Comradeship // Freechat

2800 readers

111 users here now

Talk about whatever, respecting the rules established by Lemmygrad. Failing to comply with the rules will grant you a few warnings, insisting on breaking them will grant you a beautiful shiny banwall.

A community for comrades to chat and talk about whatever doesn't fit other communities

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

felipeforte@lemmygrad.ml

ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml

Do you (or i) even understand what is a western marxist? Also about china (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 3 days ago by salim@lemmygrad.ml to c/comradeship@lemmygrad.ml

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I first heard about it through Gabriel rockhill when he was invited in the deprogram, then i kept listening to other videos he made on the topic, i didn't read his or lusordo's books unfortunately, but I think the idea is clear enough for me (maybe)

Basically it includes every left leaning person in the west that poses as marxists (or anticapitalists) but act anticommunist and pro western, they're also revisionists replacing dialectical materialism with bourgeois science and bougeois ideologies,

The first time I noticed the usage of that term outside of Rockhill, was in an Instagram reel about China, then in a horrible red pen video that is also about China, it was so weird for me bc the usage was empty of all substance,

It feels like it's used to shame people about thinking that China is revisionist more than actually serve as a valid argument, and doesn't correlate with the actual western marxist types like zizek or varoufakis,

It quickly became synonym to Ultra-leftist or chauvinist

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 3 days ago

western marxism is more of a school of thought, if we want to be kind to it. It transcends geographical borders - there are western marxists in the global south, trotskyists for example.

Losurdo's bottom line was that western marxism is a school of thought that has mostly had theoretical achievements, and eastern marxism is a school of thought that has mostly had practical achievements, because they are the only ones who have seized state power. (I haven't read the book yet either lmao, it's on my list. but this is what people who have read it explain it as)

So he also put the bolsheviks into that eastern marxism school. I'm sure he goes into a lot more details; even that simple differentiation leads to a whole lot of implications. One thing we can infer for example is that eastern marxism (as he put it, not sure I like the name myself lol) has to contend with the realities of running a country, and inherently gets embroiled in the global contradictions of what "running a country in the 21st century" means.

I assume he doesn't mean that eastern marxism has not made theoretical headways of its own, because they certainly have.