You can post questions or share your thoughts at any time, even after we’ve moved on to a new text.
Suggest upcoming texts here.
Previous texts
- The Defeat of One’s Own Government in the Imperialist War
- How to Be a Good Communist
- The Wretched of the Earth (1, 2-3, 4, 5-)
- The Foundations of Leninism
- Decolonization is not a metaphor
- Marxism and the National Question
- China Has Billionaires
- Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism
- Wage Labour and Capital
- Value, Price and Profit
- On the shortcomings of party work […]
- Fighting Fascism: How to Struggle and How to Win
- Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
- What is to be done?
- Elementary principles of philosophy
- The State and Revolution
- “Left-Wing” Communism: an Infantile Disorder
- Blood in My Eye



This is an important distinction. Democracy in the West suggests abstract means and is virtually aesthetic. If we have democracy for democracy’s sake, we have won, apparently, and apparently too, all contradictions can be resolved by “democracy”. I can see how abstract democratism can ignore the economic base, which brings a contradiction between the electorate and elected, who the electorate, in a position of class antagonism, cynically deploy the abstract, absolutist fetishization of democracy by giving the masses hopium in speech and presence yet in action do everything for their class interests and collaborators.
I read this more than a year ago now and it’s still one of my favorite theory texts. The whole thing has many practical insights for how to approach Marxism but I think this portion about democracy (along with a section before or after about freedom of speech/press) is one of the most useful things I’ve learned from it.
It really reshaped by prior thought process on the topic of democracy and how its venerated as a concrete practice in the west rather than a means to achieve an ends.