Permanently Deleted

  • DoubleShot [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I call myself a Marxist and not an ML only because I've never gotten around to reading any Lenin. I'd probably agree with him, but feels weird to call myself an ML if I don't actually know what Lenin added.

    • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Imperialism: the highest stage of capitalism is a banger, Lenin cites mail statistics to show clear evidence of capital's tendency toward monopoly. I consider it a "must read" and a good jumping off point into ML theory because it uses hard evidence like that. I'll warn you though. The run-on sentences can be entire paragraphs. My man really liked commas.

      Oh and one of the banks he rails against? Deutsche Bank. It's pretty astounding how much doesn't change.

      • DoubleShot [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        People talk about State & Revolution and I'm sure it's great, but Imperialism really speaks to my soul, I think.

        • Bnova [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          State and Revolution was fun for dunking on Soc Dems. Imperialism blew my mind with a lot of the analysis of financial capital and WW1.

          • Changeling [it/its]
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Reading State and Revolution I was like, “oh got it he’s a poster”

      • CommunistBear [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Reading Imperialism and seeing how many major companies Lenin calls out by name and seeing them still exist today was absolutely a mind fuck.

        • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Totally. It was especially salient because I read it when the Trump/Deutsche Bank scandal was at its peak in the liberal press.

        • Changeling [it/its]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Given the history of socialism in the 20th century, it’d be hard not to be imo. Although I like there are ultra left folks who essentially say that all those attempted revolutions and socialist states were revisionist and therefore don’t negate the analysis