Talk about whatever, respecting the rules established by Lemmygrad. Failing to comply with the rules will grant you a few warnings, insisting on breaking them will grant you a beautiful shiny banwall.
A community for comrades to chat and talk about whatever doesn't fit other communities
I like the list for the most part and believe that the decisions for what to cut and what to keep in each section are well-reasoned.
My main concern is with whether too much is being asked from Nia Frome's 5-10 minute "Tankies" article.
The way I see it is that while the first two sections do more than a good enough job of correcting misconceptions about Marxism, they do not do an adequate job (in my opinion) of addressing the 'elephant in the room' for most people, which is AES.
Good point. I do include Why Marxism? as this also directly confronts the question of AES (even Iran and the Russian Federation), which was the primary purpose of including it alongside Why Socialism? When viewed as a back-to-back contextualization of AES and an explanation of support and critical support, I feel that it's stronger than just "Tankies" on its own.
If the reader makes it to Stalin and actually reads Dialectical and Historical Materialism, then this helps dramatically in humanizing the soviets. By the time they make it to the section on Cultural Hegemony, they will be well-equipped to confont the brainworms of Western Marxism Jones Maonel rightly attacks.
Do you agree with this assessment, or do you think I need to add something more? I was at most considering adding "Yellow Parenti" to the intro section, as Blackshirts and Reds is far too long to keep the list under the 25 hour limit I increased to.
I don't disagree. Admittedly, it's a bit difficult to put myself in the shoes of a lib who's been exposed to this list for the first time. Different people would be curious about it for different reasons.
I hope you're right that reading the works in the first section back-to-back would be enough to motivate them to read further.
I would rather aim for 20 hours as the goal as opposed to 25. If I were in your shoes, I would add "Yellow Parenti" at the end of a section (maybe after the checkpoint) as a "strong recommendation" and just not count it to the hour count because it would technically be "optional".
I had 20 hours originally, but felt it necessary to include the topics of cultural hegemony and social progress. Is there anything you can recommend trimming? It's around 22-23 hours right now, not 25.
Yeah, that's understandable of course. It becomes very difficult to find anything to trim once we get to this level. The only thing I can think of, and I would pose this as a question rather than a suggestion, is "Value, Price, and Profit" absolutely necessary for the basic course? The "Political Economy" section would certainly feel quite thin if it's excluded.
Aside from that, I don't think much can be done in terms of cutting things out. Maybe if there are shorter alternatives to works such as "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism", or a couple essays to replace "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific", but at this point we're resorting to quite extreme measures.
I believe the only way to go beyond this, which is completely out of scope of this project, is to create more works such as the Abriged version of "What is to be done" and use those for introduction rather than the unaltered classics.
My original had Value, Price, and Profit left off, actually! It's the only one I'm seriously considering re-trimming. I added it back because it helps provide a firmer base for economic understanding, making sure the Political Economy section isn't under-developed. I'm 50/50 on taking it out.
I agree, if there were more abridged versions of texts like Imperialism, The State and Revolution, and Foundations of Leninism I'd be very satisfied with cutting ~3 hours out of this list and bringing it back down to 20 hours, while still keeping the additions.
Big fan of the checkpoint questions! Having questions pre-made after the lecture has always helped me in my learning as I immediately got feedback on if I understood the material properly. Especially if answers are provided too, but that might be harder.
That's a good idea, adding answers! I can't do nested spoilers in Lemmy's markdown (I think), but that might be something to consider. Thanks!
spoiler you can
i think
spoiler actually?
do that
:::
ayy! That's pretty cool, may overhaul the questions to include answers as well!
I thought I could go ahead and answer all the of the checkpoint questions as someone who has gone through all of the material, repeatedly, throughout my life. I don't think a single individual response is going to change much, but it could perhaps serve as a data point to see if I understand what the question is asking clearly.
Why do you want to study Marxism-Leninism?
want to help create a world where those who see no other option besides death can be told to live in earnest.
How can it be helpful in your present life?
I think ML thought is the best possible method that has been tried, at least so far, in historical attempts, to create such a world.
Why should we establish a socialist society?
Our current society doesn't make any sense. For instance: Health minister telling doctors that they will have to put up with patients dying in line, while our city is allocating budget things nobody asks for. Even protesting against.
A socialist society would make the world more lively for everyone, by addressing roto causes.
What historical context gave rise to Marxism?
I believe the way to Marxism was paved by the advancement of our means of production. The industrial revolution. Feudalism was replaced by Capitalism, Marx, himself a student of Dialectics, studied capitalism using dialectical approach, he noticed underlying contradictions in Capitalism, his taught became popular as the contradictions started materializing in everyday lives, of workers.
What are the 3 major components of Marxism?
Social components - How stuff relate to one another
Economic components - How is the stuff managed
Ideological components - How our means of producing stuff influences the stuff we believe in.
In your country, and in your personal life, what social class do you belong to and who is in control of society?
I would belong in the Lumpenproletariat. The people dictating the society would be the Bourgeoise.
What are some examples of idealist explanations, and what would the materialist explanation be?
An ideologue explains that there's a group of dangerous people out there. For instance, based on how they speak. A materialist explanation would seek the cause for why the group is behaving the way they are. Perhaps the group aren't allowed to grow their own food and have to either perish or resort to violence, perhaps it's because the lack education and don't know any better.
What are some ways you presently think metaphysically, that you can make more dialectical?
I can't think of any. Which is a problem and idk how I can resolve it.
How can you apply dialectical and historical materialism in your daily life?
Dialectical materialism: Simple use cause would be to not be guided by my emotions, instead seek to be grounded, reasonable, evaluate the situation around me and do the opposite of what my heart tells me to. Am I scared? I should aim to be brave. Am I lonely? I should aim for a community.
Historical materialism: Learning the history of the people's around me can help find the cause for why things are the way they are. What historical developments contributed to the way current existence is ordered. Why does one group hate another?
spoiler What are the qualitative aspects of value? What are the quantitative aspects?
Quantitative = How many commodities can we produce? Who is producing them? Why are they being produced? How much stuff we need to produce them? Qualitative = How much can a commodity be sold for? Who are we selling it to? Wy are we selling it? How do we split the dough? :::
How can the contradiction of class struggle be negated?
If you don't want to resolve the class struggles you could guard your vault with violence, give out borrowed life to plant it where it's absence is causing havoc, put on a theater to distract your victims.
What is the level of development of capitalism in your country, and the stage of class struggle?
It's Mixed. We have socialism in the walls and capitalism in the sheets, at odds with one another. F.ex
Can the state wither away locally, or must it be global?
The state must learn to wither away on it's own, when global relations make it possible.
What are some examples of current utopian socialist movements?
Solar-Punk, Anarcho-Primitivists, Liberalism(?)
What determines if a country is socialist or capitalist? Is it based on ratio, is it about purity, or is it about the dominant aspect of the economy, and the class in control of the state?
A socialist country is a country that never lets profit trump over people, where even if such an action is necessary, it is only temporary and able to self-correct.
In the modern era of the US Empire’s decay, how does this impact the global struggle for socialism?
Empire's decay makes the reach of their tentacles weaker, enabling the raise of Socialist movements in places such as Sahel.
Why is it important that we understand imperialism in this level of depth?
Because Capitalism within the Empire is unsustainable without Imperialism, if Imperialism went away it would implode and destroy itself. If we understand how it functions, we can help fight against it. Therefore fighting against Capitalism.
Is your country in the imperial core, periphery, or semi-periphery? How does this impact your local class struggle, and position within the international class struggle?
I'm the core, the Baltic States. It means I'm on a tight leash, but I also benefit from the spoils of the empire. It's important to keep that in mind, find way to develop force and assist the causes in the periphery however possible. Strategically.
What are the most important immediate tasks in your nation?
Find each other and organize. Build productive forces.
Is nationalism in countries dominated by imperialism reactionary, or progressive?
In a case like Cuba Nationalism has been progressive.
Are any parties local to you adopting consistent Leninist organizing methods?
No
How do we fight bourgeois cultural hegemony?
By building alternative forces of production, using those forces to spread counter-hegemonic ideals. Like opening a news station that broadcasts alternative view points targeted at dissatisfied citizens, looking for a solution.
How does the revelation that people are not simply “brainwashed” but instead willingly complicit impact how we organize and agitate?
We can't just fight ideology with ideology, socialism needs more than ideals. There is no secret 3rd way.
Reflecting on the topic of intellectuals, what are some other examples of “subclasses” that do not form a class-in-itself, but are produced by broader classes?
Subclasses are those who are stuck between two (or more) opposing class interests. Take a member of the Shadow Class as some may call it.
On one hand they're people who experience the horrors of our world and are most easily propelled into action.
On the other hand, they could be bought the most easily and stab you in the back.
Why is it important to have an intersectional outlook?
Because if you don't you'll fall into reactionary taught. To put it simply, Whiteness is Whiteness, Bourgeoise Whiteness is not Whiteness, Transness is not Whiteness, but you could be Bourgeoise x White x Trans or Proletarian x White x Trans or Bourgeoise x Non-White x Trans and so on.
How do aspects like queer identity, disability, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and more impact the class struggle between capitalists and proletarians?
Capitalism creates bigotry to prolong itself and prevent the resolution of contradictions. If you are doing identity battles you are not fighting capitalism. You are fighting for Capitalism.
Why are organizations that exclude marginalized groups weaker than ones that fight for marginalized groups?
Marginalized groups are part of the most radical elements of society. If they are not co-opted by organizations, then someone else will or they'll be a force of Chaos, more than likely which will be taken advantage of by the class conscious Bourgeoise.
I think you're choices on reading material are quite excellent, at least for the English world. I can't recommend you what to change tho' I think my list would have to be different if I wanted to share it around my communities locally.
Thank you very much for taking the time to answer the checkpoint questions, comrade!
I really appreciate the post and I'm using it! For a long term project, it would be fantastic if there were audio versions for each and then that made into a tankie tube playlist. I do take advantage of audiobooks when available
Thanks! That's indeed a goal, I usually check tankie.tube first, and then YouTube as a fallback. Some don't have any recordings though, sadly, so a playlist isn't on the table just yet. It is planned to move the YouTube works over to Tankie.Tube eventually, though!
Nice work! I'm bad at complimenting, but let me make clear I appreciate the effort.
That out of the way, you asked for feedback, not praise. Keep in mind some of my feedback is based on my own experience of learning, which is probably very different from native-English-speakers in the Imperial Core, which are probably the intended target.
The Feedback
Seems to me that this is too heavy on the "Marxism" side and too light on the "Leninism". There's a lot of really good texts on theory and developing a Marxist understanding of the world, but very little regarding party work and praxis.
Foundations of Leninism is a certified chonker but it's pulling all the weight there in the Leninism section (which should rightfully be the biggest), whereas WitbD is a really messy read without context and frankly Roderic Day's text is extremely lacking by portraying Lenin, in his words, as "a world-class observer and theoretician" rather than a dedicated party builder. I'd replace that one with something else that focuses on Lenin's practice instead of his analytical abilities. Lenin's too often reduced to just "writer of the Imperialism book", and I think this inclusion here does his theory a disservice. It's also so short that even Existential Comics twitter thread would be a decent drop-in replacement, but there's probably some better short biography out there.
On that note, I actually think a biographical summary is the wrong start here, as Leninism is not the study of Lenin the human. It'd be more useful to add "Where to Begin?" as it serves as a fine preamble to WitbD, and really drives home the necessity of (some form of) a Party Newspaper, something that is ignored by many MLs today. Even then, readers might come out without even knowing the names of key concepts such as "Democratic Centralism" as the old texts use different names.
I'm not sure what would be good inclusions here. Huey's "The Correct Handling of a Revolution", maybe? I see that in the advanced study guide you have included texts from Liu Shaoqi, which I haven't read so can't opine much, but maybe one of those could be included here? Besides that the best I can offer is Mao's "Rectify the Party's Style of Work" and "On the Correct Handling" as shorter texts exemplifying Leninism.
I think this section is critical enough that making it bigger wouldn't amount to bloat. Specially since a lot of leftists fall into the orthodox Marxist trap of knowing a lot, except for the knowledge of how to actually do something. There's also a genuine lack of post-Third-International texts in English on the topic, so compiling them would be rather useful.
On that note, on cultural hegemony. I'm quite biased due to heavily disagreeing with him lately, but I'd just scrap Jones Manoel there and replace him with something from his actual sources. His video essays naturally end up being very verbose while saying very little, which is fine for daily youtube videos but not for theory learning. And this is not even close to being his best video essay, so I don't understand why it got picked up so hard by the Anglosphere. I'd go with Losurdo's "Flight From History" or even "Western Marxism" if length is not an issue. "La Sinistra Assente" ("The Absent Left") would actually be perfect here, but I only realised now by trying to find the English name that it has only been translated to Spanish and Portuguese, but never English.
Now the minor nitpicks.
Section 4's checkpoint question on "level of development" makes little sense today without an understanding of imperialism and/or combined and uneven development, which is a section that would only be read afterwards. In those texts (and in general) Marx wrote about industrialising European countries which followed primitive accumulation, but today for most countries the trajectory is different due to the uneven development of imperialism.
In section 2, I'd swap the order of Biographical Sketch and Three Sources, as they deal with the same subject and the latter is much shorter and summarised. Three Sources serves as a neat introduction, but if one read and understood the entirety of Biographical Sketch beforehand it won't add much.
I feel like Part I of Capital Vol. I should be in either this or the advanced guide. It's self-contained enough to be read by itself, lays out the fundamentals really well and I don't think Inferno does a good enough job of summarising it considering the reader is already going through other complex texts through these guides.
Section 5's first checkpoint question opens the can of worms of "Socialism in One Country" that I think would be counterproductive given the texts in question are only from before the Soviet Revolution.
I actually sat down to read redsails's MER in order to give credence to my kneejerk rejection of it, but it surprised me by getting me to agree with most its claims. From the way I've seen people talk about it, I always assumed it was some typical first-world defeatist essay about how even the most lumpen of proletariat in the imperial core is metaphysically counter-revolutionary due to some supposed personal benefit from imperialism and settlerism. Instead it's a pretty fair critique of the elitism of "free thinking rebels" who see themselves above the "brainwashed masses". It's right there in the title, damn it! I think the checkpoint question about it could be more leading in pointing away from first-world defeatism, but in reality I really just wanted to comment on how you really shouldn't judge a book by its cover lol.
And lastly, it feels odd that the Social-Liberation section has nothing from the BPP.
And now to make this a big complaint sandwich: Nice work! I'm sorry, I'm just a complainy person!
I’m quite biased due to heavily disagreeing with him lately, but I’d just scrap Jones Manoel there and replace him with something from his actual sources. His video essays naturally end up being very verbose while saying very little, which is fine for daily youtube videos but not for theory learning. And this is not even close to being his best video essay, so I don’t understand why it got picked up so hard by the Anglosphere.
Tbh I'm also Brazilian, and I also often disagree with Jones, but it's a pretty good essay. It's short, clear, and gets the point across. He has way more verbose video essays lol
This is fantastic critique, thank you comrade! Genuinely, this is what I've been seeking, some genuine teardown of my list so I can patch weakpoints and holes. Before continuing, I do want to say that my goal is to keep it under 20-25 hours of reading, specifically because anything longer than that and people start to skim or lose momentum unless they have a study circle. This is the biggest obstacle to making a "comprehensive" guide.
That out of the way, you asked for feedback, not praise. Keep in mind some of my feedback is based on my own experience of learning, which is probably very different from native-English-speakers in the Imperial Core, which are probably the intended target.
To be clear, my target is primarily native-English speakers, but my intention is to be internationalist and flexible in application. As such, where I can bring in more applicability to the global south, I want to do so.
Seems to me that this is too heavy on the “Marxism” side and too light on the “Leninism”. There’s a lot of really good texts on theory and developing a Marxist understanding of the world, but very little regarding party work and praxis.
Fair point! My intention to keep reading time low enough is the crux of my issue, here. My "advanced section" was my original guide, but it was so long hardly anyone finished it. My goal instead is to get more completions for the basics, to prevent burnout. That being said, I think you're right, adding more works on party organization would indeed be worth it.
whereas WitbD is a really messy read without context and frankly Roderic Day’s text is extremely lacking by portraying Lenin, in his words, as “a world-class observer and theoretician” rather than a dedicated party builder.
Interesting criticism, and on that note, I'm not opposed to swapping it for more works on party building.
I'm not sure what would be good inclusions here. Huey’s “The Correct Handling of a Revolution”, maybe? I see that in the advanced study guide you have included texts from Liu Shaoqi, which I haven’t read so can’t opine much, but maybe one of those could be included here? Besides that the best I can offer is Mao’s “Rectify the Party’s Style of Work” and “On the Correct Handling” as shorter texts exemplifying Leninism
Excellent suggestions, especially Huey P. Newton's text as it's only 10 minutes long. I enjoy Liu Shaoqi's work, but need to revisit them before inclusion. I love both of the Mao texts you picked out, so I'll see how long they are.
On that note, on cultural hegemony. I’m quite biased due to heavily disagreeing with him lately, but I’d just scrap Jones Manoel there and replace him with something from his actual sources. His video essays naturally end up being very verbose while saying very little, which is fine for daily youtube videos but not for theory learning. And this is not even close to being his best video essay, so I don’t understand why it got picked up so hard by the Anglosphere. I’d go with Losurdo’s “Flight From History” or even “Western Marxism” if length is not an issue. “La Sinistra Assente” (“The Absent Left”) would actually be perfect here, but I only realised now by trying to find the English name that it has only been translated to Spanish and Portuguese, but never English.
Unfortunately, both of Losurdo's works are several hours long each. I'm very curious about La Sinistra Assente, is this an article or a full book? For now, Jones Manoel's essay serves the quite important role of helping de-brainworm the westerners reading my list, who overwhelmingly despise AES countries. If I can successfully replace it with a work of similar length, then I may do so.
Section 4’s checkpoint question on “level of development” makes little sense today without an understanding of imperialism and/or combined and uneven development, which is a section that would only be read afterwards. In those texts (and in general) Marx wrote about industrialising European countries which followed primitive accumulation, but today for most countries the trajectory is different due to the uneven development of imperialism.
Point well-taken, I'll scrap it and replace it.
In section 2, I’d swap the order of Biographical Sketch and Three Sources, as they deal with the same subject and the latter is much shorter and summarised. Three Sources serves as a neat introduction, but if one read and understood the entirety of Biographical Sketch beforehand it won’t add much.
I disagree here, actually. The utility of Three Sources is in refocusing the reader on the coming sections, summarizing the key points they just learned. Biography lays out a story of Marx and his method, while Three Sources re-centers the reader on the coming sections. Just my reasoning for it.
I feel like Part I of Capital Vol. I should be in either this or the advanced guide. It’s self-contained enough to be read by itself, lays out the fundamentals really well and I don’t think Inferno does a good enough job of summarising it considering the reader is already going through other complex texts through these guides.
All 3 volumes of Capital will be in the advanced guide. You can think of the current "advanced guide" as the progenitor of the current basic guide, as a stripped down and simplified version of it, and the future, actual "advanced guide" as a fully comprehensive, modular list meant to be pursued as a collection of topics, each topic having its own order, but the order of the topics depending on what the reader needs. This is the utility of An Extremely Condensed Summary of Capital in the basic guide.
Section 5’s first checkpoint question opens the can of worms of “Socialism in One Country” that I think would be counterproductive given the texts in question are only from before the Soviet Revolution.
Interesting point, do you have any suggestions on what could help flesh that out? If not, I'll take the question out and let the sleeping dog lie, so to speak.
I actually sat down to read redsails’s MER in order to give credence to my kneejerk rejection of it, but it surprised me by getting me to agree with most its claims. From the way I’ve seen people talk about it, I always assumed it was some typical first-world defeatist essay about how even the most lumpen of proletariat in the imperial core is metaphysically counter-revolutionary due to some supposed personal benefit from imperialism and settlerism. Instead it’s a pretty fair critique of the elitism of “free thinking rebels” who see themselves above the “brainwashed masses”. It’s right there in the title, damn it! I think the checkpoint question about it could be more leading in pointing away from first-world defeatism, but in reality I really just wanted to comment on how you really shouldn’t judge a book by its cover lol.
Agreed! It's useful in eliminating the defeatism of fighting "brainwashing" as a concept. I rely on it pretty heavily when trying to engage with people on Marxism-Leninism.
And lastly, it feels odd that the Social-Liberation section has nothing from the BPP.
I actually had a work from Huey P. Newton in there originally, concerning the intersectionality, but it mainly focused on alignment with gay and queer communities, not black liberation. That's why I swapped it out for the Combahee River Collective Statement, as despite not being Marxist inherently, it still provides that valuable layer to the discussion. I may add back in something from the BPP if I can find one of suitable length.
Thanks for the feedback!
Unfortunately, both of Losurdo’s works are several hours long each. I’m very curious about La Sinistra Assente, is this an article or a full book?
It's a full book, but the preface reads like its own short essay. Sadly I can only find it online in either Portuguese or Spanish (it's probably out there in Italian too but my Italian is non-existent). Not sure if machine translation works well, but worth a try.
https://www.marxists.org/portugues/losurdo/2015/05/28.htm
https://www.elviejotopo.com/topoexpress/la-izquierda-ausente/
As a sidenote, it's really annoying how little of Losurdo's work is freely available online or translated to English. His absence is too conveniently occupied by infrared folks and even Dugin.
Thanks, I'll give it a read! Understanding the limitations, of course. And I totally agree, what little of Losurdo I've read in contrast to his whole canon makes me enormously frustrated, especially as his work is valuable in combatting western Marxist defeatism.