I’m not sure if this type of post is allowed on Genzedong or not. I wanted to see more discussion on Lemmy and this is the largest community so I crossposted here. Please accept my apologies and remove if not allowed.
I want to preface this by saying that I am still extremely ignorant of Marxist theory. Currently working to catch up but I am very open minded to different perspectives. However, I also want to add that I come from a Chinese family with strong communist sympathies and I feel that I have certain insights into China and the history of communism in China that many in the west do not. My grandfather as well as my father were Marxist philosophers. My father did not push Marxist theory onto me as a child (which I appreciated), hence my late introduction to theory.
Since I grew up primarily in the West, access to Marxist theory was limited. Richard Wolff was one of the people who helped reignite my interest in Marxism. I realize Wolff has some opinions that do not align well with Marxist or ML theory, but I’ve always thought that he was a good gateway to leftist theory as most of what he teaches is rooted in Marxism.
I decided to look up what /r/communism thought of Richard Wolff and while I saw many comments that echoed my thoughts there were also many comments that were virulently anti-Wolff, some of which left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth.
Example: https://www.reddit.com/r/communism/comments/h8mosl/what_are_your_thoughts_on_richard_wolff/ Specifically the comments by /u/ah-gou.
I don’t know enough to form an opinion on most of his comment but the part about Wolff propagating a socialist market economy as “true communism” seems damning, but I also have never heard Wolff say this before either. Another user also replied that while Wolff may not be correct on all the theory, he ultimately teaches Marxist related theory, which cannot be said for most political or economic educators in the West. I thought there was a lot of merit in that.
I previously mentioned that reading these old threads and especially u/ah-gou’s comments left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. That wasn’t because I didn’t agree with his theory based opinion, rather it was mostly because of the strong and almost hateful reaction he had against Wolff. It reminded me of the stories that my aunt used to tell me of the most radical red guards back when she was a red guard. To my understanding, these kind of bottom up radical sectarian actions are what led to most of the violence and suffering seen in the cultural revolution. My initial reaction is that people like /u/ah-gou are exactly why the cultural revolution has been completely and utterly disavowed by the CCP today. Which is interesting given that most of my family who are knowledgeable about the cultural revolution do not absolutely disavow the cultural revolution.
In my view Richard Wolff plays a very important role of educator and usher of Marxism within liberal society. He plays up certain areas that he doesn’t necessarily believe wholeheartedly (such as co-ops) in order to move liberals towards the left. I think he has been an important factor in moving Western political discourse in the past 20 years towards the real left. He may not be right in all things theory, but his impact is important nonetheless. Discussing and criticizing Wolff’s theory is absolutely necessary but the way I have seen him being criticized is too akin to the sectarianism that has plagued and hurt socialist movements around the world, and especially reminiscent of the mistakes seen in China. I think Wolff is a vital part of the socialist movement and is exactly the type of educator we need to see more of in the West. Once you have a basic understanding of Marxist theory you can move on past him, but he is a keystone figure in moving any anti-capitalist towards Marxism.
Thoughts? I am happy to be wrong. Would love to see more discussion on lemmy.
Edit: Question for those who disagree: Those who disavow this type of liberal-pandering Marxist education/communication; what is your envisioned path towards revolution in the west?
^ genuine question, not asked in bad faith.
If anyone ever doubted that Wolff is based af, you only need to listen to what he has been saying about the Ukraine crisis and about China in his recent videos and interviews.
Yes he places much emphasis in his rhetoric on workplace democracy because that is an excellent way to introduce Americans to socialist ideas and the problems with capitalism.
I don’t think it is fair to call him a market socialist. I remember Hakim brought up planning in his interview with Wolff and the response, while cautious and measured, was quite positive.
He is an essential communicator for the modern day Marxist movement, it is clear that he is much more radical than he lets on. But he needs to stay within certain bounds of “respectability” in order to maintain his effectiveness at popularizing Marxism.
I believe that while he is a good stepping stone, his stalling of radicalization is ultimately unhelpful in the long run. Many get stuck thinking what he thinks, which just either verges back into liberalism, or into some sort of fake left movement.
I am not familiar with MLs hating Wolff but I know in general the phenomenon you are speaking of. I agree that it is a problem and one that we should be aware of and try to correct.
I think we should appreciate that everything is a spectrum and that we can’t make thing so black and white with individuals, movements, events etc. I think we should find a way to not only make sure we are compassionate to our comrades who we share 99%+ of our ideas with, but to the many others who do not quite reach such an unrealistic level of purity. It’s a tough balancing act as, of course, we have seen throughout both history and the modern day what happens when nasty elements infect a good thing. But fanatical purity politics is absolutely doing us no favors and part of a greater campaign by our enemies to weaken the Left. I think compassion and kindness are underrated virtues and more comrades should realize not only the humanity and value in those they would deem “insufficiently pure” but recognize that such values will, in the long run, do nothing but help us, just as cruelty, hostility, shit-talking and contempt–especially when excessive and unwarranted–will likewise do nothing over time but rot us from the inside and make us ineffective at growth; compassion and kindness of a sincere and informed sort is very revolutionary in a world where most people are forced to choose between sugary fake plastic la-la land and terminal cynicism and irreverence. This is an issue I’ve encountered much less with MLs than I did during my time among the Synthetic Left but we are all human and such faults are still present. I understand everybody has their own lives and their own problems and that there are traumatizing forces that many of us cope with via anger, impatience, sadism, and similar habits, and we should not belittle everyone who succumbs to their own internal weaknesses, but we should use kindness and compassion to set a standard of kindness and compassion and make sure that toxicity doesn’t root itself in our minds as individuals but particularly as a political group.
I know that I will be, in many ways, unlikable to many of my comrades. I have been very happy to join Lemmygrad but I live in constant fear of being too “me” as throughout my life this has been an eventual death sentence for my social being. I am very opinionated and have developed a lot of odd ideas and I wish greatly to share them with as many people as I can. I keep a face of sharing 99% in common with my comrades when perhaps this number is 90% or even lower depending on the individual. I fear rejection. I don’t think the solution is a cuddly cult-like love-bombing squishy and soft way of being, I just would hope that people could disagree with me (and others) and be confrontational in a way that is healthy for both parties. I might not vibe with XYZ about any given comrade, maybe even severely so, but I love them as a comrade and gladly accept the things I don’t like about them, it’s almost even a part of WHY I like them. I want a political movement and a world populated by people who are as different to me in as many different directions as possible. I think it’s healthy in a human way but also in a pragmatic way as different perspectives, tactics, etc. are needed in this multi-front war where the egregore of capitalism is certainly glad to be attacking us from a hundred radically different angles.
I even appreciate certain liberals as a greater part of a radicalization funnel…even if they perhaps hate me and view us as monsters. People radicalize in different ways. Sometimes a fascist can move straight towards being an ML, but sometimes they must first become a conservative and then a liberal and then a progressive liberal and so on and so forth. Maybe I am happy X person I am not a huge fan of can spread valuable concept Y even if it is littered with the garbage of Z because Z is already such a prominent concept and Y is a hard pill to get people to swallow, even with peanut butter (silly metaphor but you get it).
At the same time, in interest of said diversified tactics that I’m espousing, I can appreciate that pungent negativity is sexy to a lot of people and is a useful tool for certain targets. But yes, I would hope they could at least direct that negativity towards someone who is only 40% like them instead of somebody who is 80% like them. I do not judge people for negativity, I myself can be insufferably negative and as they say “hurt people hurt people.”
Anyways. This is getting cyclical and rambly.
TLDR: Yes comrade, I agree.
That was very poignant and I appreciate the time it took to edit all that…
Now let me tell you what I think of Co-ops 😈😈😈
Seriously though, it wouldn’t hurt to be nice more :3.
Thank you! It definitely could be trimmed WAY down but I was just freely rambling.
Tbh I don’t know much about co-ops 😅 but from what I do know I think my opinions align with most MLs (I think).
But yes, it is definitely emotionally demanding in a day and age where we are sapped of as much energy as we can allow and our ceiling is kept perpetually low but it almost always does better in the long game. I have seen hostile people that seemed impossible to reach take on a slight shift for the better just by policing my own tone and making sure I was being patient and not condescending. Oftentimes it will take a person a dozen acts of kindness from a dozen different people through a long period of time before the changes these amounted to are finally tangible; we must always appreciate the butterfly effect. Cheers!
Any figure slightly left is seen as a stepping stone in western leftist sphere. There is way too much stones pilled up infront of a baby leftist to pass to next step in radicalization. There should be a steady stream of criticism against these figures also. I do not see a spectrum of ideas, these steps are not linear. Marx criticised these figures who had mass appeal, as long as there is material reasons for these figures to exist they wil exist. These are not part of a organization. This disjointed sectarianism is not big deal.
There are some good sources of media such as rev left radio but western leftist media, at least the somewhat popular ones, are generally not pro-Marxism and won’t lead anyone towards anywhere close to Marxism. David Pakman and Sam Seder will not lead anyone towards Marxism. You can argue that they are not “slightly left” but the reality is that this is where the “left” is currently at in North America.
This disjointed sectarianism is not big deal.
Perhaps, and I hope you are right. Maybe I am emotionally biased because of my personal experiences, but as an example, my maternal grandfather was locked up because he hung a portrait of Mao ‘too low’; much of that was due to the escalation in sectarianism seen in the 60s and 70s. We have seen real harm and suffering as a result of this sectarianism in our recent history. Maybe that is unavoidable and even necessary, but I would like to hope not.
I am curious and want to raise this question that I asked the other user: those who disavow this type of liberal-pandering Marxist education/communication; what is your envisioned path towards revolution (in the west)?
Discussing and criticizing Wolff’s theory is absolutely necessary but the way I have seen him being criticized is too akin to the sectarianism that has plagued and hurt socialist movements around the world, and especially reminiscent of the mistakes seen in China.
ppffff this left unity bs will get you nowhere. study marxism properly and reject its many distortions
https://youtu.be/QkRO44P_mrk?t=4705
do not align based on diagnosis of problems but solutions. coops, “democracy at work” is not socialism nor will resolve the problems of capitalism.
We wouldn’t have saw the Long March and the CCP would have died in the cities if Mao’s faction, who deviated significantly from the accepted ML orthodoxy at the time, did not win the leadership and ideological struggle. China would not be the superpower it is today if the CCP did not open up to market reforms. I would argue that this same line of reasoning applies to the west today. 99% of the western population is so heavily propagandized that revolution is impossible no matter how well polished your theory is. Wolff has done more for Marxism (in that he has brought more people towards Marxism) than anyone else in North America that I know of. That’s not to say that there is no merit to your concerns that introducing such distorted theory may lead one to go astray later down the path, but so far I am not aware of any Marxist who suddenly went socdem or now thinks that co-ops are the answer because they listened to Wolff.
I’m also curious, those who disavow this type of liberal-pandering Marxist education/communication; what is your envisioned path towards revolution?
Mao’s faction, who deviated significantly from the accepted ML orthodoxy at the time,
where do you think the 30% comes from? … plus your timeline is all over the place.
I want to preface this by saying that I am still extremely ignorant of Marxist theory. Currently working to catch up
you went from this to lecturing on the chinese revolution?
it’s hilarious watching you go from wolff to maoism. total opposite strategies. lmao.
I am not lecturing anyone on anything, I was just trying to provide a historical example of deviation from accepted theory to adapt to the relevant circumstances. I am fairly ignorant of Marxist theory but I am not ignorant of Chinese history. My reference to Mao and the Long March is in regards to Mao’s focus on revolutionary praxis as opposed to ideological orthodoxy. I am referring to Mao’s ability to adapt and did not mean to lean on his ideological orthodoxy.
where do you think the 30% comes from?
Just to clarify, you’re referring to Mao’s assessment of Deng being 30% wrong and 70% right? Not the CCP’s position that Mao was 30% wrong and 70% right? Or of Mao’s assessment of Stalin being 30% wrong and 70% right? Are you a Maoist then?
… plus your timeline is all over the place.
Can you clarify what you’re referring to?
ppffff this left unity bs will get you nowhere. study marxism properly and reject its many distortions
I also want to go back to your previous comment. Of course I agree with the second half of that statement, but where has your dismissive attitude towards left unity and your grand understanding of Marxist theory gotten you and the West in the past 70 years? A few infiltrators and agitators have nearly completely neutered all of your leftist parties and have left them in splinters. Richard Wolff the “anti-communist” is taking advantage of the current anti-capitalist wave with his adapted strategy and has ignited curiosities towards Marxism in thousands of people. And so I want to ask this next question in the most sincere and respectful way possible; what have you done? Not necessarily you specifically if you don’t want to answer, but I am honestly curious, what do you think the path towards revolution in the west should be?
Democracy at work isn’t a solution, but if MLs spearhead or man the helm of such orgs then it can be used for base-building to move beyond short term solutions. In maoist terms you need a solid and stable base so that the proletariat look to the movement and not liberal institutions for solutions. IMO, it’s a mistake to throw out syndicalism and trade unionism because these ideas are ingrained in western leftism. The problem is that they’re viewed as competing strategies and not potential tools.
deleted by creator
