#three component parts of marxism

[phobic-human]

"The Marxist doctrine is omnipotent because it is true. It is comprehensive and harmonious, and provides men with an integral world outlook irreconcilable with any form of superstition, reaction, or defence of bourgeois oppression. It is the legitimate successor to the best that man produced in the nineteenth century, as represented by German philosophy, English political economy and French socialism."

Vladimir Lenin, The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism (1913)

[27moremoons]

I'm in the beginning stages of reading theory on Communism but I can't help but feel like I'm starting wrong. I'm currently reading Mao's Little Red Book through a translated PDF a friend found for me. Is that okay to start with or should I start with something else?

First, I don't believe that there is a wrong way to start reading Communist theory/history, if you ask a thousand communists what their reading/learning journey has been they will all tell you something different. They may also tell you what they would have changed in their reading journey, for example what they wish they started with, but even then you will have different answers. I would start with what interests you, in order to keep you energized and interested in what you're reading. In terms of Mao I find his writing very engaging. I would also start with *foundational texts.

Good lists to check out by apas-95 and txttletale (2) and I like my dearest beloved friend mesetacadre's reading list My personal journey started with interest in decolonial theory and African revolution:

How Europe Underdeveloped Africa - Walter Rodney Decolonial Marxism: Essays from the Pan-African Revolution - Walter Rodney The Wretched of the Earth - Frantz Fanon A Dying Colonialism - Frantz Fanon

*Foundational text recommendations:

(⋆⁺₊⋆ ☾⋆⁺₊⋆ 27moremoons personal recommendations other than Rodney and Fanon which are foundational texts to me) You will find these in the above lists as well Start with the short texts i.e. don't start with Capital

The Principles of Communism - Frederick Engels Socialism: Utopian and Scientific - Frederick Engels The Communist Manifesto - Karl Marx Das Kapital - Karl Marx The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism - Vladimir Lenin What Is to Be Done? - Vladimir Lenin State and Revolution - Vladimir Lenin Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism - Vladimir Lenin Dialectical and Historical Materialism - Joseph Stalin Anarchism or Socialism? - Joseph Stalin Quotations from Mao Tse Tung - Mao Tse Tung

Next for my personal journey, I want to immerse myself in Arab Marxism. Read Kwame Nkrumah. Then I wish to be more versed in Soviet history.

One thing I recommend is that if you start something, finish it, even if you don't understand everything. Picking up theory for the first time feels daunting, especially since a lot of these text reference history and philosophers and language you might not be versed in, but it is my belief that it's better to start somewhere than not start at all. You will become more versed in the language these authors use as you read, and you can (YOU SHOULD) review texts in the years to come.

Take only from what I said and recommend as helpful, and leave the rest.

Take care and good luck comrade, I love you forever

/)/) ( . .) ( づ♡☭✮

(P.S. if you are interested in your own Marxist history as a Palestinian, here are the historical documents and books of the PFLP 🚩🇵🇸)

My next read: Arab Marxism & National Liberation

Some accessible audiobooks found here Free resource here Free resource here Some additional useful texts found here

[mesetacadre]

>send me asks im bored

:

something ive read, and then seen people like txttletale talk about; being a marxist isn't just about rattling off a parroted opinion, but developing a framework utilizing diamat to consistently come to a correct conclusion. identify the primary contradiction, etc.

obviously it is a practiced skill, but how would you say is one of the better ways to practice building that framework?

You are completely right! Marxism is not a dogma, but an philosophical framework for analyzing, criticizing and overcoming wage labor and the system that upholds it. As exposed by Lenin in The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism (it's a great book and a short read, highly recommend), "Marxism is a continuation of the teachings of the greatest representatives of philosophy, political economy and socialism [...] German philosophy, English political economy and French socialism". What marxism is, is the logical continuation of these three components; from German philosophy grows dialectical materialism (read: Theses On Feuerbach), from English political economy grows the description of how capitalism works (read: Capital), and from French (utopian) socialism grows scientific socialism (read: Socialism: Utopian and Scientific)

Instead of, for example, just memorizing how reformism is bad and revolution is good, you should instead understand how class struggle influences both of these actions, how reformism is used by the capitalist class to misdirect the workers' struggle, and how the way class struggle functions and has always functioned necessitates that the proletariat take its historic role as the overthrowers of capitalism, and beyond this, how this is worked towards. It's also very important to understand how common marxist positions are reached in order to continue analizing new situations, such as the Palestinian struggle.

I will never grow tired of saying this: the only path towards becoming a better communist whilst advancing the class struggle bit by bit is through constant theoretical and practical education, the involvement of yourself in the workers' struggle and the capacity to extract lessons from it via what you learn by reading the works of other communists, who most probably have already dealt with an analogous situation to yours more than 90 years ago, and then to complete the cycle, reapply those lessons to your work as a communist. You can only get so far by only reading or by only doing things (of course everyone's personal situation will influence the ability to do either or both of these, I think it goes without saying). Synthetically: Learn from the past, learn from the present, exercise your own mind, and never grow complacent. In due time (we're talking more than a year at least, probably more), the marxist framework will be as natural to you as the liberal framework is to most people

[secular-jew]

What the Battle Over Judicial Reform in Israel Is Really About

By CAROLINE GLICK

Any complex issue deserves (no, requires) lengthy argument, and this piece by Caroline Glick this is no exception. But Caroline is a cogent writer who makes everyone smarter. So read it and get properly informed.

***************************************

In Israel as in states throughout the Western world, the political Left is an ecosystem of power, and not merely a political camp. It starts with the parties of the center- and far-Left. But it encompasses far more powerful institutions and actors, as well. These include the universities, the vast majority of media organs, most of the entertainment industry, and much of the economic elite. The Left also comprises the senior ranks of the security establishment—represented most clearly by politically active retired generals.

The most powerful component of the Left's ecosystem in Israel is the legal fraternity, which is comprised of the Supreme Court, the attorney general, the state prosecution, and the legal advisors to the Knesset and the government ministries.

Despite its control over vast power sources in Israeli society, the Left does not control the Israeli people themselves. A significant majority of Israelis define themselves as right-of-center. In the last elections, right-of-center parties won 64 seats in Israel's 120-seat parliament, the Knesset. The Left's parties won a mere 46 seats. The other 10 seats went to two anti-Zionist Arab parties, which are supported by, but are not constituent parts of, the leftist ecosystem.

For the first three decades after Israel won independence in 1948, the Left held all levers of political power. The Labor Party controlled the government and the Knesset. And its loyalists controlled the Left's nonpolitical ecosystem. When, under Menachem Begin, the Right won its first electoral victory in 1977, Begin disappointed his loyalists and opted not to replace Labor's apparatchiks in the public sector, the Israel Defense Forces, the legal system, and state media with his own. Begin's refusal to bring in his own people was a source of rancor, but when viewed in its historical context, his decision had its merits. Labor's apparatchiks were old-left socialists, ideologically, but they were experienced in the ways of governance and they were patriots. True, they despised Begin, but they loved Israel. Leaving them secure in their positions may have made them political thorns in Begin's side, but it didn't harm the national interest.

Begin would probably have acted differently today.

Like the Left throughout the Western world, over the past 30 years, Israel's Left has abandoned labor union politics for cultural Marxism and post-nationalism. Its new globalist ideals render the Left's constituent parts contemptuous, and increasingly hateful, of Israel's nationalist majority.

In the decades since Begin opted to leave the Labor apparatchiks in place, their post-nationalist successors have formed an oligarchy whose power sits beyond the reach of the elected Israeli government. Its members, particularly in the legal fraternity, have seized more and more executive powers away from the government, and more and more legislative powers away from the Knesset. For the past three decades, government lawyers have killed government decisions and legislative initiatives, before they were off the drawing board, by proclaiming them "unreasonable" or "legally problematic" (as opposed to illegal).

When the government and Knesset chose to disregard the unsubtle orders from their unelected lawyers, the Supreme Court pounced. The justices haven't flinched from abrogating the government's actions; and more often than not, the justices have based their decisions not on statutory law, but on the extraordinarily vague "reasonableness" rationale that has enabled them to strike down laws and lawful government actions simply by deeming them "unreasonable."

Today, led quite openly by Israeli Supreme Court Chief Justice Esther Hayut and her predecessor, Aharon Barak, the Israeli Left is in open rebellion against the Netanyahu government and its plans to reform the judicial system. Buffeted and sometimes led by a media that has abandoned all pretense of dispassionate journalism for propaganda, some on the Left—including the mayor of Tel Aviv—have outright called for civil war. Others have deployed a combination of riots, protests, boycotts, highway blockages, and lawfare in a bid to paralyze and intimidate the Netanyahu government into standing down.

The Netanyahu government's program for judicial reform is astounding for its modesty. If passed in full, it will simply realign Israel's currently unchecked judiciary with the checked judiciaries of the vast majority of Western democracies.

The judicial reform package's main components are: placing judicial appointments under more political control; requiring justices to base their judgments on the law, rather than the malleable veneer of "reasonableness"; banning the Supreme Court from amending or overriding Israel's Basic laws, which form the basis of Israel's quasi-constitutional rule of law; and placing constraints on the Supreme Court's power to abrogate laws duly promulgated by the Knesset, while providing the Knesset with a mechanism for overriding the Court's decisions.

The final clause of the government's reform package stipulates that the attorney general's opinions do not bind the government that he ostensibly serves.

While the Left has managed to engender a sense of chaos, the situation in Israel is actually far more stable than it appears. The Left's riots will continue so long as the billionaire funders in Israel and abroad send their checks. But the legal reform will be passed into law and implemented.

Any doubt that this would occur was dispelled two weeks ago, via a strategic intervention by Israeli President Isaac Herzog. Although the position of Israeli president is a largely ceremonial post, two weeks ago Herzog inserted himself into the middle of the debate. In a primetime address, Herzog set out his own proposal for judicial reform. A former head of the Labor Party and the son of Israel's sixth president, the late Chaim Herzog, Isaac Herzog is a scion of the leftist establishment.

Herzog's proposal involved fewer limits on the Court's powers than the government's proposal. But his intervention was important—indeed, it was decisive—for three main reasons.

First, Herzog's proposal is predicated on both recognition and opposition to the fact that today, Israel's Supreme Court has no checks on its power whatsoever. To restore and safeguard Israel's democracy, the Israeli Supreme Court must cease to operate as a self-perpetuating judicial oligarchy.

Second, Herzog's proposal recognizes the fundamental legitimacy of the political Right. Knesset opposition leader Yair Lapid and his partners have so far refused to follow suit; as far as they are concerned, the Israeli people's vote last fall to restore Netanyahu to power was no more than an arbitrary moment, and far less legitimate than the unmoving positions of the nation's ruling elite.

Finally, Herzog's intervention gave cover to leftist politicians and luminaries who, like him, are willing to work with the Netanyahu government to reach a workable compromise on legal reform. Despite public denials by various opposition politicians, following Herzog's speech, prominent leftists have been meeting behind the scenes with Justice Minister Yariv Levin, Chairman of Knesset Law, Constitution, and Justice Committee Simcha Rothman, and their advisors, in order to bridge differences.

And those differences are not all that large. Nearly every single leading politician on the Left—including Lapid himself—has put forward a program of judicial reform similar to the Netanyahu government's plan. Back in 1994, Herzog's father, then-President Chaim Herzog, also called for constraining judicial power.

At the end of the day, the fight over judicial reform in Israel isn't about judicial reform at all. It is about the radical Left, and its refusal to accept the validity of democratic outcomes when its side loses. The Netanyahu government will win because, despite the fact that the radicals have taken over the leftist ecosystem, enough old-left Zionists are still around to work with their counterparts on the Zionist Right and cut a deal.

Caroline B. Glick is a Newsweek columnist, the senior contributing editor of Jewish News Syndicate, and the diplomatic commentator for Israel's Channel 14. She is also the author of The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, (Crown Forum, 2014). From 1994 to 1996, she served as a core member of Israel's negotiating team with the Palestine Liberation Organization.

[rotting-in-your-arms]

Some introductory reading (ordered by aescending complexity) to learn about Marxism and Anarchism

-Marxism-

The Principles of Communism by Frederick Engels (1847) - essentially an early FAQ on communist theory

Value, Price and Profit and Wage Labour and Capital by Karl Marx (1847) - short pamphlets written for the average worker that discuss the structure of capitalism and its effects on all classes

The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism by Vladimir Lenin (1913) - The different facets of Marxism and why they're important (philosophy, economy, and politics)

The Motorcycle Diaries by Che Guevara (1992) - the story of Che Guevara before he became a Marxist revolutionary; link is an incomplete transcript, full book can be found elsewhere

Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism by Vladimir Lenin (1917) - a 92 page pamphlet discussing how capitalism always progresses to imperialism

Das Kapital: Chapter One by Karl Marx (1867) - the first chapter of the first volume of Marx's Capital, which proposes several critiques of capitalism

-Anarchism-

To Change Everything: an anarchist appeal by CrimethInc. - an appeal and introduction to basic anarchist thought

Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You! by David Graeber (2000) - an introduction to anarchism using simple everyday situations

Anarchy 101 by "dot matrix" (2012) - an FAQ for Anarchist beliefs

An Anarchist FAQ: Section A - What is Anarchism? by "Anarcho" (1996-2023) - another FAQ that's much older but still being updated

Listen, Marxist!, an excerpt from Post-Scarcity Anarchism by Murray Bookchin (1986) - a chapter criticizing Marxist theory from the perspective of an anarchist

Anarchy Works by Peter Gelderloos (2010) - answers common objections towards anarchism with real-world historical examples of anarchist societies

[howieabel]

"Throughout the civilised world the teachings of Marx evoke the utmost hostility and hatred of all bourgeois science (both official and liberal), which regards Marxism as a kind of “pernicious sect”. And no other attitude is to be expected, for there can be no “impartial” social science in a society based on class struggle. In one way or another, all official and liberal science defends wage-slavery, whereas Marxism has declared relentless war on that slavery. To expect science to be impartial in a wage-slave society is as foolishly naïve as to expect impartiality from manufacturers on the question of whether workers' wages ought not to be increased by decreasing the profits of capital." - Lenin, The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism (March 1913)

[curtwilde]

Hello. So I know very little about communism and marxism except very vague ideas but I'm interested to learn. Do you have any resources/recommendations about where to start learning about communist theory? I'm especially interested in how it can work in india so if you have any resources on that will be great 😊 thank you

Hi! Honestly I don't think I'm the best person to answer this. My own reading has been very scattered. I will make a list of books that helped me form my own ideas but if you want to learn formally I highly recommend you follow marxists.org's reading guide, and you also reach out to other people to have a reading pool.

The Communist Manifesto is the best place to start obviously.

Socialism, Utopian and Scientific by Frederick Engels. I always recommend reading Engels before Marx because he is very concise and ideal for beginners.

The Principles of Communism by Engels where he dispels common misconceptions with short Q and A on communism.

The Critique of the Gotha Program deals with how the transition from a capitalist to communist society would work.

The German Ideology for Marx's analysis of history and dialectical materialism. Marx uses Hegel's theory of dialectics here, if you want to really go into it read the concerned sections in Hegel's Encyclopaedia Logic and Phenomenology, but honestly a basic idea of it good enough as far as it concerns Marxist theory.

I know a lot of people will disagree but I highly advice against starting off with Das Kapital right off unless you have a graduate level understanding of economics. Watch David Harvey's lecture series first. Once you have an understanding of the concepts you can start with the Preface and Chapter 1 of Volume 1 which are essential readings. I struggled with the source text so David Harvey's companion was very helpful for me.

The 1844 manuscripts, especially the chapter on alienation for Marx's theory of alienation under capitalism.

Preface to A contribution to the critique of political economy for Marx' theory of base and superstructure.

Antonio Gramsci's Prison Notebooks - for questions of how the ruling class uses cultural hegemony to maintain power, his theory on education and intellectualism and how it relates to the working class, and his theory of economic determinism.

This should be enough for classical Marxist theory. Next I'd say go straight into Lenin. I find Lenin's writings to be a lot more relevant to our current economic system/s. Mind, he had a dramatic flair so you have to sift through a lot of high-flowing language to get to the meat of things. Some essential readings:

The Three sources and three components parts of Marxism.

What is to be done

The State of Revolution

Imperialism: the highest stage of communism

Against Revisionism: In defence of Marxism

On Strikes

Since you mentioned India, I find Lenin's writings on agarian reforms to be very relevant to our primarily agricultural socioeconomic setup. Essential readings:

The Proletariat and the Peasantry

The Peasant Reform and the Proletarian-Peasant Revolution

The Agarian Question

The Law of Diminishing Returns

After Lenin, I'd recommend reading more recent theorists like Raymond Williams and Althusser for a more contemporary understanding.

Raymomd Williams: Marxism and Literature, Culture and Materialsm, Culture and Society - especially the chapter "Culture is Ordinary"

Althusser - Ideology and Ideological State Apparatus.

Terry Eagleton - Why Marx was right and The Body as Language.

If you want to get into Trotsky - for critiques of the Soviet read The Permanent Revolution and The Revolution Betrayed; for his theory on how art under socialism read Art and Revolution.

I haven't read a lot of Mao myself but On Contradiction, On Practice, Where do correct ideas come from, Combat Liberalism and Oppose Book Worship are essential works. The Little Red Book is good to get you started off with his ideology.

Che Guevera's The Motorcycle Diaries - not part of the Marxist canon per se but still recommending it as a personal favorite.

I'm not making detailed lists for Marxist Feminism and Black Marxism because this is getting too long but you can send me a seperate ask if you want to go into it. To get you started with, for Black Marxism: Cedric Robinson's Black Marxism and Frantz's Fanon's The Wretched of the Earth; for Marxist Feminism, Clara Zletkin's Proletarian Women, Alexandra Kollontai's Communism and the Family and Rosa Luxembourg's Women's Sufferage and the Class Struggle.

I'm feeling too lazy to add links, but everything on here except Harvey's companion should be available for free online on marxists.org. If you don't find anything send me a message.

I'll add the India-specific resources under a seperate reblog.

[gingeraleeeee]

People always have been the foolish victims of deception and self-deception in politics, and they always will be until they have learnt to seek out the interests of some class or other behind all moral, religious, political and social phrases, declarations and promises. Champions of reforms and improvements will always be fooled by the defenders of the old order until they realise that every old institution, however barbarous and rotten it may appear to be, is kept going by the forces of certain ruling classes. And there is only one way of smashing the resistance of those classes, and that is to find, in the very society which surrounds us, the forces which can - and, owing to their social position, must - constitute the power capable of sweeping away the old and creating the new, and to enlighten and organise those forces for the struggle.

V. I. Lenin, "The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism," Prosveshcheniye No. 3, March 1913

[socialistworld]

Lenin's 'The Historic Service Of Marx And Engels' & 'Three Component Parts Of Marxism'

Lenin's 'The Historic Service Of Marx And Engels' & 'Three Component Parts Of Marxism'

We republish below a speech and article by Lenin on the historic role of Marx and Engels and summarise their revolutionary ideas. socialistworld.net Lenin’s Speech at unveiling of a monument to Marx and Engels on […]

[fuckyeahmarxismleninism]

“People have always been the foolish victims of deception and self-deception in politics, and they always will be until they have learnt to seek out the interests of some class or other behind all moral, religious, political and social phrases, declarations and promises. Champions of reforms and improvements will always be fooled by the defenders of the old order until they realise that every old institution, how ever barbarous and rotten it may appear to be, is kept going by the forces of certain ruling classes. And there is only one way of smashing the resistance of those classes, and that is to find, in the very society which surrounds us, the forces which can—and, owing to their social position, must—constitute the power capable of sweeping away the old and creating the new, and to enlighten and organise those forces for the struggle.”

- V.I. Lenin, "The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism"

[one-divides-into-two]

If you comrades here already know materialism and dialectics, I would like to advise you to supplement your knowledge by some study of their opposites, that is, idealism and metaphysics. You should read Kant and Hegel and Confucius and Chiang Kai-shek, which are all negative stuff. If you know nothing about idealism and metaphysics, if you have never waged any struggle against them, your materialism and dialectics will not be solid. The shortcoming of some of our Party members and intellectuals is precisely that they know too little about the negative stuff. Having read a few books by Marx, they just repeat what is in them and sound rather monotonous. Their speeches and articles are not convincing. If you don’t study the negative stuff, you won’t be able to refute it. Neither Marx nor Engels nor Lenin was like that. They made great efforts to learn and study all sorts of things, contemporary and past, and taught other people to do likewise. The three component parts of Marxism came into being in the course of their study of, as well as their struggle with, such bourgeois things as German classical philosophy, English classical political economy and French utopian socialism. In this respect Stalin was not as good. For instance, in his time, German classical idealist philosophy was described as a reaction on the part of the German aristocracy to the French revolution. This conclusion totally negates German classical idealist philosophy. Stalin negated German military science, alleging that it was no longer of any use and that books by Clausewitz should no longer be read since the Germans had been defeated.

Mao Zedong, Talks at a conference of secretaries of provincial, municipal and autonomous region party committees, part II, January 1957

[mesetacadre]

Any challenges in understanding and reading Capital on your first read? Do you have any advice for the first time reader?

I have not read it yet but have plenty of comrades who have. Capital is the meme book in communist circles because of its magnitude, but it really is not an impossible book or climbing mount everest, and the cultural perspective of it as this insurmountable achievement doesn't do anyone any favors. It's certainly not a beginner book but you don't need a degree in marxism.

Certainly what you have to keep in mind is that it's a study of the mechanisms of capitalism in the UK in the mid 19th century. Like any theory, you can't take it literally. But it does use that example to construct the framework for understanding economics that's one of the three component parts of marxism. Therefore, Capital should be studied, not memorized, and not read like you'd read a novel. The study is, again, not insurmountable, but it takes time and patience. There are also anthologies out there which condense it down to a more friendly length, but the quality of those are very dependent on which editorial you're looking at. For finding out a good one, you should ask multiple people who might know, in your language. Even for the entire book itself, there are very bad translations and good translations. For example, I know that the Spanish version of Capital that's the most popular confuses labor and labor-power, and that the best translation is the one from the editorial Siglo XXI, so when I get around to it, I'll get that translation. I don't know anything about english translations. There are also plenty of guides, but like the anthologies and translations, the quality will vary and asking people is the best way to find a good one.

[tankism]

Hi, anarcho-communist here, I want to get an understanding of what a Marxist Leninist, I think I have a good grasp on Marx, it's just the theory of Lenin that I don't quite get What should I read?

Some basic stuff :))

Basic principles of Marxism Leninism: a primer (Jose Maria Sison)

https://foreignlanguages.press/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/S20-Basic-Principles-of-ML-A-Primer.pdf

The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism(Vladimir Lenin)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/mar/x01.htm

Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism (Vladimir Lenin)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/

The Proletarian revolution and the revolution Kautsky (Vladimir Lenin)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/prrk/index.htm

What is to be done? (Vladimir Lenin)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/

State and revolution (Vladimir Lenin)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/

Lenin’s texts against revisionism and opportunism:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/mar/01.htm

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/dec/x01.htm

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htm

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1910/dec/23.htm

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1908/apr/03.htm

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/sep/12b.htm

The foundations of Leninism (Joseph Stalin)

http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/FL24.html

Anti-Dühring part I (Friedrich Engels)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch01.htm

Anti Dühring part II (Friedrich Engels)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch13.htm

Anti Dühring part III (Friedrich Engels)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch23.htm

The German Ideology, chapter 1 (Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm

Socialism: utopian and scientific( Friedrich Engels)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm

On contradiction (Mao)

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_17.htm

[one-divides-into-two]

you:

Mao Zedong:

“ou comrades here already know materialism and dialectics, I would like to advise you to supplement your knowledge by some study of their opposites, that is, idealism and metaphysics. You should read Kant and Hegel and Confucius and Chiang Kai-shek, which are all negative stuff. If you know nothing about idealism and metaphysics, if you have never waged any struggle against them, your materialism and dialectics will not be solid. The shortcoming of some of our Party members and intellectuals is precisely that they know too little about the negative stuff. Having read a few books by Marx, they just repeat what is in them and sound rather monotonous. Their speeches and articles are not convincing. If you don’t study the negative stuff, you won’t be able to refute it. Neither Marx nor Engels nor Lenin was like that. They made great efforts to learn and study all sorts of things, contemporary and past, and taught other people to do likewise. The three component parts of Marxism came into being in the course of their study of, as well as their struggle with, such bourgeois things as German classical philosophy, English classical political economy and French utopian socialism. In this respect Stalin was not as good. For instance, in his time, German classical idealist philosophy was described as a reaction on the part of the German aristocracy to the French revolution. This conclusion totally negates German classical idealist philosophy. “

mao said you have to work out and read hegel. watch so called communists conveniently ignore this

[readmarx]

“People always have been the foolish victims of deception and self-deception in politics, and they always will be until they have learnt to seek out the interests of some class or other behind all moral, religious, political and social phrases, declarations and promises.”

— V. I. Lenin, The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism (1913)

[socialist-art]

"𝘊𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭, 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳, 𝘤𝘳𝘶𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳, 𝘳𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘯𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘺𝘦𝘥." - Lenin, The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism [1913] [#laborwave] designed by laborwave_goals, 2019 (at Kraków, Poland) https://www.instagram.com/p/CU5Tr6GojeR/?utm_medium=tumblr