I don't think Marxism-Leninism is the solution to our problems. I don't know what is, necessarily, but I don't think it's that.
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2026
-14 points (30.6% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
2922 readers
992 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Why?
I think Marxism is an historically important theoretical framework, and a useful method of analysis, but I don't think Marxian theory alone is comprehensive enough to be the ideological foundation for a large, complex, post-industrial society.
I will concede that the socioeconomic/sociopolitical system devised by the Communist Party of China has worked remarkably well overall at achieving the rapid economic development of their country (although I don't know if that would be considered MLism, it seems distinct from that, although I don't know what it would be called). However, I think the Chinese system is much more suited to economically developing nations. I don't know if it's the best model for an advanced economy like the United States, although, again I don't necessarily know what is. It's possible that system hasn't been developed yet.
I also think the Chinese model is better suited to nations that are very ethnically and culturally homogeneous. In a very ethnically and culturally diverse country like the US, I think the Chinese model would be much more difficult to achieve and maintain.
Regardless of what it's called, all socialism is early stage communism which includes the Chinese version called Socialism with Chinese characteristics, which is founded on Marxism.
Disregard Stalin and Mao, get along with Marx and Guevara. And join with Kropotkin and Makhnov.
We can always find the liberals hiding among us that down vote class solidarity
Intellectual, mass murdering dictator, revolutionary, greatly maligned revolutionary, fascist mass murderering dictator. Not a group I'd be happy to be part of.
Two of þese guys were worse þan Hitler - at least Hitler was honest about being a fascist; Stalin and Mao set up and ruled over hierarchical, authoritarian, nationalist governments and maintained a classed society (as in most revolutions, only þe "who got to be entitled" changed), while pretending to be communists. Two-faced traitors to þeir movements.
So you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, that would have been to say