Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46

Thread: What is Revolutionary Marxist?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Michigan, U$A
    Posts
    1,252
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    19

    Default What is Revolutionary Marxist?

    Can a REVOLUTIONARY MARXISTS give me a better view of their group. Explain to me your views, ideologies, and stuff like that.
    Last edited by Bostana; 26th March 2012 at 02:00.
    Yes, we want to make your wife a radical feminist lesbian, we want to forcibly gay marry you to a leatherclad bear, we want to send your kids into white slavery at the court of a black communist dictator, we want to paint your church red with the blood of christian babies, we want to set fire to your ikea and your SUV, we want to rape your labrador with the broken pieces of your white picketed fence.

    We want to wage nuclear war on the nuclear family.
    why? because we are pinko freedom hating commienazi atheist bastards, its just what we do.
    ~psycho

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    817
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I think it's a "non-tendency" Marxist group.

  3. #3
    Workers-Control-Over-Prod's Avatar
    Workers-Control-Over-Prod is offline Libertarian-Authoritarianist Supporter
    Forum Moderator
    Global Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Santa Cruz, California
    Posts
    1,421
    Organisation
    IWW (Industrial Workers of the World)
    Blog Entries
    21
    Rep Power
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bostana View Post
    Can a REVOLUTIONARY MARXISTS give me a better view of their group. Explain to me your views, ideologies, and stuff like that.
    Basically it's just anyone that adheres to Marx's writings more than anyone else.
    "It is necessary for Communists to enter into contradiction with the consciousness of the masses. . . The problem with these Transitional programs and transitional demands, which don't enter into any contradiction with the consciousness of the masses, or try to trick the masses into entering into the class struggle, create soviets - [is that] it winds up as common-or-garden reformism or economism." - Mike Macnair, on the necessity of the Minimum and Maximum communist party Program.

    "You're lucky. You have a faith. Even if it's only Karl Marx" - Richard Burton

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Workers-Control-Over-Prod For This Useful Post:


  5. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    1,350
    Organisation
    IWW
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    It just means that they are marxists that think that they best way towards communism is through a revolution rather than reform. Basically, almost everyone here is a revolutionary marxist.
    Society does not consist of individuals but expresses the sum of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand. ~ Karl Marx


    The state is the intermediary between man and human liberty. ~ Marx

    formerly Triceramarx

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Eisenach, Gotha, & Erfurt
    Posts
    14,026
    Organisation
    Sympathizer re.: Communistisch Platform, WPA, and CPGB (PCC)
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bostana View Post
    Can a REVOLUTIONARY MARXISTS give me a better view of their group. Explain to me your views, ideologies, and stuff like that.
    Are you referring to small-r revolutionary Marxism, or the usergroup?

    If the latter, a number of us are "volunteering" in whatever way we can to jump-start the worker-class movement once again and merge Marxism with this, but actually adapting the entirety of what was once called "Orthodox Marxism" (especially the strategic lines) to modern circumstances. In fact, I'd say that this is the core of small-r revolutionary Marxism.
    "A new centrist project does not have to repeat these mistakes. Nobody in this topic is advocating a carbon copy of the Second International (which again was only partly centrist)." (Tjis, class-struggle anarchist)

    "A centrist strategy is based on patience, and building a movement or party or party-movement through deploying various instruments, which I think should include: workplace organising, housing struggles [...] and social services [...] and a range of other activities such as sports and culture. These are recruitment and retention tools that allow for a platform for political education." (Tim Cornelis, left-communist)

  7. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Die Neue Zeit For This Useful Post:


  8. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    146
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bostana View Post
    Can a REVOLUTIONARY MARXISTS give me a better view of their group. Explain to me your views, ideologies, and stuff like that.
    Putting the word 'revolutionary' before the word 'Marxist' is completely redundant. Marx made it clear he believed in working class revolution. The term is about as useful as 'evolution-accepting Darwinist'. I find the term 'revolutionary Marxist' annoying since it implies there is such a thing as a non-revolutionary Marxist.
    Stalin got it wrong. A million deaths under socialism is an atrocity. A million deaths under capitalism is a statistic.

    'Trotsky explained that a nationalised planned economy needs democracy as the human body needs oxygen.' Alan Woods in a summary of The Revolution Betrayed

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RedAtheist For This Useful Post:


  10. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Kentucky, United States
    Posts
    3,305
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    It's clear that OP is referring to the usergroup which is our resident Orthodox Marxist group.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ostrinski For This Useful Post:


  12. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Southern US
    Posts
    367
    Organisation
    None - Individual
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    A Marxist is revolutionary on it's own terms. Now a Socialist can either be or not be revolutionary depending on what they believe.

    I don't think there are people who are reformist Marxists unless they are just influenced by Marxism and don't really read much Marx.

    But anyway I'm not a Marxist but I still like some of his ideas.

  13. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,157
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    As others have said, the revolutionary Marxists user group is basically the Orthodox Marxist user group. Orthodox Marxism was the ideology of the Second International. When Marx and Engels died, Marxism as a coherent and cohesive school of thought didn't entirely exist to the outside world. Its concepts needed to be organized and made presentable; and in addition, certain concepts such as Dialectical Materialism were vague and hazy. The most prominent Orthodox Marxist is Karl Kautsky who was known back in the day as the "pope of Marxism". Unfortunately, he ended up abandoning the idea of revolution during World War I and was then known as an anti-communist renegade for the rest of his days. In conjunction with the historical significance of the October Revolution, Kautsky was forgotten in favor of Lenin; despite the latter being a theoretical lightweight in comparison. The resurrection of Orthodox Marxism seems to owe a lot to the seminal work Lenin Rediscovered: What is to be done? In Context by Lars T. Lih, which is a nearly 900 page text which was published in 2005.

    You could say that one of the things that concerns Orthodox Marxists the most is strategy. They see anarchists, left communists, and leninists as having a nonexistent revolutionary strategy(not the same thing as organizational principles) who instead rely on "apocalyptic predestinationalism" in regards to the fate of Capital.

    You could also probably say that Orthodox Marxism is the dominant ideology of the CPGB. They have a lot of videos there explaining things from their perspective which are worth giving a watch.

    Quote Originally Posted by RedAtheist View Post
    I find the term 'revolutionary Marxist' annoying since it implies there is such a thing as a non-revolutionary Marxist.
    Clearly you haven't spent enough time on the forums.
    Last edited by Grenzer; 26th March 2012 at 09:26.

  14. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Grenzer For This Useful Post:


  15. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Long Island NY
    Posts
    463
    Organisation
    The Inner Party
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    I was under the impression that the usergroup you refer to was some kind of Kautskyist group. In all honesty, I don't know much about it, Die Neue Zeit seems to be the one in the know about that.

    Are you in the Rev Marxist gorup mostly anti-Leninist, for the record?
    "It is not history which uses men as a means of achieving - as if it were an individual person - its own ends. History is nothing but the activity of men in pursuit of their ends."
    - Karl Marx

  16. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,157
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Must - Crush - Capitalism View Post
    I was under the impression that the usergroup you refer to was some kind of Kautskyist group. In all honesty, I don't know much about it, Die Neue Zeit seems to be the one in the know about that.

    Are you in the Rev Marxist gorup mostly anti-Leninist, for the record?
    No, absolutely not. Orthodox Marxists don't consider themselves to be Leninists, but many are indeed fans of Lenin. It's more that they see that Lenin got most of his views from Orthodox Marxism, and that it's better to focus on the teacher(Orthodox Marxism) as opposed to the student(Lenin). They basically believe that no understanding of Lenin's theoretical views can be complete without also understanding the dominant thinkers of the Second International. The thing about Orthodox Marxism is that it's not monolithic. Some might hate Lenin(Most do not), others might be big fans.. it's really up to the individual to decide. One thing Orthodox Marxism is not is a pre-packaged set of opinions on any given subject. It's that way with many subjects, such as the nature of the Soviet Union. Some say it was capitalist, some say it was a bureaucratic dictatorship. Orthodox Marxism gives a framework for analysis, it does not give pre-packaged results. Depending on how the individual interprets things, they might come to a different conclusion. With that said, I think the view that the Soviet Union was at any point a socialist sate is incompatible with the framework of Orthodox Marxism.

    And yes, DNZ is more or less the resident expert on the subject.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Grenzer For This Useful Post:


  18. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Poop
    Posts
    1,159
    Organisation
    Poop
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Die Neue Zeit View Post
    Are you referring to small-r revolutionary Marxism, or the usergroup?

    If the latter, a number of us are "volunteering" in whatever way we can to jump-start the worker-class movement once again and merge Marxism with this, but actually adapting the entirety of what was once called "Orthodox Marxism" (especially the strategic lines) to modern circumstances. In fact, I'd say that this is the core of small-r revolutionary Marxism.
    That's essentially it
    "The exploited are not carriers of any positive project, be it even the classless society (which all too closely resembles the productive set up). Capital is their only community. They can only escape by destroying everything that makes them exploited...Capitalism has not created the conditions of its overcoming in communism-the famous bourgeoisie forging the arms of its own extinction-but of a world of horrors." -At Daggers Drawn

    "Our strategy is therefore the following: to establish and maintain a series of centers of desertion, or poles of secession, of rallying points. For runaways. For those who leave. A series of places where we can escape from the influence of a civilization that is headed for the abyss." -Tiqqun, Call

  19. #13
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,972
    Organisation
    sympathizer, Trotskyist League
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    You could say that one of the things that concerns Orthodox Marxists the most is strategy. They see anarchists, left communists, and leninists as having a nonexistent revolutionary strategy(not the same thing as organizational principles) who instead rely on "apocalyptic predestinationalism" in regards to the fate of Capital.
    Perhaps a resident orthodox Marxist could fill me in on what exactly they propose for revolutionary strategy? This is actually something I have been grappling with quite seriously lately as I have felt like my own views rely upon a "apocalyptic predestinationalism."

  20. #14
    Q's Avatar
    Q is offline Tectonic Revolutionary Supporter
    Forum Moderator
    Global Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    9,072
    Organisation
    Communistisch Platform
    Blog Entries
    36
    Rep Power
    136

    Default

    DNZ and Grenzer have already covered a lot of it all. Except perhaps for the following:

    Quote Originally Posted by 9mm View Post
    Perhaps a resident orthodox Marxist could fill me in on what exactly they propose for revolutionary strategy? This is actually something I have been grappling with quite seriously lately as I have felt like my own views rely upon a "apocalyptic predestinationalism."
    This is a big subject. If you want to know more about it, I recommend the book Revolutionary Strategy - Marxism and the Challenge of Left Unity (click for a review here, there is a Revleft usergroup here). I'll try to summarize the main points.

    First of all it needs to be understood in opposition, broadly speaking, to both the left and the right of the workers movement. The right is characterized by coalitionism (willing to carry out governmental position under capitalism, often under the guise of "being realistic" and "doing something"). The left is characterized by the strategy of the mass strike (or variations thereof), where the working class is supposedly to take power spontaneously by escalating strikes in which process (or so is the idea) soviets will be formed and thus the working class takes power.

    So, the right wing collapses to becoming a part of the capitalist state and bureaucratizes the working class movement. The left collapses to sectism of "the pure" that agitate all the time for strikes, demonstrations and other forms of action in an attempt to, effectively, dupe the working class into power.

    The revolutionary center (or Orthodox Marxism) opposes to the right a position of permanent opposition and working class independence and against the left a strategy of patience and mass organisation. It can be summed up as the "merger formula" where the existing mass movement merges with Marxist ideas and thus becomes a party-movement, with a plethora of forms of self-organisation of the working masses. They are all guided by the idea of being explicitly pro-working class based and on the program of this class wanting to take power as a class. This implies majority support of our class and as such Revolutionary Marxists generally agree on the need for a political struggle for the most thorough form of democracy. This in essence for three purposes: To expose the undemocratic nature of capitalist society, where we are ruled by the financial markets and the "rule of law"; to form the working class, in all its diversity, as a class-collective; and to pose a positive alternative against capitalism, where humanity is ruled by humans as opposed to money.

    So, what we propose is the patient (admittedly boring, dull, long-term and committed) work of education, agitation and organisation of our class in mass organisations, effectively building our class as the party (hence "party-movement"). Don't think strictly in terms of political parties like we understand them today, but also in the sense of a cooperative movement, democratized unions, educational collectives, social & cultural organisations, etc. This forms the basis of our alternative society and the logical trajectory can only lead towards revolution: towards consciously getting the old society out of the way of our self-emancipation and building a different kind of society.

    Many in the Revolutionary Marxists group don't see the existing left in a purely problematic way, despite our disagreements with the strategies on table. Many comrades in the existing groups are surely committed to the project of a human future, but are - in our view - limited by their often sectarian politics, where everyone inside a group has to agree on every public stance of the group and where public disagreement are an anathema under the argumentation of "discipline" and other such nonsense.

    As opposed to this we pose the need for radical democracy - the right to disagree - also on the left. In fact, the right to disagree is the only way forward as only on a democratic basis we can achieve lasting unity, only on a democratic basis can we achieve discipline, only on a democratic basis can we achieve a movement of thinking leaders as opposed to robots following a guru... Only on a democratic basis does the left, and indeed humanity, have a future.
    I think, thus I disagree. | Malcom X: "You can't have capitalism without racism" | RIP tech, I'll miss you!

  21. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Q For This Useful Post:


  22. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Brunswick, Canada
    Posts
    373
    Organisation
    ILN
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I'll stick with just "Marxists", thank you.

  23. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,024
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    One that holds that the proletariat should violently overthrow their bourgeois oppressors and consolidate power and societal control for the proletariat.
    sing me to sleep then leave me alone

  24. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    san fransisco
    Posts
    3,637
    Organisation
    The 4th International
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    I like to keep is simple and not dwell into 2nd international stuff...
    For student organizing in california, join this group!
    http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
    http://socialistorganizer.org/
    "[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
    --Carl Sagan

  25. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Kentucky, United States
    Posts
    3,305
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Q View Post
    DNZ and Grenzer have already covered a lot of it all. Except perhaps for the following:



    This is a big subject. If you want to know more about it, I recommend the book Revolutionary Strategy - Marxism and the Challenge of Left Unity (click for a review here, there is a Revleft usergroup here). I'll try to summarize the main points.

    First of all it needs to be understood in opposition, broadly speaking, to both the left and the right of the workers movement. The right is characterized by coalitionism (willing to carry out governmental position under capitalism, often under the guise of "being realistic" and "doing something"). The left is characterized by the strategy of the mass strike (or variations thereof), where the working class is supposedly to take power spontaneously by escalating strikes in which process (or so is the idea) soviets will be formed and thus the working class takes power.

    So, the right wing collapses to becoming a part of the capitalist state and bureaucratizes the working class movement. The left collapses to sectism of "the pure" that agitate all the time for strikes, demonstrations and other forms of action in an attempt to, effectively, dupe the working class into power.

    The revolutionary center (or Orthodox Marxism) opposes to the right a position of permanent opposition and working class independence and against the left a strategy of patience and mass organisation. It can be summed up as the "merger formula" where the existing mass movement merges with Marxist ideas and thus becomes a party-movement, with a plethora of forms of self-organisation of the working masses. They are all guided by the idea of being explicitly pro-working class based and on the program of this class wanting to take power as a class. This implies majority support of our class and as such Revolutionary Marxists generally agree on the need for a political struggle for the most thorough form of democracy. This in essence for three purposes: To expose the undemocratic nature of capitalist society, where we are ruled by the financial markets and the "rule of law"; to form the working class, in all its diversity, as a class-collective; and to pose a positive alternative against capitalism, where humanity is ruled by humans as opposed to money.

    So, what we propose is the patient (admittedly boring, dull, long-term and committed) work of education, agitation and organisation of our class in mass organisations, effectively building our class as the party (hence "party-movement"). Don't think strictly in terms of political parties like we understand them today, but also in the sense of a cooperative movement, democratized unions, educational collectives, social & cultural organisations, etc. This forms the basis of our alternative society and the logical trajectory can only lead towards revolution: towards consciously getting the old society out of the way of our self-emancipation and building a different kind of society.

    Many in the Revolutionary Marxists group don't see the existing left in a purely problematic way, despite our disagreements with the strategies on table. Many comrades in the existing groups are surely committed to the project of a human future, but are - in our view - limited by their often sectarian politics, where everyone inside a group has to agree on every public stance of the group and where public disagreement are an anathema under the argumentation of "discipline" and other such nonsense.

    As opposed to this we pose the need for radical democracy - the right to disagree - also on the left. In fact, the right to disagree is the only way forward as only on a democratic basis we can achieve lasting unity, only on a democratic basis can we achieve discipline, only on a democratic basis can we achieve a movement of thinking leaders as opposed to robots following a guru... Only on a democratic basis does the left, and indeed humanity, have a future.
    So if I'm not mistaken, you all believe in both the mass strike and party organization?

  26. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,157
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    No, I don't think they do. From my conversations with DNZ, they believe that mass strikes are an ineffective tactic and that it is dangerous and counter-productive to fetishize them.

    Their party organization is a mass party which allows multiple tendencies and factions, from what I can tell. Would this be democratic centralism? I'm not that familiar with it since it looks simple enough in practice, but then why does it seem that no Trotskyist or Stalinist parties are actually democratic?

    Overall, I think their little movement is a positive thing overall; but only time will tell whether it will thrive and grow, even though I disagree with some of their politics like national liberation and 20th century anti-imperialism. I also have yet to see them adequately address the issue of internationalism.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Grenzer For This Useful Post:


  28. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Eisenach, Gotha, & Erfurt
    Posts
    14,026
    Organisation
    Sympathizer re.: Communistisch Platform, WPA, and CPGB (PCC)
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grenzer View Post
    No, I don't think they do. From my conversations with DNZ, they believe that mass strikes are an ineffective tactic and that it is dangerous and counter-productive to fetishize them.
    Polemically, I like being the polemical "bad cop" amongst the revivalists with respect to direct action, mass strikes, soviets, etc.

    Their party organization is a mass party which allows multiple tendencies and factions, from what I can tell. Would this be democratic centralism? I'm not that familiar with it since it looks simple enough in practice, but then why does it seem that no Trotskyist or Stalinist parties are actually democratic?
    I don't know about the other comrades, comrade, but I'm for multiple tendencies but also for a ban on factions and factionalism (see Marx, not Lenin).
    "A new centrist project does not have to repeat these mistakes. Nobody in this topic is advocating a carbon copy of the Second International (which again was only partly centrist)." (Tjis, class-struggle anarchist)

    "A centrist strategy is based on patience, and building a movement or party or party-movement through deploying various instruments, which I think should include: workplace organising, housing struggles [...] and social services [...] and a range of other activities such as sports and culture. These are recruitment and retention tools that allow for a platform for political education." (Tim Cornelis, left-communist)

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to Die Neue Zeit For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10th March 2009, 17:40
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 19th December 2008, 16:10
  3. Revolutionary Marxist Collective
    By Snitza in forum Upcoming Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 26th January 2006, 06:49
  4. The New Marxist Revolutionary Party
    By Marxist_machine in forum Politics
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 24th August 2003, 16:48

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •