More languages
More actions
Hello there :)
First Set
1. I discovered ProleWiki in 2024 while searching for some Marxist concepts on Google, with the Wiki appearing near the top results, giving me the curiosity to check it out. I have since explored many articles and am very happy with being able to explore Marxist and non-Marxist focused articles without being subject to the obvious western-liberal bias of other websites such as Wikipedia. I am not that familiar with editing, but I did recently make some contributions to some articles already without a proper account, which led me to desire to formally create one. I am most interested in contributing to articles relating to Zionism, the Palestinian struggle for liberation and Jewish-related articles (e.g. Bundism). I am also interested in contributing to some others relating to articles regarding countries outside of the Imperial Core, but I'm less apt in these subjects.
2. I consider myself to be a Marxist-Leninist, though I like to interact with a broader range of currents and don't consider myself ideologically stagnant or dogmatic in anyways, being open to new ideas and perspectives. The path here has been long, and I once considered myself to be a center-left liberal, though at the time I had little interest in politics and barely knew anything beyond the mainstream status quo. As I became more interested in politics I moved to the Social Democratic sphere during the pandemic and remained there for a fairly long time, though I already developed interest and enjoyment in countries such as Yugoslavia and the USSR during this time. The limitations of Social Democracy made me want to move left-ward, though my remaining liberal perspectives prevented me from going full Marxist for some time, before the development of worldwide events caused a final rupture between myself and my older perspectives, leading me to interact and join formal Marxist currents, more specifically Marxist-Leninism.
3. I have read the principles and agree with them. In fact it saddens me that more famous projects such as Wikipedia use the same language of "democratic transparency" while being largely funded by large corporations and controlled by some few rich contributors from the Imperial Core (mostly USA) only. I guess my only suggestion for them would be to add new countries to critically support, as events develop, such as Burkina Faso, which since 2022 has been strongly moving to an anti-imperialist and even socialist-aligned perspective (though I wouldn't call them an AES country).
4. Marxist should, with no shadow of doubt, support transgender people in the broader struggle against the bourgeoisie. Gender identity and sexual orientation, although making great progress when compared to a century ago, are still seen as "external" and "exotic" and the West supports it as long as activism remains lucrative (pinkwashing), elitist (excuse to denounce, sanction or even invade other countries) and superficial (actually changes nothing). Indeed, though progressive liberals proclaim themselves as "allies", they see these topics as external, limited to peaceful activism. As Phil Ochs put it, they are "Ten degrees to the left of center in good times, ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally." and won't move an inch to actually strive for equality beyond "go get 'em champs" support. From a dialectical material point of view we can understand that the norms, systems, structures and roles that oppress the LGBTQIA+ do not derive from some "senseless outdated conservatism" but from material conditions which perpetuate them in the name of the accumulation of capital and maintenance of power by the capitalist class. Of course, the overthrow of capitalism will not imply the immediate and sudden end to oppression on these regards, as the superstructure also exerts much influence on the base, but through dialectial materialism we can understand this oppression, in its current form, to derive from the structures of capitalism, independent of "liberal" or "conservative" labels. As such, the Marxist support for these people, including trangender people, is essential for the liberation of the whole workingclass from its chains, and continuous support is of great importance to ensure the end of oppression after the end of capitalism.
5. Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong are essential and important figures in the history of socialism. Both made unprecedented contributions to the movement through their roles as leaders of the USSR and China, and many of their ideas and plans yielded great results that proved that socialism could work and improve the lives of millions, while also developing their countries and communities into material abundance. Of course, we shouldn't fall prey to the Great Men Theory, which is fully idealistic in nature and promotes "Great Men" as being the sole responsible ones for any and all historical events and developments. We also shouldn't idealise and romanticise them, as the mistakes that were done along the way need critical analysis to strive for better developments in the future. As both of them promoted throughout their lives, cults of personality and lack of self-criticism are not part of socialism. Even through their mistakes, one must see through the Imperial propaganda and look to them as men who played key roles, observing their successes as they faced a global siege from the capitalist countries.
6. China, Vietnam, Cuba, DPRK and Laos are countries defined by Actually Existing Socialism. Despite their differences and historical developments since the 20th century, they remain dictatorships of the proletariat and remain committed in their fight against imperial capitalism. The processes called "liberalisation" by Western Media were rather necessary measures to develop the productive forces in their countries, strenghten their bases and maintain socialist leadership in the midst of the the tulmultuous end of the 20th and start of the 21st centuries. China is a primary example of this socialist success, having developed from a poor underdeveloped country into a superpower in half a lifetime, and now moving back into socialisation. Other countries, such as Cuba and the DPRK have suffered enormous and unprecedented sieges, forcing them to isolate and adapt, but managing to keep their stances even through that. As such, despite any critiques or not, one must recognise these countries as socialist.
7. Settler-Colonialism is the process through which an external conquering population colonise another land and people not only through the exploitation of the population and the extraction of the wealth and resources, but also by attempting to replace, assimilate and/or exterminate them into their own, as they migrate into said land. This process has been most proeminent in countries such as the United States, Canada, Israel and Australia, but can also be seen in many regions and countries such as Brazil, South Africa, Argentina, Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), and more. The majority of these countries remain settler-colonialist because they continue to engage in this process, which is independent of any colony-metropolis relation that relates to broader colonialism. The answer has been and remains one: Decolonisation. Decolonisation does not mean giving barren land to indigenous populations, calling it a "reserve" and pretending all is now fine, and it also does not limit itself to monetary reparations. The liberation of the indigenous peoples can only come through an effective decolonisation process where the glorification of the colonial past is ended, they are given the means and tools to assert full sovereignty (does not imply separatism, which is one of many options) and repair them fully through land, acknowledgement (real, not superficial) and allowing them to develop themselves independently of their former oppressors (e.g. giving them "autonomy" under the same sociopolitical framework).
8. The situation of Palestine did not start in 2023. It also did not begin in 1967, 1948 or 1922. Since the dawn of large-scale imperialism in the 19th century, the West has eyed Palestine as having an strategic position to protect their interests regarding the colonial exploitation of the peoples of the region, keeping control of the valuable Suez Canal and later on to guarantee the supply of petroleum and similar regional resources to the West. They attempted to do that first by forcing the Ottoman Empire (who controlled it at the time) to open itself to Western capital (which proceeded to buy much land in Palestine) and also through religious means (German Templer "silent crusade" during the late 19th century). Once Zionism emerged as a political force, a germanic-nationalism-inspired movement of the Western European jewish bourgeoisie, its desire to create "something colonial" (as Herzl described) collided with the already existing European desires to control the region, leading to its promotion by Western elites as a viable movement to establish an effective military and colonial hold of a strategic region and also get rid of the Jews, which they had persecuted for centuries ("The antisemites will become our most loyal friends, the antisemite nations will become our allies.", also said by Herzl). So Zionist settler-colonialism began in the 19th century, first slowly and weak, and then gaining great strength after World War I once the British established the Mandate of Palestine. After that Zionists, supported and protected by the British, were able to begin their preparations to expel and cleanse Palestinians, as happened during the Nakba (still ongoing). Since the establishment of Israel, Zionists continued to exterminate and oppress the indigenous Palestinians, which continued to this day. It should surprise absolutely no one that an oppressed people, as it turns out, don't want to be oppressed, and will fight for their freedom, as seen on countless occasions such as the Intifadas, and, more recently, October 7th. Israel already made clear they don't want peace (In 2018, Gazans participated in the Great March of Return, a series of civilian-led peaceful demonstrations against Zionist occupation and oppression. Israel then proceeded to kill more than 200), and despite any criticism one might have of Hamas, their efforts in fighting off Zionist aggression and striving to liberate Palestine after Arafat's and Fatah's opportunistic capitulation should be lauded. As such, the current Gaza War is not an exceptional event regarding the Palestinian struggle, but the latest development in a fight for freedom which now lasts for over a century. The current genocide is further evidence that the State of Israel, which serves as a military extension of the United States, should be fully dismantled and decolonised, for a Free Palestine is possible, and an essential step in killing off the bloodsucking beast that is colonialism and capitalism.
Second Set (Lightning Round)
1. Dialectial Materialism is the means by which one can properly analyse the importance of real conditions and contradictions in society and given events. It is of great importance to understand the current challenges that the proletariat face and must be understood if one desires to comprehend where things are and how they came to be as such. 2. National Liberation is a very important process by which an oppressed people can assert their independences and freedoms from imperial, colonial and assimilationist policies that exploit and oppress them. National Liberation does not imply nationalism, separatism and "balkanisation", which are grounded on more bourgeois conceptions of sovereignty. They can occur through these, but can also happen through various other means, as seen in the Soviet policy of Korenizatsiia. 3. I have read some pieces of Marxist Feminism and I believe that it is the way to the liberation of women. Today Feminism is promoted in a superficially activist, liberal and 'entrepreneur' form which don't actually do anything to end the entrentched patriarchy and solve the inequalities between men and women. Marxist Feminism additionally allows for the placement of women's struggle in the greater socialist struggle, rather than being opportunistically coopted to promote racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc., as we have previously seen in "bourgeois-approved" feminist movements. 4. The so-called "Nuclear Family" has been a recent and modern development, especially promoted during the 20th century by Western Imperialist countries. The nuclear family could be called a commodisation of familiar relations, where parents are expected to raise their children by themselves as an investment for the future, with the men expected to provide economically and while the women can also contribute in monetary terms, her main obligation should be as a caretaker and housewife. As such, it should be abolished by promoting more communitary and communal bonds by creating an environment in which children are not an "investment" to be cared solely by their father and mother, but as independent human beings which grow in a healthy communitarian environment. Meanwhile, the child's parents should be liberated from any financial or household expectations, being free to pursue their desires and raise their children in a broader and healthier context. As the saying goes, "It takes a village to raise a child." 5. The most pressing issue in the moment should actually try to build an effective communist movement instead of constantly fracturing or selling out. The mainstream parties in my country that once were self-declared "communists" have went through a series of unnecessary divisions over superficial issues that left the communist movement weakened, and later led to them becoming reformist and aligning with social democratic or left-liberal coalitions. In recent years there has been a surge in actual communist movements and new parties have formed along the way. These parties should cooperate and strive to build an effective movement, because as of now it is very small, though 'very small' is an improvement from 'effectivelly non-existent'. 6. The difference between Marxism and other anti-capitalist movements such as Anarchism (or more wild ones such as Reactionary Accelerationism) is the fact that Marxism has an effective philosophical basis focused on material reality, which allows it to plan, program, learn and understand how to built a movement that isn't merely anti-capitalist, but also for full universal liberation. This means that the movement can be organised, planned and successful, instead of just becoming impactless activism, crazy hateful rhetoric or just spontaneous bursts of unorganised activity that yield nothing in the long-term. 7. Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism and the process through which the Imperial Core extract labour and resources from the rest of the world and their populations. Institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank are key in this regard, as they impose measures that allow for Imperial countries and their corporations to exploit other countries. The Belt and Road Initiative is not imperialist because it does not wish for the exploitation of others, but their mutual development. The capitalist West is epistemologically incapable of understanding any international program that doesn't require subjulgation and exploitation, as such now does self-projection against it. Of course, many critiques can be done to it, but calling it imperialist just misses the point of what imperialism is and shows a complete lack of understanding of the program beyond Western Media talking points. 8. I have read some works from Marxists coming from historical and current AES countries, but I don't think I have read a full work just yet, but rather read parts of it. A proeminent example that comes to mind is Deng Xiaoping, which I of course read because of his contributions to the development of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and the immense growth of China since then.