assorted anarchists. Their task has been to discredit Lenin, Marxism and the Russian Revolution in the interests of the “democratic” rule of bankers and capitalists.
As we used to say as kids playing cowboys/indians or mock battles, ‘We now take prisoners, beg for mercy’…That will have to pass for backslapping reformist ‘Comrades’ as salutation.
Our ‘Red Forty-eight Group’ is a leftist party group abstraction whose fundamental note so to speak reaffirms the revolutionary path but in a new way, and without as such rejecting the reformists. Like him or not Bernstein struck a dialectical chord that was unstoppable and in the end we can affirm revolutionary socialism and do nothing while the reformists busy beaver civil society’s mock socialism…so, can we evolve to socialism? as we said, ‘beg for mercy’. Continue reading “R48G: revolution, reform…?”
This is an invaluable essay, yet one we should critique, because it actually attempts, after a fashion, to consider the actual process of social construction in the wake of ‘revolution’. As we see the whole subject suddenly stumbles into complexities of all kinds. Let us note to start in passing that ‘class struggle’ is not the motor of history. We always caution about statements about historical dynamics. Marxism got it wrong, along with most other attempts. This needs more discussion elsewhere.
The motor of history can only be approximated: our methods of the eonic model suggests a better approach…The macro transitions there are ‘revolutions’ after a fashion, but far more complex…
But we might reiterate our warning Continue reading ” Revolutions in action”
Source: When workers armed – Redline
Red Forty-eight Group: now or never…
February 29th, 2016
The world isn’t ready for neo-communism, but it wasn’t/isn’t ready for either social democracy or, gasp, socialism as referenced by Sanders, the reason it forever goes into ‘next election’ mode. But Sanders has shown that the times have changed: a new public is stirring. But the world has never been ready to confront the nature of economic dysfunction and the real and intrinsic failure of capitalism in a crisis of increasingly desperate climate change. So the point is to prompt the original idea of ‘what to do’ inherited from the successors to the French Revolution who saw that a theory of economy and class was needed: presto, Marx. But the idea of communism predates Marx who is therefore in principle what we must be, inheritors of the original idea. Continue reading “Now or never”
Source: The Democratic Socialist Cul-de-sac: A Critical Look at The Socialist Manifesto – COSMONAUT
This is an engaging critique of the reformist path and it is important, essential, for leftists to try to present the basics of revolutionary transformation, but the problem seems to be that while reformism can be critiqued for its failure the revolutionary framework is equally open to such criticism: if the leninist path itself failed just what is being pointed to as an exemplar for the left? The whole dilemma needs to be reexamined and those who preach the revolution sermon need to recast their thinking without citing russian revolution, a record of confusion, failure and finally stalinism.
Despite our critiques,this remains a classic piece
The Marxist theory of the state and the tasks of the proletariat in the revolution
Source: The State and Revolution