Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. Simply, it's the most proven and current mode of Marxist organization that addresses the pitfalls of past revolutions (revisionism, over-bureaucratic, erosion of the democratic rule of the masses' party) while maintaining the revolutionary line abandoned by revisionist states at some point in their existence (China, USSR, Nepal pretty recently). It recognizes that the masses make history and even outright calls for attacks on the parties' headquarters from the masses should they rest on their laurels too heavily and abandon the revolutionary struggle. It has active revolutions globally, namely in the Philippines and India currently. These revolutions are developing and have done a lot of really great things in countries that have historically been extremely reactionary (the New Peoples Army officiated the first gay wedding in the Philippines!)
I am open to any questions because a big part of MLM is Criticism, self criticism, and unity! For my anarchist friends here may I recommend this video! It's a really good and non-antagonistic video about how we might have a little more in common than you'd think! :)
I totally agree that we have a LOT in common and a lot to agree on. I am much more along the lines of Bakunin than Marx.
greetings. right now i'm not active in any organization, though still affiliated with psol in brazil. i consider myself a thompson-mandel trotskyite, though with not so hidden sympathies towards titoism and rojavan anarchism.
Ok, ok... I'll go first - I consider myself to be an Anarcho-Communist. Of all the branches of leftist thought and systems, the anarchists have appealed to me the most, and of course I also think that things do need to be organized to work well in the long-term.
I personally don't believe that violent revolutions for the left are going to be successful long-term. History has shown that these breed nothing but reactionary counter-revolutions and efforts to thwart the advancement of the socialist systems you're trying to implement and grow. It's always three steps forward, two steps back, then another step back, then a few more steps back, to the point at which where we are now is worse than before the revolution.
I believe that for long-term success, we must start smaller and gradually make the philosophy part of the culture, which can only happen over the course of many generations. We must start in kindergarten and work harder on stressing to children the need for kindness and empathy, and the values of stewardship of society and the environment. And we need to continue to teach and expose the evils of selfishness and greed and violence.
If we can get to a stage in global human culture wherein the default thought is "Of course I'm going to help my neighbor! Why wouldn't I?" instead of "This is my property and you have to pay me for it!" then we'll be able to take bigger steps.
We also must overcome scarcity, and that's going to involve the use of AI and central planning and a LOT of technological systems that need to be created. But we have the technology to do this now. We CAN overcome scarcity even within our own generation. It's just a matter of will, at this point.
A lot of what you're saying lines up with the political concept of cultural revolution! In China during theirs' they had programs to have students go out from their social circles and into the countryside to build solidarity with the workers and peasants and solidify a connection to the masses. Here's a good video on it!
Yes, that's great. And it's absolutely what we need. Without the threat that the government will "disappear" you if you don't follow along, however.
