Maoists vs Stalinists
Oct 29 2009 17:25
Inspired by http://libcom.org/forums/libcommunity/how-real-25102009
Are Western 'Maoists' actually more mental than Western 'Stalinists'? They definitely seem it.
However, is that just because they are more of a novelty in the UK? In countries where they are of comparable levels of (in)significance, are they as bonkers as each other?
Not that Maoists can't be Stalinists, but I'm sure my meaning is obvious.
Oct 29 2009 19:09
#2
Entdinglichung wrote:
a good book on the topic is Max Elbaum's Revolution in the Air
looks useful, thanks for the cite
Oct 29 2009 21:25
#3
Maoists are mos def more mental especially when carrying 2x4s.
Oct 29 2009 22:04
#4
Are Western Stalinists even around anymore, save for the handful of CP fossils?
Oct 30 2009 09:50
#5
Arthur Scargill told my mate he wanted to close all UK border to migrant labour the other day.
Oct 30 2009 15:09
#6
Vlad336 wrote:
Are Western Stalinists even around anymore, save for the handful of CP fossils?
in the UK, there are today e.g. the NCP and the CPGB(ML) of Harpal Brar, both ardent believers in North Korean satellites ... but generally, they were, all these currents were - compared with most other "developed countries" - relatively weak in the UK, in my opinion due to the fact, that there was neither a strong student movement around 1968 nor a sizeable "anti-revisionist" wing in the CPGB after the sino-soviet split
Oct 31 2009 12:24
#7
I think one of the things that make the Maoists sound a bit further out in England is that English Stalinists are pretty much like old Labour right wingers with an added bit of nostalgia about Russia. Therefore they don't seem that strange, and in fact have pretty mainstream views on lots of subjects, such as 'British Jobs of British Workers'.
The Maoists are completely different. They are a bit of a fish out of water to use a Mao analogy. Even in countries like ours, they can make a pretence of fighting a 'people's war'. What would they do in England? They could launch their war from Epping forest, or hide out in the Pennines, which are basically a set of hills misnamed as mountains. Alternately, the could build autonomous bases in Snowdonia.
As the main Maoist strategy is unavailable to them, and as they never trusted the working class anyway (especially the Western Working class), they end up being supporters of who ever they see as the 'oppressed' groups in society whilst cheering on Maoism in the 'third world'.
The fact that their 'anti-sexism', 'anti-homophobia', 'anti-transphobia' etc... would be met with a bit of a bemused look from those who they are supporting doesn't occur to them at all.
Devrim
Oct 31 2009 12:59
#8
The Maoist group that used to exist at Sussex Uni always bemused me (Che-Leila Brigades). I had visions of them trying to launch a peoples' war from the sussex downs, then realising the terrain wasn't really suited to guerilla warfare.
Oct 31 2009 14:22
#9
Joseph Kay wrote:
The Maoist group that used to exist at Sussex Uni always bemused me (Che-Leila Brigades). I had visions of them trying to launch a peoples' war from the sussex downs, then realising the terrain wasn't really suited to guerilla warfare.
They solved the problem by sending their 'youth brigades' to Palestine, Colombia, Vietnam etc. They had unbelievably shit politics (like defending suicide bombings and praising the heroism of Hamas etc), but somehow ended up doing OK stuff usually. Like when they sent 6 students to Ramallah in 2002, which was under siege, they ended up delivering food and medicine to people.
http://www.mail-archive.com/antinato@topica.com/msg05296.html
Oct 31 2009 14:32
#10
fuck, if only Maoism was true...I'd be a FULL LABOUR ARISTOCRAT
Oct 31 2009 20:26
#11
Joseph Kay wrote:
The Maoist group that used to exist at Sussex Uni always bemused me (Che-Leila Brigades). I had visions of them trying to launch a peoples' war from the sussex downs, then realising the terrain wasn't really suited to guerilla warfare.
Weren't they all really rich middle eastern students? I somehow got that impression (2003 or so).
Nov 3 2009 19:59
#12
Actually Devrim, a lot of the Maoists are homophobic.
The RCP famously called it a "bourgeois perversion"
Nov 3 2009 20:11
#13
888 wrote:
Joseph Kay wrote:
The Maoist group that used to exist at Sussex Uni always bemused me (Che-Leila Brigades). I had visions of them trying to launch a peoples' war from the sussex downs, then realising the terrain wasn't really suited to guerilla warfare.Weren't they all really rich middle eastern students? I somehow got that impression (2003 or so).
possibly, I didn't know any of them to talk to, except one 'palestinian' guy (born in Egypt, iirc) who loved Hamas. actually I don't even know if he was a member, but he spoke at one of their events.
Nov 3 2009 23:41
#14
Ed was a member for about a year.
Nov 4 2009 11:07
#15
Steven. wrote:
Actually Devrim, a lot of the Maoists are homophobic.The RCP famously called it a "bourgeois perversion"
and the RCP's long time sister organisation Shining Path murdered LBGT people in Peru; the RCP itself dropped their homophobic position officially some years ago
p.s.: a family tree of the ML movement in the states: http://freedomroad.org/staticfiles/familytree/megatree.html
Nov 5 2009 09:33
#16
Steven. wrote:
Actually Devrim, a lot of the Maoists are homophobic.The RCP famously called it a "bourgeois perversion"
Yes, but I was under the impression that a lot of them had changed. It wasn't just Maoist parties though. Going back a few years the English 'Militant' used to take the same line. The Turkish 'Workers' Party' (ex-Maoist) still do.
I was under the impression that they had, having given up on the Western working class, taken up the banner of the 'oppressed', including homosexuals, a sort of 'Euro-Maoism'.
Devrim
Nov 5 2009 12:08
#17
Yeah, I was under the impression that a lot of them currently went in for ultra-PC politics. Since their anti-imperialism always fixated on writing things like United $tate$ of Amerikkka, it was inevitable that their gender politics would centre on using words like wimmin and persyn a lot. If anyone can read this and make sense of it, you're braver than me.
Quote:
“Dear Maoist-Third Worldist,
Does MSH consider MIM language policy, which is continued by MSH, to be compatible with Stalin’s Problems of Linguistics in which he states language is class neutral and that there is no proletarian language?”Comrade Serve the People answers for MSH:
Comrade, you are equivocating on the term “language.” In his article Marxism and Problems of Linguistics, Comrade Stalin uses the term in the sense of a linguistic system common to at least one people: Dutch, Vietnamese, and Nahuatl are three languages. When MIM established its “language policy,” it used the term to refer to a handful of constructions and forms that the party required or preferred for its official purposes: “Amerikkka” and “bio-womyn” were promoted under MIM’s language policy. These two senses of the word “language” are distinct, and you have unfortunately confused them. We recommend that you reread Comrade Stalin’s article.
Nov 5 2009 22:14
#18
Farce wrote:
Yeah, I was under the impression that a lot of them currently went in for ultra-PC politics. Since their anti-imperialism always fixated on writing things like United $tate$ of Amerikkka, it was inevitable that their gender politics would centre on using words like wimmin and persyn a lot.
Wow, I didn't know about all these other alterna-spellings! (from farce's link)
Quote:
English is spoken as a native language primarily in several thoroughly bourgeoisified countries of the First World (the “United” KKKingdom, Ireland, the united $nakes, Kanada, aU$tralia, New $tealand, etc.)
How could anyone possibly take a text with these spellings seriously? Whereas most PC language comes across as sanctimonious, this just comes across as hilarious. Why does Kanada only get one K? K-k-kanada sounds better.
Nov 5 2009 22:50
#19
I don't even know where Aztlán is (Texas?) or what “Azania” and “Boricua”even are.
Nov 5 2009 23:02
#20
Azania is South Africa, Aztlan is the old name of the Aztec Empire, maybe Boricua is Puerto Rico?
Nov 6 2009 00:29
#21
Quote:
We recommend that you reread Comrade Stalin’s article.
ULTIMATE REBUTTAL.
Nov 6 2009 00:55
#22
888 wrote:
Quote:
English is spoken as a native language primarily in several thoroughly bourgeoisified countries of the First World (the “United” KKKingdom, Ireland, the united $nakes, Kanada, aU$tralia, New $tealand, etc.)How could anyone possibly take a text with these spellings seriously? Whereas most PC language comes across as sanctimonious, this just comes across as hilarious. Why does Kanada only get one K? K-k-kanada sounds better.
yeah, like "Ulrik-k-ka!”
Also, I love the quote marks around "united"
Nov 6 2009 01:04
#23
I love it how Ireland is clearly the shittiest of the English-speaking "thoroughly bourgeoisified countries" because it's just spelled Ireland. I guess Direland would be a step in the right direction, but it's not really worth the effort.
also let's not forget about the Romance speaking countries, like $pain, Fran$e, Portukill, and ItaLIE.
Nov 6 2009 02:18
#24
Monkey Smashes Heaven wrote:
Policy on alternative gender spellingsMonkey Smashes Heaven is encouraging, but not requiring, writers to drop alternative spellings relating explicitly to gender such as “womyn,” “persyn,” “wimmin,” “bio-wimmin,” etc. The use of such spellings by Maoists, while honorable, is misguided. Language conventions are not a dividing line issue for Maoists.
Firstly, these feminist spellings have largely been taken over by the bourgeois-feminist movement in Amerikkka. By using them, we appear to tail bourgeois feminism. Bourgeois feminism and other imperialist ideologies advocate for more privilege and power for first world populations. Maoism advocates for less privilege and power for first world females and males.
http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/policy-on-alternative-gender-spellings/
Nov 6 2009 03:00
#25
888 wrote:
maybe Boricua is Puerto Rico?
yes, and boriquenos are puerto ricans
ps - your avatar is disturbing
Nov 6 2009 06:44
#26
Vlad336 wrote:
I love it how Ireland is clearly the shittiest of the English-speaking "thoroughly bourgeoisified countries" because it's just spelled Ireland. I guess Direland would be a step in the right direction, but it's not really worth the effort.
also let's not forget about the Romance speaking countries, like $pain, Fran$e, Portukill, and ItaLIE.
Please, €spania not $pain.
Devrim
Nov 6 2009 14:12
#27
As foretold by my Magic Marxist 8-ball, the ICC's average sense of humor has skyrocketed since they've incorporated Devrim! 
Nov 6 2009 16:36
#28
Devrim wrote:
Vlad336 wrote:
I love it how Ireland is clearly the shittiest of the English-speaking "thoroughly bourgeoisified countries" because it's just spelled Ireland. I guess Direland would be a step in the right direction, but it's not really worth the effort.
also let's not forget about the Romance speaking countries, like $pain, Fran$e, Portukill, and ItaLIE.Please, €spania not $pain.
Devrim
Sorry that was clearly just my anglophone bourgeois bias rearing its ugly head.
Nov 6 2009 18:41
#29
Vlad336 wrote:
I love it how Ireland is clearly the shittiest of the English-speaking "thoroughly bourgeoisified countries" because it's just spelled Ireland. I guess Direland would be a step in the right direction, but it's not really worth the effort.
also let's not forget about the Romance speaking countries, like $pain, Fran$e, Portukill, and ItaLIE.
I will fucking jump up and down on your head all day.
Nov 6 2009 19:18
#30
precisely the kind of unwarranted threats you'd expect to hear from a 1st World social fascist and crypto-Catholic. But you won't be so tough when the global countryside encircles the global cities!
the "maoist" or "marxist-leninist", "anti-revisionist" or "new communist" movement in e.g. the USA, France or Germany in the 1970ies-1980ies covered a wide range of organizations from total mentalness to some quite intelligent orgs like Sojourner Truth Organization (STO) in the US, UCF/ML in France (best known member was Alain Badiou) or the KB in Germany, some were simply attracted and inspired by some (often marginal or later suppressed) aspects of the cultural revolution or what they considered to be "Third World Marxism" (Mao/Cabral/Che/etc.), others bought the complete package from China (including accepting all weird turns in Chinese foreign policy and the 70%/30% about Stalin) ... a good book on the topic is Max Elbaum's Revolution in the Air about the "New Communist Movement" in the USA, he himself was a member of the group Line of March which was also one of the more decent ones of the movement