More languages
More actions
- ProleWiki Application Responses
- FIRST SET
1. Where did you find ProleWiki from? How familiar are you with it? What made you want to join, and what areas are you interested in contributing to?
I found ProleWiki while looking for better leftist and Marxist sources online. I was trying to move beyond vague internet leftism and find resources that take Marxism, anti-imperialism, socialist history, and existing socialist states seriously. I would say I am still learning, but I am familiar enough with ProleWiki to understand that it is a Marxist-Leninist project with a strong anti-imperialist position.
What made me want to join is that I believe leftist education matters. I formally study political science in school, and that has pushed me to take theory, history, and organization more seriously. I want to contribute to areas like anti-imperialism, national liberation, Black liberation, Asian and Filipino history, socialist states, settler-colonialism, political theory, and pro-LGBTQIA+ Marxist analysis. I am also interested in helping explain concepts in a way that is accessible to newer comrades without watering down the politics.
2. What current of Marxist thought do you uphold? Describe your path toward your current political perspective.
I uphold Marxism-Leninism, though I am still developing and studying. My path toward Marxism came through anti-racism, anti-imperialism, political science, ethnic studies, and learning about the history of colonialism, capitalism, and socialist revolutions. I became more serious about leftism after seeing how capitalism connects exploitation at home with imperialism abroad.
I learned from Marx, especially Capital, and from revolutionary figures and thinkers like Kwame Ture, Frantz Fanon, Angela Davis, and other anti-colonial and Black radical traditions. I also learned through Asian ethnic studies and post-Civil War American history, where I saw how capitalism, racism, colonialism, and state power developed together. Over time, I came to believe that moral opposition to capitalism is not enough. Marxism-Leninism gives a scientific method for understanding class society, imperialism, the state, revolution, and socialist construction.
3. Have you read our principles? Comment your agreements or objections.
Yes, I have read the principles. I agree with the Marxist-Leninist and anti-imperialist orientation. I also agree with the defense of existing socialist states, the opposition to NATO imperialism, the rejection of fascism and Zionism, and the opposition to racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of oppression.
I especially agree that class reductionism is not Marxist. Class struggle is central, but oppression is not separate from capitalism and imperialism. Racism, patriarchy, settler-colonialism, homophobia, and transphobia are material systems that help divide the working class and reproduce capitalist power. I do not have major objections to the principles. My main position is that I am still studying and want to keep improving my understanding in practice.
4. Should Marxists in your country support transgender people? Explain gender identity and sexual orientation using dialectical materialism.
Yes. Marxists in my country should absolutely support transgender people. A Marxist movement that abandons trans people is not liberating the whole working class. Trans liberation and queer liberation are part of the struggle against capitalism, patriarchy, reaction, and bourgeois moral control.
Using dialectical materialism, gender identity and sexual orientation should not be treated as fixed metaphysical categories outside history. Human beings are biological, social, historical, and material beings. Sex has biological aspects, but the way society organizes gender, family roles, masculinity, femininity, reproduction, sexuality, and social expectations changes across different modes of production and historical conditions.
Gender identity is a person’s lived relation to gendered social existence, including how they understand themselves within or against the categories society gives them. Sexual orientation concerns patterns of romantic or sexual attraction. Neither can be reduced to individual “choice,” bourgeois liberal identity alone, or abstract idealism. They emerge through the relationship between human biology, social development, culture, labor, family structure, and historical conditions.
Marxists should support trans people materially: defend access to healthcare, housing, employment, public safety, legal recognition, education, and protection from fascist and reactionary attacks. We should oppose transphobia in the working-class movement, support trans workers, and understand that attacks on trans people are often used by the ruling class to distract from capitalism and divide the oppressed.
5. What is your position on Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong? How would you describe their historical role?
My position on Stalin is that he is not personally my favorite historical figure, but I reject the common anti-communist demonization of him. Stalin played a major role in socialist construction, industrialization, collectivization, defeating Nazi Germany, and defending the Soviet Union during an extremely difficult historical period. I think Marxists should study Stalin seriously, defend him against false bourgeois propaganda when necessary, and also be willing to discuss mistakes, contradictions, and harsh conditions without falling into liberal anti-communism.
Mao Zedong is one of the most important revolutionary leaders in world history. I see Mao as a giant of anti-feudal, anti-imperialist, and socialist struggle. The Chinese Revolution defeated the brutal conditions of semi-feudalism, colonial domination, warlordism, Japanese imperialism, and Kuomintang rule. Mao’s contributions include people’s war, the mass line, new democracy, anti-imperialism, and the attempt to continue class struggle under socialism. I respect Mao highly because the Chinese Revolution transformed the lives of hundreds of millions of people and laid the basis for China’s later development.
6. What are your thoughts on China, Vietnam, Cuba, DPRK, and Laos? Do you believe any are socialist?
Yes, I believe China, Vietnam, Cuba, the DPRK, and Laos are socialist, though each has its own historical path, contradictions, and material conditions. I do not judge socialism by whether a country looks like an idealized utopia. I judge it by class power, the role of the communist party, public ownership and planning, anti-imperialist orientation, socialist construction, and whether the state is oriented toward developing the productive forces under proletarian leadership.
China is socialist because the Communist Party remains the leading force of the state, the commanding heights of the economy remain under public direction, and the country uses markets as a tool while maintaining long-term socialist planning and anti-imperialist development. Vietnam and Laos have similar market-socialist paths shaped by war, underdevelopment, and the need to develop productive forces. Cuba is socialist because it has maintained socialist planning, public healthcare, education, and internationalism despite decades of U.S. blockade. The DPRK is socialist because it remains anti-imperialist, led by a workers’ party, and shaped by the need to survive extreme U.S. military pressure and sanctions.
I also think it is important to distinguish socialist states from anti-imperialist or progressive states. Countries like Burkina Faso, Nicaragua, Algeria, the Congo, Bangladesh, or Indonesia may have anti-imperialist, progressive, national-developmental, or historically socialist elements depending on the period and leadership, but I would be careful not to call every anti-Western or postcolonial state socialist. Marxists should analyze each concrete case materially.
7. What is settler-colonialism? Are there countries that still fit that description, and what should be done regarding them? What should be done about decolonization and liberation of indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities, and immigrant groups in your country?
Settler-colonialism is a form of colonialism where the colonizing population does not simply extract resources and leave, but settles permanently, takes land, replaces or dominates the indigenous population, and builds a state around that dispossession. It is not only an event in the past; it is a continuing structure.
The United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Israel are major examples of settler-colonial states. In the U.S., settler-colonialism is tied to indigenous genocide, stolen land, slavery, anti-Blackness, militarized borders, and imperialism. Israel is also a settler-colonial state because Zionism created and maintains a state through the displacement and domination of Palestinians.
What should be done is decolonization in a real material sense, not just symbolic representation. That means land back, treaty rights, indigenous sovereignty, return of stolen resources, abolition of colonial policing and border violence, protection of indigenous languages and cultures, and the right of oppressed nations to self-determination. For ethnic minorities and immigrant groups in the U.S., liberation requires fighting racism, deportations, labor exploitation, police violence, imperialism, and the capitalist system that produces these conditions. Decolonization of the mind also matters, as Frantz Fanon argued, because colonialism shapes culture, identity, education, and consciousness.
8. What is your analysis of Palestine? What do you think of the October 7, 2023 events and the groups involved?
My analysis is that Palestine is fundamentally a question of settler-colonialism, national liberation, and imperialism. Zionism created a settler-colonial state through the displacement of Palestinians, and Israel continues to occupy, blockade, dispossess, imprison, and militarily attack Palestinians. The United States and other Western powers support Israel because it functions as a strategic outpost for imperialism in the region.
My thoughts on Palestine are serious and not based on liberal “both sides” framing. The root cause is occupation and settler-colonial violence. I am not personally a supporter of Hamas’s ideology, and I have more sympathy for secular and leftist Palestinian resistance traditions such as the PFLP and the historic PLO. However, I still support the right of oppressed people to resist occupation, including armed resistance, while also believing Marxists should oppose the targeting of civilians.
The October 7 events have to be understood in the context of decades of occupation, blockade, ethnic cleansing, apartheid conditions, and repeated Israeli violence against Palestinians. The Palestinian groups involved were acting within a broader national liberation struggle, even if Marxists can critique specific tactics, ideology, or actions. Israel’s response, especially the mass killing and destruction in Gaza, shows the colonial character of the Israeli state. The main task for Marxists is to support Palestinian liberation, oppose Zionism, oppose U.S. imperial support for Israel, and defend the right of return and self-determination for the Palestinian people.
Second Set:
1. In your own words, how would you describe dialectical materialism?
Dialectical materialism is the Marxist method for understanding reality through material conditions, contradiction, change, and development. It means that the world is not static. Society changes because contradictions develop inside it, especially contradictions between classes, productive forces, property relations, and political power.
Materialism means we begin from real conditions: labor, production, land, technology, class relations, imperialism, and the state. Dialectics means we understand that things develop through conflict and contradiction. Capitalism creates its own gravediggers because it develops the working class, socializes production, and creates crises that expose the limits of private ownership. Dialectical materialism is not just an academic idea; it is a tool for revolutionary analysis and practice.
2. What are your thoughts on national liberation or land back?
I support national liberation and land back. National liberation is the struggle of oppressed nations against colonialism, imperialism, occupation, and dependency. It is not separate from class struggle, because imperialism exploits nations, resources, workers, and land on a global scale.
Land back is not simply about individual property transfers. It means returning land, sovereignty, resources, and decision-making power to indigenous peoples. In settler-colonial countries like the United States, land back is necessary because the state itself was built on stolen indigenous land and enslaved African labor. Marxists should support indigenous sovereignty and connect it to socialism, anti-imperialism, ecological repair, and the liberation of all oppressed peoples.
3. Have you read anything on Marxist feminism? What are your perspectives on it?
Yes. I have read and learned some Marxist feminist perspectives, especially through Angela Davis and women’s liberation in the Black Panther and broader communist tradition. I have also learned a little about Leila Khaled and revolutionary women in anti-colonial struggles. I still want to study more, including Engels, Clara Zetkin, Alexandra Kollontai, and more contemporary Marxist feminist work.
My perspective is that women’s oppression is materially connected to class society, private property, the family, reproduction, unpaid domestic labor, and capitalist exploitation. Marxist feminism is important because liberal feminism often focuses only on representation, while Marxist feminism asks who does the labor, who owns property, who controls reproduction, and how patriarchy serves capitalism. Women’s liberation requires socialism, but socialist movements also have to actively fight patriarchy inside the movement.
4. Do you think abolishing the nuclear family should be a goal of the communist movement? If so, how would it be abolished?
Yes, but I think this has to be explained carefully. Abolishing the nuclear family does not mean abolishing love, care, parenting, or personal relationships. It means abolishing the economic compulsion and patriarchal structure that force people into isolated family units for survival.
Under capitalism, the nuclear family often privatizes care work, traps women in unpaid labor, makes children economically dependent on parents, and turns housing, healthcare, education, and survival into private burdens. Communists should abolish the economic basis of the nuclear family by socializing care: universal childcare, free healthcare, communal resources, public housing, food security, elder care, reproductive freedom, and the end of women’s economic dependence on men. Family relations should become freer, more collective, and based on love rather than property, coercion, or survival.
5. What is imperialism, and how do institutions/programs like the IMF, Belt and Road Initiative, and World Bank relate to it?
Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism, where monopoly capital, finance capital, colonialism or neocolonialism, military power, and unequal exchange allow dominant capitalist countries to exploit oppressed nations. Imperialism is not just one country being mean to another. It is a global system of extraction and domination.
The IMF and World Bank are imperialist institutions because they often force poorer countries into debt, austerity, privatization, deregulation, and dependency. They help maintain the power of Western finance capital over the Global South. The Belt and Road Initiative is different. I see the BRI as broadly anti-imperialist because China helps many African, Asian, and Latin American nations build infrastructure, develop productive forces, and escape some forms of Western colonial and neocolonial dependency. That does not mean every project is perfect or free of contradiction, but it is not the same as IMF structural adjustment or Western imperialist domination.
6. What Marxist works have stood out to you?
Some works and thinkers that stood out to me include Marx’s Capital, because it explains exploitation, surplus value, commodity production, and how capitalism works beneath the surface. Kwame Ture also stood out to me because he connected Black liberation, Pan-Africanism, anti-imperialism, and revolutionary struggle. Frantz Fanon stood out because he explained colonial violence, national liberation, and the psychological effects of colonial domination. Angela Davis stood out because she connects capitalism, racism, prisons, gender, and liberation.
I still want to read more Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Thomas Sankara, Kollontai, Zetkin, and other Marxist-Leninist and anti-colonial writers. I am not finished studying, but I take theory seriously and want to keep developing as a socialist.
Optional Questions:
1. Comments or feedback about the application process
I think the application process is useful because it checks political line, seriousness, and whether someone understands Marxism beyond aesthetics. I also appreciate that it asks about transgender people, settler-colonialism, imperialism, socialist states, and Palestine, because those questions show whether someone is actually anti-imperialist and anti-oppression in practice.
2. Familiarity or skill with programming languages or MediaWiki
I do not have deep programming or MediaWiki experience yet, but I am willing to learn. I understand that collaborative projects require formatting, sourcing, editing standards, and patience. I would be interested in learning how to edit properly and contribute in a disciplined way.
3. Other skills or areas of interest that could benefit the project
I have experience with political science, ethnic studies, art, writing, and explaining political ideas to newer people. I am interested in anti-imperialism, socialist history, Black radicalism, Filipino and Asian history, Palestine, settler-colonialism, Marxist feminism, LGBTQIA+ liberation, disability and accessibility, and making Marxist education more understandable without making it liberal or unserious.