FIRST SET 1. I first discovered ProleWiki on Marxist-Leninist groups on Reddit. I access the site to get information on the international communist movement from communist sources themselves instead of depending on sites like Wikipedia, word-of-mouth, or online interactions. I am interested in joining the site as an editor because I want to contribute to the project of a firmly Marxist-Leninist encyclopedia and want to share my knowledge on the current communist movements in France, Italy, and Europe in general. 2. I uphold a modern vision of Marxist-Leninist thought which is strictly anti-opportunist and anti-dogmatic. Historically, I support actually-existing socialist states such as the USSR (especially before the counter-revolution following Khrushchev's coup) and countries from the Eastern bloc. On my political path, my family is progressive and in high school I was interested in economics and history. However, I understood that the current system was impossible to reform and a revolution was needed, so I shifted towards a vague "anti-authoritarian" socialist current. As an Italian, I idolized revisionist leaders such as Enrico Berlinguer, while at the same time praising actual Marxists like Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. As I reached university, I started being in contact with Marxist-Leninists with which I discussed my ideas and they changed my perspective towards a more scientific view of socialism. I began reading classic Marxist works, especially during the COVID pandemic, and I began to align myself with Marxism-Leninism while having some doubts about the nature of current socialist countries like the PRC. As my views began to concretize on the PRC by interacting with Marxist sources from China directly (Roland Boer, translated works of current Chinese Marxist authors), I joined Marxist-Leninist organizations in two European countries as well as organizing a student union. 3. I have read the site's principles and I do not disagree with any particular point, however, I believe that the term reactionary language should be defined more clearly for the sake of comprehension and to limit misunderstandings. 4. My understanding of gender is that it is a social construct distinct from biological sex. Gender roles have changed with changes in the economic base of society throughout history, and with them, concepts such as the family, patriarchy/matriarchy, and marriage. Marxists should support the LGBT community in their struggle against reactionary ideology and views from the capitalist superstructure. However, we must keep in mind their common instrumentalization by imperialist forces ("freeing Islamic countries because of their treatment of LGBT people") as well as the anti-Marxist nature of identity politics. The fight against the oppression of the LGBT community must always be redirected towards a class understanding of oppression.
5. To begin with, I believe history to be written by the masses and not by individual leaders. I see Stalin's leadership over the Soviet Union as a great advancement of the socialist cause. From the industrialization of the Soviet Union into a modern superpower that could compete with the United States, his contribution to advancing the material well-being of the Soviet people, his role in the fight against Nazism and fascism in Europe, and his commitment towards Marxism and communism, he should be considered by all communists as a great figure of our movement. However, like all historical figures, socialist or not, Stalin's administration (not his own "leadership" as he did not rule the country alone) maintained some key flaws. First, the deportations of ethnic groups in fear of Nazi collaboration, while a byproduct of imperialist aggression and not Stalin's supposed prejudices, had severe excesses which must be rightfully criticized. Similarly, the trials between 1936 and 1938, again a byproduct of imperialist aggression and a response to the visible fascist, capitalist, and separatist infiltrators, also had their excesses as Molotov stated in his memoirs. The criminalization of homosexuality and abortion is also something that Marxist-Leninists should criticize. Unlike some Marxist-Leninists, I also believe that the collectivization of agriculture, while a necessity due to the impending aggression from both the capitalists and fascists in the West and the need for rapid industrialization, also had a role (minimal) in the Soviet famine of 1933.
About Mao Zedong's administration in China, I see his role in the fight against Japanese fascist aggression and the liberation of China from the reactionary leadership of Chiang Kai-Shek and the Kuomintang as extremely positive. It is also clear to me that Maoist-era policies laid an important base for modern China's successes, with Deng and successive Chinese leaders being inspired by Mao's application of Marxism-Leninism in the Chinese context. However, I maintain that the Sino-Soviet split was a monumental setback to the communist movement and that certain events such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution (which did not originate from Mao himself, but was supported regardless) were errors that require criticism. Maoist China's invasion of Vietnam, their support of the Khmer Rouge and anti-communist movements in the Global South, and their late rapprochement with the United States just to attack the Soviets are also worthy of criticism.
In general, both Mao and Stalin were historical figures who were responding to the historical problems of their time from a Marxist-Leninist perspective and with the objective of socialist construction. Stalin was the leader of the first socialist state, so certain mistakes were almost inevitable. It is necessary to defend their legacy from anti-historical claims and understand their history to not repeat the same mistakes.
6. Currently, I support the People's Republic of China as a dictatorship of the proletariat (albeit one that is undergoing a stage of state capitalism, both out of material necessities, concessions as a means to interact with the global capitalist economy, and also a geopolitical strategy distinct from the errors of the former Soviet Union). The same goes for Cuba, the DPRK, Vietnam, and Laos. Socialism is a process, not a concrete event. I also believe like Mao, that the national bourgeoisie can sometimes have an anti-imperialist nature in the context of the Global South, and that therefore, certain capitalist countries (Russia, Iran), self-proclaimed socialist states that did not undergo a process of revolution (Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua), or ones that are not ruled by explicitly Marxist-Leninist parties can have a progressive role in the fight against US/EU imperialism.
We must have an anti-dogmatic approach towards imperialism and remember that Lenin's analysis of imperialism in the early 20th century is an undebatable and monumental work, but as he states in the preface to the German and French editions, it is a strictly economic work that answers a specific question in world history (namely why imperialist countries started World War I). The current situation is different for example in the context of power projection. While during WWI, imperialist countries had roughly equal military budgets, we are now in a situation where the overwhelming majority of global "defence" spending is from the United States and its allies. Further theoretical developments such as the theory of unequal exchange must also be taken into account, with certain works such as Hickel et al. (2022), maintaining that the main "losers" in the world economy from imperialist drain and unequal exchange include countries like China and Russia. Therefore, the main role of anti-imperialists is to fight US and European influence. For Western comrades, like Liebknecht said, “The Main Enemy Is in Your Own Country!” and we should rally against imperialist endeavours like the war in Ukraine and the encirclement of China by NATO through its proxies like Taiwan and the Phillippines. In the case of comrades in countries such as Russia and Iran, we must support them in their objective of eventually toppling their reactionary regimes and installing socialism.
On the socialist nature of actually existing socialist states, I believe that recent theoretical developments have put the liberation of productive forces as the principal priority. We must understand socialism as a dialectical process, not as a definition or label to ascribe to countries. Therefore, it is difficult to say that countries like China, Vietnam, and Laos, are socialist at the moment. I do believe that they are constructing socialism. Cuba and the DPRK are distinct cases. It seems that they are pursuing similar policies to the modern Communist Party of China as they are seeing their positive developments and their objective advancement of socialism. In general, all current AES countries are dictatorships of the proletariat, retain democratic structures of governance, and have a strong state participation in the economy. While not characteristics of a socialist state per se, it is important to keep this into account.
7. Settler colonialism is a process whereby armed settlers invade and occupy a specific territory to permanently replace the indigenous population. It is often done to install imperialist bulwarks in places with a strong anti-imperialist presence. Some examples of current settler colonialism are notably Israel, the United States, and South Africa (now only partially given the victory of the anti-apartheid movement). While I do not see my country (Italy) as settler-colonial in the present day (it was in the fascist period), I do believe that an "Italian nation" does not have a strong historical footing as a united entity that declares itself as such. The proclamation of a united Italy in 1861 and its total unification in 1871 did not follow the trend of a country with a similar history like Germany, which was composed of several small states united through military alliances and customs unions then united fully in a more or less peaceful manner. Italy united through force and therefore, it is safe to say that the Piedmontese expeditions in the South could constitute as a “colonization”. There are still many regional inequalities and particularities and in the case of the socialist revolution, as Gramsci stated, the southern Italian regions should be given priority concerning economic development and undoing the tendencies following unification. In general, my country still has many regional particularities, and where regionalist sentiments are particularly strong, a future socialist state should come to arrangements of autonomy. Regarding immigrant groups in my country, I am a strong believer in immediate naturalization even under capitalism. In general, forced immigration is caused by imperialism and unequal exchange and it should be seen as criminal endeavours from Western capitalist states. People should be free to decide where to live and flourish, not be forced from material and physical conditions to flee their countries, their families, and contexts to be exploited by Western firms. The proletariat of my country should unite its struggles with the struggles of immigrant groups instead of attacking them and subscribing to a war between the most exploited members of society and the second-most exploited. I completely disagree with groups that want to send immigrants back to their country, but I am also critical towards those who do not understand the true nature of forced immigration and the consequences it brings to people.
8. The Palestinian people are currently living through a genocide, something that even some bourgeois institutions are forced to accept. However, while it has intensified since October 7, it is foolish to think that it was not undergoing a genocide already before. When a nation is confronted with clear, unequivocal attempts towards genocide, resistance must be supported regardless of political positions. There is an attempt to fearmonger the Palestinian resistance as solely composed of Islamic and jihadist movements like Hamas, but there are also progressive, Marxist organizations like the PFLP and the DFLP. There is a lot of confusion regarding October 7, but even certain Israeli outlets concluded that many civilian casualties were caused by the Israeli army themselves as part of both the Hannibal Doctrine and the general indiscriminate use of force. The Palestinian resistance has no real incentive to kill civilians as they tend to take them for hostage exchanges. There are currently thousands of Palestinian hostages in Israeli prisons who were arbitrarily detained. That being said, we must also attack positions that are anti-Semitic. Likening the state of Israel to Judaism only legitimizes the settler colonial project. The main founders of Zionism such as Herzl and Israeli leaders such as Ben-Gurion and Meir were all atheists and saw Jews as a European "nation" and not a religion. The religious turn of Israel is a much more recent development as a means to justify the colonial project. The objective of Zionists is to create and uphold a Western colony in Palestine to control the Arab states following decolonization and economic interests such as oil and maritime routes.
SECOND SET 1. In your own words, how would you describe dialectical materialism?
Dialectical materialism is the philosophical outlook all Marxist-Leninists should ascribe to. It is composed of both a dialectical outlook and a materialist outlook. The materialist outlook entails that material reality shapes societies, as opposed to idealism which maintains that human ideas shape societies and the reality around us. In particular for Marxists, it is the need for humans to fulfil their necessities (the provision of food, water, shelter), that shapes societies and history. For example, the need to develop our means of subsistence has caused technological advancements that paved the way towards agriculture (and as a result, class society as a whole). Material changes cause transitions from one mode of production towards the other, namely from the primitive communal mode of production to the slave mode of production, then to the feudal mode of production, the capitalist mode of production, and finally the communist mode of production (of which socialism is an early stage of). The dialectical outlook aims to understand things in their concrete form and entails that much like material reality in the scientific realm, the world is in constant movement and change, that it is also marked by interconnection, and that there is a unity among opposites. Dialectics maintains that things should be analyzed concretely concerning all other concepts and their context. This is as opposed to the metaphysical outlook maintaining that concepts have fixed definitions with fixed attributes and that events have a clear cause and a clear effect.
2. What do you think is the most pressing issue for communists in your country? What is your opinion of communist parties there?
The most pressing issue for communists in my country is the re-foundation of a strictly Marxist-Leninist vanguard party organized under the lines of democratic centralism that remembers the errors of the past and is willing to fight against revisionism and opportunism. Currently, there are dozens of communist parties, all fighting against one another often for personal issues with members instead of ideology. A serious communist organization should have the overarching goal of re-founding the communist party, not as it was before, but a party that understands current issues and is willing and able to fight against them. However, re-foundation should not just be a re-grouping of all the communist parties but a serious attempt to spread Marxism-Leninism as the only real path towards a socialist revolution. The party should neither want the restoration of capitalism nor have dogmatic and left-opportunist outlooks on issues like imperialism.
3. What do you believe is the main difference between Marxism and other anti-capitalist movements?
Marxism retains a scientific view of socialism and the world around us, understands the need for revolution and the state to reach communism, and requires a strictly organised and disciplined militancy. This is unlike other anti-capitalist movements such as anarchist, Trotskyist, and “libertarian” socialist movements which do not think dialectically and scientifically and attack historical and current examples of socialism on theoretical lines without contextualizing the issues it faced. Every “socialism” will remain in the realm of perfect if such socialism is only present in the minds of people and not concretely in the material world.
4. What is Imperialism and how do institutions and programs like the IMF, Belt and Road Initiative, and the World Bank relate to it?
Lenin defined imperialism as the highest phase of capitalist development. It is a phase whereby capitalist competition naturally concludes in the formation of monopolies and their key role in the economy. Due to capitalism’s constant need for expansion, once an internal market is saturated by monopolies, firms start to look outwards beyond borders. There is therefore a merging of industrial and finance capital as a means to export such capital elsewhere, where the margin of profit is higher. This creates what Lenin described as “a financial oligarchy”. Such financial oligarchy becomes a transnational financial oligarchy with a footing in several countries and capitalist powers divide the world amongst themselves. This definition of imperialism differs from other definitions as it arrives at the essence of imperialism itself instead of the means with which imperialism conducts itself. For some, imperialism is simply the military conquest of a territory or an unequal relationship between core and periphery. However, these are simply means through which imperialism perpetuates itself. These definitions shield institutions such as the IMF and World Bank from criticism of imperialism. Such institutions facilitate the capture of foreign markets in the Global South by taking states hostage of structural adjustment programs (SAPs), which force large part of industries, often extractive, to be privatized and therefore, sold to monopolies in the Global North. SAPs can also deregulate labour laws, weaken the domestic labour movement, empower transnational corporations, and therefore allow states from the Global North to have a strong footing in developing countries where the profit margin is higher (since factors such as labour and resources cost much less).
5. Have you read works from Marxists, pertaining but not limited to those from historical or existing socialist states? Please note some that stood out to you and what contributions to Marxist thought that they added and why you liked them.
I have read some works from Marxists about historical or existing socialist states. The ones that stood out for me were mostly the works written by the Soviet Academy of Social Sciences, especially “Political Economy” and “History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)”. They give a succinct and clear explanation of economic and political theory. However, one of the reasons I retain the views I have on modern China today is Roland Boer’s “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics: A Guide for Foreigners”. It makes Chinese Marxism available to Westerners by translating and providing direct sources from CPC documents and theoretical discussions and provides answers to almost all the questions most communists have regarding China (China’s supposed imperialism, its capitalism, etc).
OPTIONAL 1. No comments, quite clear 2. I have a professional certificate in Data Science from IBM, I know Python.