«12. . .567891011»
1, Because Engels was more of an editor and friend who expanded on Marx's ideas.
2, Theory vs practise.
3, Google it, we're not chefs here.
1.Marxism includes the works of Engels, don't ask me why but marx is more famous for some reason
2. Leninism is Marxism but more developed, focusing more on imperialism and the changing conditions of it's time, to my knowledge Marxism was more of a critique of capitalism than really theories on how to overthrow it, although marx and Engels were both very clear about the fact that violent revolution was necessary, and Lenin dealt a lot more with that
Engels also wrote a lot of his own works which were very important for the development of Marxism though
thanks
how do you google something :))) (jk)
Anyone who identifies as leftist is welcome here to learn provided their intent is learning, however this is a project of the NSLeft. Nations that don't introduce themselves or act out will be ejected, this is a serious region for people who want to learn.
Nations who opted to be "teachers" in last week's poll have been elevated to become the regional officers of the new MSC. Congrats comrades!
I think focussing in on a smaller section or excerpts of such texts would be a more realistic and useful thing. It's better that we discuss it in depth and draw out analysis, criticism, and lessons rather than read whole pamphlets and books which will result in inaction and lack of direction which has plagued previous attempts to form NSLeft reading circles.
Marxist Scholar Vanguard, Books and bombs, and Che in the msc
One way I was thinking we could do it is maybe pick one text per reading period and then have each "teacher" (or any other member involved who's interested) pick an excerpt from the text that they provide commentary on, whether that be elaboration, criticism, highlighting relevance to certain current conditions, and of course questions and confusion. Then this will prompt response and discussion to each other's critiques and questions.
On the poll I think maybe a 4-5 week period will give a little bit more breathing room for some back and forth to occur and for every text to be discussed thoroughly before moving on.
Any leftist is welcome to come here and learn and discuss marxism and marxist analysis with us in good faith, anarchists, democratic socialists, etc included! Books and bombs is also an anarchist and I look forward to hearing their reflections on our discussions. We probably won't be reading anarchist texts however, as that is not the focus of the project.
Marxist Scholar Vanguard, Ubertas, and Books and bombs
I agree, I think this is what we had planned. In my opinion 2 weeks is plenty of time to spend on any topic, as it stretches out to 3 or 4 weeks, people will get bored/lose interest.
What about something like, a "teacher" or volunteer may post; "This week (or 2 or 3) we'll chat about national liberation/colonialism. Here are some works (3-4 paragraphs/a page or two) from Mao" now maybe someone has questions, maybe someone disagrees, maybe someone posts Fannon to further the discussion. Then after the time period (2-3 weeks) we'll pick another topic. Maybe organizing a Union, environmentalism, the dictatorship of the proletariat or the history of Eastern European socialist states.
What do comrades think of this as a plan?
Are there any more volunteer "teachers" who are not from NK?
I think there has to be some sort of mechanism in place if a topic ends up taking more time than we expected, we shouldn't cut it off if there's still important conversations going on
THE DEFENDER ALLIANCE, Ubertas, Books and bombs, and All-union peoples republics
I’m for it :)
Marxist Scholar Vanguard and Che in the msc
Sorry for the wait comrades! I'm Zulanka, a Marxist-Leninist in the US and member of North Korea and The Internationale. I hope to contribute to the furthering of the education of leftists on NS with this project.
I honestly was wanting to have reading groups come out of this, but I think comrade All-union peoples republics' point on focusing on sections to draw out from so as to avoid inaction makes a lot more sense (at least at this point in time). I could see some quality articles as being a springboard for discussion as well and one that's more accessible than an entire book. I would rather have more flexible times around a given topic being more appropriate (with consideration going towards the complexity of said topic and interest in it).
Something I'd like to see is if teachers or folks answering questions can navigate a space between just giving answers off the top of their heads and throwing links at people. We should strive for thoughtful, high-quality answers that engage with the individual asking a question on their level and give them material for further engagement of their own. Everyone here has their own strengths and weaknesses, their own preferences in what they engage with regarding theory, so no one should feel the burden to answer a question if they don't feel they can give a substantial reply.
Marxist Scholar Vanguard, Soviet ganymede, Books and bombs, All-union peoples republics, and 1 otherChe in the msc
For our first lesson, I'd like to bring up
Marxism and (Islam) religion
Mostly because I'd like to pick the brains of the comrades here.
In the West, against racism and Islamophobia we stand for Muslims to have a free and peaceful place to practise their faith. Communists take the line that a "woman wears whatever she wants" so the Burka is permissible. Some radical organizations (some communists) condemn the Burka as a way to control women and condemn Islam for having a backward view on women. So what is the correct political line for the Burka?
Marx is rather vague from what I've read on religion, we know the 20th century communists have stood on both sides of debate (stifling religion in Eastern Europe/ using it to their cause in South America) so it really is a great question.
How does religion fit into a post revolutionary world?
These are two really good works by Lenin on this that I recommend, and it shows that as far as it's relation to praxis and socialist struggle religion is not a black and white issue, something that's usually left out of discussions like this is the existence of a thing called "context"
I know we're not reading whole books in here, which I think is a good thing, but from what I remember these aren't actually all that long, what do my comrades think about analyzing these for the religion discussion?
One big thing that I think it's important to remember, especially for people like me who aren't particularly fans of religion, is that although it is used by capitalists to maintain capitalism, sometimes the struggle against religion is also used to distract people from the struggle against those same capitalists, like what Germany did with the Kulturkampf
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1909/may/13.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/dec/03.htm
Muslims are under attack by the US, and if we're going to struggle against the US than they are going to be important allies, there is a discussion to be had on religious coercion and forced behavior, but really in this context, I don't think that having that discussion is appropriate, if the US made some sort of law attacking Burqas than it would be our duty as socialists to fight against it, in this time and in this context any such law would be a sign of the rise of fascism within the US, which is obviously something that we fight against
«12. . .567891011»
Advertisement