On April 22nd, 1870, Vladimir Illyich Ulyanov “Lenin,” hero of the Russian Revolution, and architect of the world’s first Socialist state, was born. His contributions to the Marxist canon and to the revolutionary theory and practice of the proletariat throughout the world carries on to this day, in increasing magnitude. Every passing day, he is vindicated. His analysis of imperialism, the right of nations to self-determination, and revolutionary strategy have played a key role in the past century, and have remained ever-more relevant throughout.

He also loved cats!

Some significant works:

What is to be Done?

Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism

The State and Revolution

“Left-Wing” Communism

The Right of Nations to Self-Determination

Materialism and Empirio-Criticism

The Tax in Kind

Interested in Marxism-Leninism, but don’t know where to start? Check out my “Read Theory, Darn it!” introductory reading list!

  • all4theTomatoes@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I appreciate what other leftists are doing for the cause. As an anarchist, though, I have to interject.

    The idea that a revolution needs to be carried out by a central authority is dangerous, as I’m sure plenty of you know. It doesn’t matter how red your new flag is. We leftists shouldn’t think of our state becoming a “better” state, but rather the abolition of the state altogether. Power concentrated in any form, no matter how well intentioned, inevitably reproduces hierarchy and domination. Our goal shouldn’t be to seize the machine, but to dismantle it and build something radically different: decentralized, cooperative, and rooted in mutual aid. Something we all can get behind.

    I’d love to hear a marxist pov on this. <3

    • m532@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      Our goal should be to seize the machine. The machine is highly valuable. The means of production. The key to communism is the machine; automation.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      Anarchist movements can very easily be hijacked by bad faith actors. Billionaires are reading your literature. But not to become your friend.

    • Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      You should not confuse leftism as synonymous with anarchy and decentralization.

      Decentralization does not work for large scale infrastructure that is needed to make a modern society function. Power concentrated invariably produces hierarchy, but you can still have power divided enough to combat that with a centralized system. Ranked choice voting, sizing your house correctly, and allowing many competing viewpoints to exist through campaign funding laws can stop most of the ills.

      It’s a large mistake to assume that smaller groups of people will not still oppress others. Decentralization aids supremacy groups by allowing them to carve out areas where they have greater control, giving them a stronger foothold to take over society at large.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      As a Marxist-Leninist, the biggest distinction is that Marxists and Anarchists have different views of what the State even is, to begin with. As a consequence, what a society that has abolished the state looks entirely different for Marxists and Anarchists. We can’t all get behind the ideas you posited, specifically decentralization as the basis for the economy.

      For Marxists, the state is an instrument of class oppression, and to eliminate it, you must eliminate class. An important note, class is not hierarchy. There exists inter-class hierarchy, such as bourgeois and proletarian, but also intra-class hierarchy, such as managers and workers. A fully publicly owned and planned global economy is what Marxists envision as “Communism.” Without any property distinctions, there is no class, and thus no need for special bodies of armed men to uphold property distinctions, no need for things like property rights, while things like administration remain.

      This is because Marx’s view of Socialism is as it emerges from Capitalism. As Capitalism advances, large industry emerges, and with it cooperative production and increasing complexity in fewer and fewer firms. Marx therefore saw the Proletariat, growing greater in number and the bourgeoisie lesser and lesser as competition dies out, as taking control and directing this new economy in its own interests. It isn’t about reversing trends into decentralized communes, as in Marx’s eyes, this retains class distinctions, as each commune only owns itself, and thus there is no mechanism for equal ownership across communes, and therefore a necessity for a “state” in each commune to protect these rights and competition between communes for production and trade.

      For Anarchists, the state is about hierarchy. Tackling this is the primary objective. This is why when Anarchists judge Marxists on their ability to abolish what Anarchists percieve as the state, they find Marxists invariably fall flat. However, when Marxists are judged on their own merits and own goals, we find Marxists to be quite successful.

      As a side-note, the vanguard structure is a formalization of what already exists, the politically advanced among the revolutionary class. It isn’t distinct from the revolutionary class. I recommend reading The Tyranny of Structurelessness.

      I over-simplified a ton, but I hope this helps! I can also answer any questions you may have. I used to be an Anarchist myself, so that helps smooth miscommunication.

      I also elaborate on this subject here.

      • valentinesmith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        interesting, thanks for writing it down like this.

        If you allow the random question, is this persistence of class between communes also the reason you shifted from anarchism to Marxism? Because I think you do make a persuasive point and would like to know what changed your trajectory/mind.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 days ago

          No problem!

          To answer your question, I believe the arguments presented by Marx concerning the ever-increasing complexity of production in large-scale industry paving the way for societal progression naturally towards a planned economy to be more than compelling enough for me to question my prejudice against the various existing Socialist states. That spurned on a lot of personal reading on the various Socialist states and more Marxist theory. Strategically, I find Marxism-Leninism has proven itself in theory and in practice, and it continues to get refined and shaped ever further.

    • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Well said. Anarchism has received horrible press at the hands of Big Democracy but many of our current problems are rooted in the concentration of power, money and influence that capitalist societies seem to produce. On the other hand, can we live without the many products and technology that require large scale effort? It feels like that would be a major challenge for any fledgling anarchic society.

    • fakir@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Hey, I’ve argued this exact stance with my Marxist brothers a few times here and here. They seem sure of revolution and against market socialism. Anyways, I’ve created a community for us to talk more about it here - Collective Cake

      And what a coincidence today being a Collective Cake day!