• Camarada Forte@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Marxist-Leninist is not valid term in my opinion, because Lenin is the continuation of Marx.

    You underestimate the relevance and importance of Lenin. No, Lenin is not a continuation of Marx, Lenin is Marx in practice. It’s clear by your rambling that, by stripping “Lenin”, that you have no care for revolutionary practice. What you call yourself is irrelevant, but to claim the term is invalid is just an spectacle of ignorance. At this point, you should very well stop calling yourself a “Marxist”, even. 😉

    • Soviet Pigeon@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      You underestimate the relevance and importance of Lenin

      Do I? Where? By saying that I would call myself Marxist and not add more things because to it or just by talking about “Marxism” and not “Marxisim-Leninism” in general? That’s stupid.

      Lenin is not a continuation of Marx, Lenin is Marx in practice

      And therefore not a continuation? Mutual exclusive? Some would argue, that Lenin had nothing to do with Marx, like some pseudo-left might do it, but I don’t. Lenin is the continuation of Marx and of course Marx in practice.

      It’s clear by your rambling that, by stripping “Lenin”, that you have no care for revolutionary practice.

      I just always talk about Marxism as generally term, not adding Engels or Lenin. If this is your proof, that I don’t care for revolutionary practice, then revolutionary praxis probably means not much for you.

      What you call yourself is irrelevant, but to claim the term is invalid is just an spectacle of ignorance.

      I already explained often enough, that ML is still not a valid term for me, it doesnt even stop by Lenin and goes beyond the developments that occurred after his death. Where is the ignorance? That I use a different words which probably makes no difference at all and means the same?

      At this point, you should very well stop calling yourself a “Marxist”, even. 😉

      Thanks for the advice, great analysis at all. By thinking that ML is not valid term and others are better, while I am using ML in discussions, I am probably not a Marxist at all, but a full blood liberal. I will now throw everything away, immigrate to the USA as fast as I can, so I can vote for a party which supports genocide.

      • Camarada Forte@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Do I? Where? By saying that I would call myself Marxist and not add more things because to it or just by talking about “Marxism” and not “Marxisim-Leninism” in general? That’s stupid.

        By insisting on saying the term was invalid, so it’s not about what you call yourself. I’m explaining to you that is not only valid, but essential. It’s not just a label, it’s a political orientation. “Marxism” is broad, Marxism-Leninism is more specific and to the point.

        I already explained often enough, that ML is still not a valid term for me, it doesnt even stop by Lenin and goes beyond the developments that occurred after his death. Where is the ignorance?

        The fact that you are insisting on this discussion and your position is a political statement. The fact that you insist it’s an “invalid term” is either a presentation of your ignorance or cynicism. You could argue Marx is a continuation of Hegel and call yourself a Hegelian for what it’s worth. Why don’t you call yourself a Hegelian? Why call yourself Marxist at all?

        • Soviet Pigeon@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          “Marxism” is broad, Marxism-Leninism is more specific and to the point.

          It is broad, ML being more concrete still has the lack of being broad, since it tries to cover other historical splits which occurred.

          The fact that you are insisting on this discussion and your position is a political statement.

          I am just answering comments, simply not ignoring the replies. Since there is also the way to be proven wrong, I don’t see the need to ignore.

          You could argue Marx is a continuation of Hegel and call yourself a Hegelian for what it’s worth. Why don’t you call yourself a Hegelian? Why call yourself Marxist at all?

          Because there is an important breaking point between Marx and Hegel which also falls into contradiction between each other. So why not Marxist-Leninist? Because in my understanding this would mean, that it simply stops by the later one and is not going beyond this. My collected works of Stalin are even from the soviet “Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin” Institute and this to much in my opinion, by simply adding every name. So I came to the conclusion, that ML is not valid term, because it stops at an point, including the absolute importance or Lenin but not what was after that.

          • Camarada Forte@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            18 hours ago

            So why not Marxist-Leninist? Because in my understanding this would mean, that it simply stops by the later one and is not going beyond this.

            Does Marxism stop at Marx? 😒

            • Soviet Pigeon@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              Hi, I cant continue this discussion any longer, because of some message in a comment somewhere, that I will be muted if I keep engaging. Like, seriously discussing the validity of this term. That’s a pity, since a long comment appeared which tries to explain why my position is wrong, but there is probably not much one can do about it here.