• Camarada Forte@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    16 days ago

    As I said ML is not a valid term in my opinion and historically it was used after the establishing and banning of the “left opposition”, especially by Stalin.

    Stalin, you say? The Cuban, Vietnamese, Chinese, Korean and many African revolutions were all led by people who called themselves Marxists-Leninists. Strange coincidence, huh? It’s like “Lenin” had a massive importance in terms of revolutionary practice, perhaps?

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

      And? Lenin had and has still massive importance even for groups who splitted with the SU or those opposition right or left which where there for a while. So answer me, what are you trying to imply? And of course Stalin, because he is an important figure. ML simply don’t just refer to Marx and Lenin and I already wrote about that more concrete in another comment of mine

      • Camarada Forte@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        So answer me, what are you trying to imply?

        I’m implying that those who care too much about trying to remove the “Leninist” from Marxist-Leninist are people who do not understand the importance of Lenin. Or perhaps they do and they are doing on purpose like classic revisionists. First comes “why Leninism?” before “why Marxism?”

        • Soviet Pigeon@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 days ago

          Well, I don’t want to be rude, but where the fuck did I want remove especially Lenin in his importance? I am talking about, that ML is simply not concrete enough and therefore not a term I can work with, only use it in a vague definition, where I ignore the others important figures after him, which added unique thoughts and theories. Referring to myself and talking about communism, the term “marxism” is still something I prefer to use, you can not think about marxism without Lenin. In another comment I explained, that I still use ML where it is needed so someone can still understand me. I don’t see any proof, that the way how I handle it is anywhere some revisionist move, where I want to remove Lenin and then probably Marx. The only thing I see is, that I use marxism or some term which can cover the uniqueness of a important person in the history of ML

          • Camarada Forte@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            15 days ago

            Well, I don’t want to be rude, but where the fuck did I want remove especially Lenin in his importance?

            Right in the fuck where you insist Marxism-Leninism is not a valid term. I don’t care if you use “Marxist” with your friends and family, but I do care if you claim it’s not a valid term and use the shittiest explanation ever to defend that. We’ve seen revisionists and opportunists everywhere in history trying their best to distance themselves from Lenin, only to distance themselves from Marx later on. Fuck off with that bullshit.