Very recently I’ve been questioning Marxism-Leninism and MZT, after a very good friend of mine has told me they’re considering Maoism themselves, and after I’ve seen many former M-Ls become either MLMs or Hoaxhaists, in some rarer cases. My question to anyone who reads this, regardless of tendency, is so; do you think Marxism-Leninism is more equipped to deal with the modern proletariat’s liberation, or does that fall on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, rendering Marxism-Leninism/MZT revisionist? Respond with your case for either in the comments section.
And if I may add, this is my first post on this site!
Hello. The only addition i would make is that Maoism is not exactly marxism leninism first and foremost. Real maoism, the one of Mao ze dong, is actually Chinese nationalism. The Communist Party of China is still a maoist organization. The CPC, Mao included, were/are chinese nationalists firsts, communists second.
It is not, they follow Marxism-Leninism with Mao-Zedong-Thought, which is different from Maoism.
Please re read what i wrote. I wrote real Maoism, which is, obviusly, what Mao did and write. Someone in Peru or India can claim the mantle of ‘Real Maoism’, but i consider real maoism the maoism the person whom the ‘word’ maoism denotes.
Obviusly, i dont consider Gonzaolism real Maoism, since as i wrote, real Maoism is chinese nationalism. The CPC is the sole and true authentic maoist organization. The day CPC stops being Maoist, is the day the CPC will not exist as a party, and China wont exist as a country. The only thing which keeps alive the thing we call ‘China’ is the Communist Party of China, and thus, Maoism.
There is a reason why Mao’s face is in the chinese money, for everyone to be reminded daily what Maoism is and represents. No Maoism means no china and thus no chinese money. The CPC really reminds daily to their people what the CPC is and the role they play on keeping alive the Project China.
Maoism and MZT are already well-defined terms, and trying to reverse their meaning will just lead to confusion. Not to mention that the CPC itself uses the term MZT (eg in the Chinese constitution).
And there is also a good reason why MZT is not called Maoism: while Marxism analyses capitalism, and Lenin analyses imperialism, there is no qualitatively new development of capitalism which Mao could have analysed. Instead, he applied Marxism-Leninism to the material conditions of China.
I disagree, but okay.
Oh, of course it is your right. Perhaps a question you could ask yourself to ponder over the weekend is where Marxism-Leninism fits into supporting Pinochet, Pakistan against Bagladesh, and commiting to an alliance with the US to kill of USSR. Now unite these facts with a reasoning: If CPC was ML first and foremost, they could never done such a thing. Thus, the only logical conclusion must be fund somewhere outside of Marxism-Leninism or global communism.
See you around comrade :)