I actually think that with the internet and everything, we will gradually move away from “big thinkers”. Sure, there will still be people producing decent theory, but i just can’t see in the current world a russian revolution like scenario when whole shifts at factories would meet up to read Marx.
I believe we will move towards a sort of “crowdsourced” theory where the main theoretical line is born organically out of continuos communication and discussion until we eventually get to a point where most contradictions and disagreements are solved. At that point the “big thinker” and his work will be one of many inputs, and not some sort of ideological hegemon.
Sort of like it is happening on here. We didn’t read the same stuff, but with time the community shaped itself to a point where we substantially agree with each other on pretty much everything.
I believe we will move towards a sort of “crowdsourced” theory where the main theoretical line is born organically out of continuos communication and discussion until we eventually get to a point where most contradictions and disagreements are solved.
Not if the CIA or FBI have anything to say about it. Hell not if Maoists and Trots still exist. Hell not if grifters still exist and wield enormous influence that trickles into and infects even those who condemn them on the whole.
This feels kind of like thinking along anarchist lines. That if we only allow everyone to do their thing, people will just arrive at the right conclusions. Even if all institutions sabotaging Marxism magically vanished tomorrow and everyone forgot they existed and their methods, there would still be problems with this. With them existing and those who benefit from them and replicate their suppression and division, this is a pipedream. There’s a reason parties adopt a party line, and that’s because you’ll never get 100% agreement. The point of that of course being, disagree behind closed doors, discuss, debate, but then present a united front once dem-cent process is done whether you lose or win. However you’ll always have haters, power-mongers, fed-plants, and people high on their own fumes.
We need a party, a real movement and leadership within that movement to begin to write down any worthwhile theory in the west. Moreover that movement has to have some sort of success beyond just being mildly popular as CPUSA was in the 30s. Theory without practical, proven application is just spitballing hypotheticals into the void and not necessarily worth a lot.
Also I’ll offer a lot of the western left is infected, deeply with idealism, western nonsense thinking, etc. I think the worthwhile theory of our era is going to come out of China and be translated. At least until the west begins to crumble and a real movement that begins notching successes forms in the west. Until that point it’s largely naval-gazing. The one thing we can try and do right now is solidarity, solidarity, solidarity with other nations and peoples. Anti-imperialism is the one litmus test, wishing for the defeat of the west to which we must hold ourselves and all who would call themselves Marxists who are not in fact vulgar perverters of that term. Ukraine has been helpful in this, weeding out those still clinging to the propaganda of empire and the bourgeoisie who benefit from it.
I am also hopeful for translations of Chinese theory. The west will still need theorists analysing local conditions, though, so revolutionary parties should be cultivating that analysis. Otherwise, I agree with you.
I agree the world has changed a lot with modern tech. And we should be utilising that. It does provide opportunities and it must be theorised, starting with analysis like yours. I do have some criticisms, though.
i just can’t see in the current world a russian revolution like scenario when whole shifts at factories would meet up to read Marx.
This is one of our tasks. It must be built. Reading and discussing key texts regularly and in a careful order must be part of a revolutionary organisation.
I believe we will move towards a sort of “crowdsourced” theory where the main theoretical line is born organically out of continuos communication and discussion until we eventually get to a point where most contradictions and disagreements are solved.
I agree but this is the task of a revolutionary party working with the people to develop a mass line. I’m unsure if it can arise spontaneously.
One of the key benefits of people like Parenti or Woolf is that due to their careers, they have the time to think, write, and publicise their ideas. That’s hard for people with unrelated full time jobs. Although there is some good work by groups like Notes From Below (I’ll get a link).
with time the community shaped itself to a point where we substantially agree with each other on pretty much everything.
That might be more because the patsocs, Hoxhaist, and liberals we’re all expelled lol. (I’m joking, here. I agree with you though as I’ve changed my views on many topics since joining here. So the agreement isn’t because there’s no room for dissent.)
I actually think that with the internet and everything, we will gradually move away from “big thinkers”. Sure, there will still be people producing decent theory, but i just can’t see in the current world a russian revolution like scenario when whole shifts at factories would meet up to read Marx.
I believe we will move towards a sort of “crowdsourced” theory where the main theoretical line is born organically out of continuos communication and discussion until we eventually get to a point where most contradictions and disagreements are solved. At that point the “big thinker” and his work will be one of many inputs, and not some sort of ideological hegemon.
Sort of like it is happening on here. We didn’t read the same stuff, but with time the community shaped itself to a point where we substantially agree with each other on pretty much everything.
Not if the CIA or FBI have anything to say about it. Hell not if Maoists and Trots still exist. Hell not if grifters still exist and wield enormous influence that trickles into and infects even those who condemn them on the whole.
This feels kind of like thinking along anarchist lines. That if we only allow everyone to do their thing, people will just arrive at the right conclusions. Even if all institutions sabotaging Marxism magically vanished tomorrow and everyone forgot they existed and their methods, there would still be problems with this. With them existing and those who benefit from them and replicate their suppression and division, this is a pipedream. There’s a reason parties adopt a party line, and that’s because you’ll never get 100% agreement. The point of that of course being, disagree behind closed doors, discuss, debate, but then present a united front once dem-cent process is done whether you lose or win. However you’ll always have haters, power-mongers, fed-plants, and people high on their own fumes.
We need a party, a real movement and leadership within that movement to begin to write down any worthwhile theory in the west. Moreover that movement has to have some sort of success beyond just being mildly popular as CPUSA was in the 30s. Theory without practical, proven application is just spitballing hypotheticals into the void and not necessarily worth a lot.
Also I’ll offer a lot of the western left is infected, deeply with idealism, western nonsense thinking, etc. I think the worthwhile theory of our era is going to come out of China and be translated. At least until the west begins to crumble and a real movement that begins notching successes forms in the west. Until that point it’s largely naval-gazing. The one thing we can try and do right now is solidarity, solidarity, solidarity with other nations and peoples. Anti-imperialism is the one litmus test, wishing for the defeat of the west to which we must hold ourselves and all who would call themselves Marxists who are not in fact vulgar perverters of that term. Ukraine has been helpful in this, weeding out those still clinging to the propaganda of empire and the bourgeoisie who benefit from it.
I am also hopeful for translations of Chinese theory. The west will still need theorists analysing local conditions, though, so revolutionary parties should be cultivating that analysis. Otherwise, I agree with you.
I agree the world has changed a lot with modern tech. And we should be utilising that. It does provide opportunities and it must be theorised, starting with analysis like yours. I do have some criticisms, though.
This is one of our tasks. It must be built. Reading and discussing key texts regularly and in a careful order must be part of a revolutionary organisation.
I agree but this is the task of a revolutionary party working with the people to develop a mass line. I’m unsure if it can arise spontaneously.
One of the key benefits of people like Parenti or Woolf is that due to their careers, they have the time to think, write, and publicise their ideas. That’s hard for people with unrelated full time jobs. Although there is some good work by groups like Notes From Below (I’ll get a link).
That might be more because the patsocs, Hoxhaist, and liberals we’re all expelled lol. (I’m joking, here. I agree with you though as I’ve changed my views on many topics since joining here. So the agreement isn’t because there’s no room for dissent.)