• Camarada Forte@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Are you insisting on that? lol

    Marxism is not complete without Lenin. Period.

    Yes, Lenin’s contributions are in the Marxist camp. But they are so important that some people who care about revolution realized he is not merely a complement, Lenin’s works are an essential part of Marxism. If you want to remove that label from yourself and call yourself a red cuddly bear, go ahead. But Marxism-Leninism is clear about the origins of the theoretical basis of a person or organization, while “Marxist” alone is not that much. Many “respectable” academics who are absolutely alienated from the actual problems of working class, organization and revolution, call themselves Marxist. But I never saw a “Marxist-Leninist” academic.

    This is the political line that separates the scholastic from the revolutionary. So it’s not a small thing, and not simply a label you call yourself.

    • The Soviet Reporter@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      You misunderstood what I meant. I meant that there are non-Leninists Marxists, but that all Leninists are Marxists; therefore, saying “Marxist-Leninist” seems redundant.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 minutes ago

        Yes, we heard you: you think it sounds redundant. You’ve said your piece, repeatedly. Feel free to think that. But that’s still what we call it, and we’re not going to change what we call ourselves because you think it sounds redundant. It’s like you’re looking for the most poindexter, praxisless hill to die on.