Comrade:Magz

First set 1. I found Prolewiki on Lemmygrad and learned more about it on the Decolonial Indigenous and Proletarian Study server on Discord. I have used Prolewiki to read books and to read about socialist history. I became interested joining Prolewiki after talking to editors in the Decolonial server. I would be okay with uploading books in the library.

2. I am a Marxist Leninist. I grew up in a family that held somewhat progressive political values, so naturally I started out as a social democrat. In my teens I got more interested in politics, having friends being members of a socialist youth party. This introduced me to a bunch of Marxist literature, and after reading the communist manifesto, something clicked in me, and I was well on my path towards ML thought. In my 20's I joined my local communist ML party, participated in study clubs and went to many protests and marches. The more political theory and history I read, the more solidified my political views beaome.

3. I've read Prolewikis principles and fully agree with all of them.

4. Gender is a topic i whish to learn more about. My understanding is that the concept of the nuclear family, which is a capitalist concept, is reinforcing traditional family structures to reproduce the labor force. This leads to discrimination of the LGBT community. In short, capitalism limits gender expression to the traditional nuclear family. Marxists should support the LGBT community, because liberation of the LGBT community requires the dismantling of the capitalist system.

5. Stalin contributed greatly to the industrialization of the USSR. He played a key role in the victory of the Great Patriotic War against the Nazis. My knowledge of Mao is limited. He successfully lead the Chinese civil war to victory against the Kuomintang and the communist party is still standing strong in China to this day. If I recall correctly, Mao developed the principle of The Mass Line, which aims to formulate and put the peoples needs to action. China, as well as Russia was at the pre-revolutionary time semi-feudal. And Mao was well aware of the need to redistribute the land for the revolution to be successful.

6. China, Vietnam, Cuba, DPRK and Laos are all socialist countries with their own characteristics. China and Vietnam both are big industrial countries, and probably because of that they don't suffer from sanctions like many other former and current socialist countries. Both China and Vietnam allows private markets, and due to both countries being big manufacturers that can be invested in or produce for foreign companies, they are considered "free enough" by the capitalist west to avoid sanctions. Cuba recently voted to allow for private property but are still heavily sanctioned/blockaded by the U.S. which heavily limits their trade with the rest of the world. Due to proximity to the U.S, fear of successful socialism is a major threat to the capitalist imperial core, and therefore heavily sanctioned/blockaded by the U.S. The DPRK which is one of the worlds most sanctioned countries, has its own characteristics of socialism, Juche. This is a concept of self reliance, in contrast to the U.S vassal, South Korea which are fully reliant on the U.S and other capitalist countries. I don't know much about Laos, other than the revolution was led by Ho Chi Minh, and is ruled by the the Lao Peoples Revolutionary Party.

7. Settler-colonialism. First examples that comes to mind would be; U.S, Canada, Australia, Israel. One differencing trait to "traditional" colonialism is that the land for the indigenous are directly taken over by the (European) settlers. The goal is not to exploit the potential labor of those indigenous to the land. The goal is to get rid of them. A solution to end the oppression of settler-colonialism would include redistribution of the land, political power and wealth back to the indigenous communities. This would at least be a start. Needless to say, the abolishment of private property would be essential to liberate the indigenous communities. Marginalized communities such as ethnic minorities, immigrants and indigenous people (especially in settler-colonial states) often become victims to reactionaries. News outlets sharing stories how immigrants are crossing borders "illegally", how indigenous communities aren't contributing enough to the workforce. What these lies achieve is to paint marginalized communities as the reason that wages are low, jobs are hard to find etc.. instead of putting the blame on the capitalist. These lies are often in settler-colonial states targeted at the white working class people, dividing the working class and making it more difficult to stand as a united force against the capitalists. The Rainbow Coalition is a good example of working class movements that managed to unite, despite the reactionary views of Young Patriots.

8. As mentioned in question 7, Israel is a settler-colonial state. DNA tests are not allowed in Israel due to the fact that a DNA test would reveal that most of the settlers are in fact, not native to the land. It is an Apartheid state that seeks to establish an ethno-state. Palestinians live under different rules than Israelis, which alone proves the fact that Israel is an Apartheid state. The Law of Return gives every Jew right to settle in Israel/occupied Palestinian land. In contrast, The Absentee Property Law forbids Palestinians that fled or got deported to return to their homes. Homes that will be taken by Israeli settlers. Israel has since its beginning in 1948 been a de facto U.S vassal. A strategic military outpost in west Asia, a puppet state that can destabilize the region without the U.S loosing face and an excuse to pump billions in to the military to continue U.S hegemony.

Second set 1. Dialectical materialism. Dialectics is the non-static nature of things, the "motion" of the world. Materialism is the physical world around us. The term dialectical materialism stands in contrast to idealists or liberal interpretations of the world where the world isn't necessarily in motion, and the real world isn't necessarily real. An idealist would say that an apple is an apple and has always been an apple. And the apple looks like an apple to me, and tastes like an apple to me, but it may invoke different sensations in other people. It is to say that the object of the apple exists in the mind of individuals. For a dialectical materialist the apple is the product of a biologic process, a product of societal and historical processes. The evolution from a seed and energy, to a bud on a tree, to the apple on the counter. To my understanding, dialectical materialism is the scientific way to describe the world in motion. One example on how dialectical materialism describes "motion" or societal change is through contradictions. Contradictions is the natural "tension" or conflict that exists in our world i.e struggle between the working class and the bourgeoisie. These contradictions are a driving force for societal and historical change.

2. National liberation seems to me like one of the most important parts of the process to an International communist world. Today it seems like slowly the imperial core are loosing control over its holdings around the world, stretched too thin trying to keep control on Ukraine and Israel while still maintaining its outposts in the rest of the world (occupied Korea, Philippines etc..). While national liberation brings economic freedom and self determination to those who achieve it, it also weakens the imperial core greatly by taking back ownership of national recourses. I critically support every national liberation, even those where the national recourses falls into the hands of the "local bourgeoisie". Just the act of weakening the imperial countries gives reasons to support the movement. I would of course prefer if such liberation movements would bring about actual socialism, but I still would critically support every national liberation movements (and no, Taiwan isn't a national liberation movement. no love for fascists).

3. I am not very well read on Marxist feminism, but as I wrote about gender, this is also a topic i wish to read and learn more about. As with earlier questions, it's useful to compare Marxist feminism with "regular" or "liberal" feminism. While both agrees that the patriarchy must be abolished, only the Marxist feminists recognizes that the patriarchy is interlinked with capitalism, and to end patriarchy, one must also end capitalism. Capitalism reinforces patriarchal systems such as the nuclear family where women are expected to bear children, maintain the home, cock food, bring up children for no pay, and to bring up the next generation of workers for the capitalists to exploit. Not only does this devalue the traditional "feminine work". It also keeps women dependent on the income of men. While a liberal feminist might celebrate a female CEO, a Marxist feminist knows that there will be no real female liberation before the end of capitalism. A marxist feminist knows that the struggle for female liberation is linked to the liberation of all working people. you cannot win one without the other.

5. I thing the most pressing issue for communists in my country is to agitate, teaching Marxist theory and supporting socialist projects around the world. Living in the imperial core, communists should fight for the death of NATO, and should fight against the propaganda of the west. Here I'm happy to have discovered Prolewiki, which seems like a reliable source of information, sources and books. Communists should learn to organize everything from the workplace to the apartment blocks where you live and tie it into the political work you do. One should be principled, and fight against western lies and present your own propaganda. There are several parties which claims to be communist or socialist parties. There is a party which claims to be communist called "The Red Party" which have had decent electoral success. They are the leftmost party that have seats in the Parlament. The Labour Party has been a liberal / social democratic party for about a century. Before that, they were a part of the Comintern. When Labour left the Comintern in the 20's, a significant number of members founded a new party. The "Workers' Communist Party" was established, and still exists today. This is the party I'm most affiliated with.

7. I've talked to quite a few people who wonder why the continent of Africa still are so impoverished, even though there are enormous amounts of recourses there. The easiest way to explain why it is like this, is to start with institutions such as IMF and the World Bank. Not sure why Belt and Road Initiative is mentioned together with the World Bank and IMF, since they haven't operated the same way as the two others have. Anyways.. Most of African countries started their "independency" with debt to their former colonial master. The reasoning behind this debt is that the newly free country should pay for the infrastructure that were left behind after independence. Infrastructure such as ports for slave ships, railway to transport goods out of the country etc. This in addition to confiscation of national reserve (at least in French colonies, and former colonies who use the CFA Franc) made it impossible to repay the debt forced upon these countries. This is where these institutions comes in. To repay their colonial debt, they are offered loans from the IMF and World Bank. Loans with very specific conditions. And these conditions always spells austerity. To refinance colonial debt, former colonial countries are forced by these institutions to privatize most of their economy and cut spending in welfare programs. This leads to a country that will struggle economically, and most national industries will be ripe for foreign purchase. And just like this can a country with vast natural resources still be poor over exploited. The Belt and Road initiative seeks to build infrastructure that can boost the economy, and in turn make Africa as a whole a future trading partner. I have yet to see similar austerity conditions on the loans issued through the belt and road initiative, as the loans from the Wold bank always include.

Optional questions 1. It was a very insightful and fun activity to answer these questions. Many of the questions were questions that I haven't thought about much before, and some were questions I was very familiar with, but I haven't necessarily formulated an answer to it before. I used a couple of days to answer this. And hour here and there between work and sleep. I did my best not to directly search for the answers online or in books, but I have looked up names, words and definitions here and there. I like the mixture between open broad questions, and very specific questions. The format is honestly quite horrible. A small text box to fill in answers for many questions that requires somewhat long answers. I used an external text editor, but it is still hard to check this textbox after I've pasted in my answers.

I am always unsure about how much or how long I should answer a question, but I suppose there could never be a rule for that. If any answers I gave left you in doubt, please feel free to ask about it so I can clarify. Thanks!