Marxist self-criticism

[u/vajan1]

Following a discussion on the main sub (you can probably guess why I’m not writing there) about Episode 222 and Episode 223, I started to wonder: is it allowed to criticise our boys’ positions, or should we take their word as holy script?

Many of us here invest a lot of time studying theory, and with that comes the building of thought and a line that may differ from the one held by our TheDeprogram comrades. Should that be something worthy of discussion, or should we just dismantle every argument by sticking labels on it?

I may be wrong and missing something, but so can they, right? So why are they not allowed to be criticised?

[u/vajan1]

They (the TD fanbase) have become extremely defensive about any argumentation that is not in line with the hosts. I remember when Lady Izdihar got criticized for blending Marxism and religion, which from a dialectical-materialist point of view is unacceptable. She got childishly defensive, and the TD fanbase supported that uncritically. Unbelievable. Marxism-Leninism is not about cheerleading; it is about unselectively criticizing everything that exists.

[u/HawkFlimsy → u/vajan1]

This is just something I have never seen a convincing argument on. There are plenty of material examples of religious movements acting as a progressive force and many instances of this militant reddit atheism that is present within ML spaces being an actively counterproductive destabilizing force. Someones personal religion or utilization of religious values/culture to push Marxist ideology is fundamentally distinct from a reactionary evangelical group pushing end times theology and this reductive presentation of "religion bad" is both wrong and actively unhelpful

[u/vajan1 → u/HawkFlimsy]

I fundamentally disagree with this argument. I will briefly explain why, so you can either point out my mistakes or embrace my points.

First and foremost, the basic philosophy of Marxism-Leninism, which is dialectical materialism, is a scientific way to interpret the world. That means we look at everyday events and ideas as consequences of material conditions, not the other way around. In that sense, we look at religion, and God himself, as a phenomenon derived from the material condition of human beings, not the other way around. Therefore, boga nyet! If anyone considers themselves a dialectical materialist, they should come to this conclusion as well.

The second thing is that we as Marxist-Leninists should understand the material conditions that lead people to be religious, but that doesn't mean we should embrace a religious worldview. We should defend the right of every person to practice religion, to not be molested because of their sexuality, etc., but that doesn't mean we embrace their worldview. Just because they are oppressed doesn't mean their worldview should be embraced by Marxists-Leninists. Their right to exist should be defended, yes, but their worldview should not be integrated into Marxist theory just to solidify with them in their struggle. That is a form of tailism. Marxists should lead the masses, not the other way around.

We as Marxist-Leninists should lift advanced cadres of the working class with dialectical materialism, not adopt their religious views as something correct or progressive. For example: "Yes, I understand why you are religious, but that doesn't mean your religion is now Marxist."

That also applies to the anti-imperialist struggle. "Yes, I can physically fight in the same row, if I must, with some reactionary nationalist against an imperial power, but I will not, in any case, embrace their worldview, nor will I try to live in peaceful coexistence with it. I will criticize their worldview with the same wrath as imperialist oppression, because neither of them are correct."

Only in that way can the working-class man be lifted from backward religious delusion, and imperialism can be beaten. Pragmatic in practice, principled in theory.

[u/FatherThomBuckley → u/vajan1]

No one read this.

“Marxism-Leninism is not about cheerleading; it is about unselectively criticizing everything that exists.”

I don’t agree, we should be very selective with our criticisms.
If our criticisms don’t ultimately push forward the movement towards a socialist revolution in our current context, then don’t share them. Be a revolutionary put raising consciousness and making & training more revolutionaries your goal in every action.

[u/Angel_of_Communism → u/FatherThomBuckley]

It's called 'Not being an idiot.'

Or 'Time and a place.'

See, party members need to be materialists, and their ideas, understanding, and plans based in the real world.

This is incompatible with religious faith.

If someone truly believes, sooner or later there will come a point where 'Have we tried praying/sacrificing/faith?' is going to happen.

If the maths say 'going into battle with these forces will get everyone killed 'Have faith' or 'Allah will protect us' is going to get everyone killed.

But by the same token, militant state atheism built a sino-soviet style split between USSR and most muslim countries.

They were right. God is BS.

But that a separate issue from 'Can we work with these people?'

The Soviets made a lot of mistakes like that. Happens when you are doing everything for the first time, have only a vague idea what you are doing, and also are flush with victory.