More languages
More actions
I have seen much criticism of leading marxist media and its figures. Luna oi's various programs. Second thought, Hakim and Yugopnik with the deprogram and all the rest. Most of it is correct. But fails in a key way: no attempt is made to make media criticizing these materialists' mistakes. To put those criticism's into practice.
I remain supportive of all forms attempt to make marxist media. To capture the essence of marxism and combat liberalism. Websites, podcasts, youtube, twitch, twitter, insta. All of it. One of the more recent redsails is a Lenin that particularly captures my feelings. Lenin wrote a piece titled On the Significance of Militant Materialism. Lenin talks about militant non-communist materialists with the following language. (https://redsails.org/western-marxism-and-christianity/)
"At any rate, in Russia we still have — and shall undoubtedly have for a fairly long time to come — materialists from the non-communist camp, and it is our absolute duty to enlist all adherents of consistent and militant materialism in the joint work of combating philosophical reaction and the philosophical prejudices of so-called educated society. Dietzgen senior — not to be confused with his writer son, who was as pretentious as he was unsuccessful — correctly, aptly and clearly expressed the fundamental Marxist view of the philosophical trends which prevail in bourgeois countries and enjoy the regard of their scientists and publicists, when he said that in effect the professors of philosophy in modern society are in the majority of cases nothing but “graduated flunkeys of clericalism.”
Considering that idealist thought, feality to christianity and its culture such as martyrdom (https://redsails.org/western-marxism-and-christianity/) blights the west. Especially my home English country, the united states of amerika. I stand with Lenin's analysis. He goes on further to illustrate the power of non-marxist thought and its importance to marxists. Further in On the Significance of Militant Materialism he states,
"The keen, vivacious and talented writings of the old eighteenth-century atheists wittily and openly attacked the prevailing clericalism and will very often prove a thousand times more suitable for arousing people from their religious torpor than the dull and dry paraphrases of Marxism, almost completely unillustrated by skillfully selected facts, which predominate in our literature and which (it is no use hiding the fact) frequently distort Marxism. We have translations of all the major works of Marx and Engels. There are absolutely no grounds for fearing that the old atheism and old materialism will remain un-supplemented by the corrections introduced by Marx and Engels. The most important thing — and it is this that is most frequently overlooked by those of our Communists who are supposedly Marxists, but who in fact mutilate Marxism — is to know how to awaken in the still undeveloped masses an intelligent attitude towards religious questions and an intelligent criticism of religions."
Lenin gives the correct approach to these non-marxist materialists just after the above paragraph:
"The well-known German scientist, Arthur Drews, while refuting religious superstitions and fables in his book, The Christ Myth, and while showing that Christ never existed, at the end of the book declares in favour of religion, albeit a renovated, purified and more subtle religion, one that would be capable of withstanding “the daily growing naturalist torrent.” [6] Here we have an out-spoken and deliberate reactionary, who is openly helping the exploiters to replace the old, decayed religious superstitions by new, more odious and vile superstitions. This does not mean that Drews should not be translated. It means that while in a certain measure effecting an alliance with the progressive section of the bourgeoisie, Communists and all consistent materialists should unflinchingly expose that section when it is guilty of reaction. It means that to shun an alliance with the representatives of the bourgeoisie of the eighteenth century, i.e., the period when it was revolutionary, would be to betray Marxism and materialism; for an “alliance” with the Drewses, in one form or another and in one degree or another, is essential for our struggle against the predominating religious obscurantists."
The next immediate paragraph lies out that marxist leninists should lay their own propaganda organs to criticize these lines, and to in Lenin's words,
"Under the Banner of Marxism, which sets out to be an organ of militant materialism, should devote much of its space to atheist propaganda, to reviews of the literature on the subject and to correcting the immense shortcomings of our governmental work in this field. It is particularly important to utilize books and pamphlets which contain many concrete facts and comparisons showing how the class interests and class organizations of the modern bourgeoisie are connected with the organizations of religious institutions and religious propaganda."
All criticism of our materialist breatheren should be organized into public formats. Like this essay or the myriad of other forms available.
The foundation of attacks on liberalism is the building up of proletarian philosophy, AKA materialism and its most advanced form, dialectial materialism. All Marxists who make no effort to show the errors of non-communist materialists are little more than masturbators of the intellect. Swelling like an erogenous blow-fish with each marxist text they read but are either unable or unwilling to share outside their marxist circle.