Why against multipolarity
Why against multipolarity
Why against multipolarity despite many socialist state arise after ww1 and even more after ww2 end? I ask this question because I see many people in r/communism view multipolarity negatively.
You're viewing a single thread.
The reddit r/communism is mostly (last I checked) maoist or what we'd consider "ultraleft" here.
If you can share screenshots of what you're referring to, that would help. The tendency here is largely (at least nominally) Marxism-leninism, which isn't the same as that particular subreddit.
yeah, I remember them collectively mourning Gonzalo while /r/genzedong was crabposting
Hah they seethed so hard the r/communism and r/communism101 maoist mods carpet banned everyone who had r/genzedong in their posting history.
Haha I remember that vividly, what a day 🥰
One of the few occasions to celebrate on 9/11 lmao
What's the issue with maoism?
Didn't they get some revolution to happen and get the benefit (or at least a large part of it) to the working class?
Maoists have never had a successful revolution and have never really won lasting gains for the working class.
Now when I say Maoists as in Maoist Ultras I am talking about Gonzalo thought or MLM (Marxism-Leninism-Maoism) as they call themselves usually. I am not talking about ML-MZT or Marxist-Leninist with Mao-Zedong-Thought.
Mao adapted ML thought to China's unique conditions and succeeded. The communist party he helped found (CPC) is now the leading socialist nation and the largest in pure numbers of membership as well as the one of the only ones actively advancing theory (Cuba is also doing some things but smaller given their circumstances). MLM's condemn modern China for not being pure enough. They are a left deviation, the same kind Mao wrote against and condemned at various points. On the other hand they celebrate, venerate and support a deranged man (Gonzalo) who died in prison without leading a successful revolution or doing anything but founding a group of theoretically unsound guerillas who turned to adventurism and violence over substance.
Too many of these MLM's seek glory and adventure instead of service. Of course those in the west would scream and run away at the prospect of having to commit violence themselves but through their purity fetishism they get to condemn all existing communist movements and all capitalists states and put themselves above it all as some imaginary, idealist, superior system. In that way they serve capital and empire. These people have a martyr complex and a martyr worship complex. It is in that way not surprising how attractive they are in the soup of western Christian civilization and thought, such ideas being promulgated as very honorable, attractive, etc in keeping with such philosophies.
They sound a lots like Donglin party at the end of Ming Dynasty.
Thank you! Mapping the names of variant ideas is so hard! Often counterintuitive since branches want to claim the big names for them.
Funnily enough, Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao apparently didn't really want their names appended to the ideas.
In that space, how did ML came to be named that? Was it Lenin's huge body of work and early death to fault?
Lenin's work and Stalin's synthesis and expanding of that work is how we got ML.
Didn't Stalin coin the term?
I always thought based on theory communism was iconoclastic like myself but the usual naming is after figures. I wish the community moved away from that and I don't ever adapt that naming myself. I think naming convention around the time periods of important communist time landmarks would be more suitable but oh well.
Is there like mlm theory? What's their most popular book?
Darkcalling's already answered the question pretty well! I'll point out that MLM's are welcome here, just that most of LG aren't MLM.