Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Leninists?

rated by 0 users
This post has 11 Replies | 4 Followers

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,649
Points 28,420
E. R. Olovetto Posted: Tue, Aug 4 2009 3:30 PM

What would I have to do to get called a Leninist? How is what Lenin proposed, or more appropriately what he did, different than Marx, the average socialist/communist or whatever? I don't waste much time researching theories that can be refuted in under a minute, so a concise answer would be great. Stick out tongue

Democracy means the opportunity to be everyone's slave.—Karl Kraus.

  • | Post Points: 65
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 574
Points 9,305
Natalie replied on Tue, Aug 4 2009 3:54 PM

Why would you want to be called so?

If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.

J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495

Leninist refers to a political constitution more than an economic system. Lenin changed his mind on economic matters more than once.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,649
Points 28,420

I don't want to and haven't been =)

I was wondering why Carl Watner (voluntarist guy) called Rothbard one. It has something to do with his strategy. I could maybe dig out the link again and reread but I think what I was lacking was knowledge about Lenin.

 

Stranger:

Leninist refers to a political constitution more than an economic system. Lenin changed his mind on economic matters more than once.

Edit: hmm, I will think about this, thanks.

 

Democracy means the opportunity to be everyone's slave.—Karl Kraus.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495

This may be what he meant when he called Rothbard a leninist. It's from The Ethics of Liberty.

Every new idea and every new discipline necessarily begins with one or a few people, and diffuses outward toward a larger core of converts and adherents. Even at full tide, given the wide variety of interests and abilities among men, there is bound to be only a minority among the professional core or cadre of libertarians. There is nothing sinister or “undemocratic,” then, in postulating a “vanguard” group of libertarians any more than there is in talking of a vanguard of Buddhists or of physicists. Hopefully this vanguard will help to bring about a majority or a large and influential minority of people adhering to (if not centrally devoted to) libertarian ideology.


  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 62
Points 1,480

Stranger, could you elaborate please?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 7,105
Points 115,240
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguardism

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 170
Points 3,275
Arvin replied on Sat, Aug 8 2009 9:03 AM

Leninists want to "seize the power".

 

Listen from 38:00

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6015291679758430958

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 62
Points 1,480

Thanks for the responses.

 

I read the whole wiki page on vanguardism and downloaded that video. Learned something new :-)

 

As an aside, does Marxism use the NAP?

Marx:

"

The Commune was formed of the municipal councilors, chosen by universal suffrage in the various wards of the town, responsible and revocable at short terms. The majority of its members were naturally workers, or acknowledged representatives of the working class. The Commune was to be a working, not a parliamentary body, executive and legislative at the same time.[2]"

… (from wiki)

This social order with its emphasis on recallable delegates and maximal public participation in governance has many similarities to the modern conception of direct democracy."

So it's a voluntary direct democracy?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

yoshimura:

The Commune was formed of the municipal councilors, chosen by universal suffrage in the various wards of the town, responsible and revocable at short terms. The majority of its members were naturally workers, or acknowledged representatives of the working class. The Commune was to be a working, not a parliamentary body, executive and legislative at the same time.[2]"

… (from wiki)

This social order with its emphasis on recallable delegates and maximal public participation in governance has many similarities to the modern conception of direct democracy."

So it's a voluntary direct democracy?

No in the sense that if you aren't in total agreement with the proletariat masses then you cannot refuse to listen to what the majority ( the working class ) is dictating. This is what Marx meant by the dictatorship of the proletariat. It is a period where emergency powers are given to a group of individuals in order to carry out radical legislation that is complusory.

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 62
Points 1,480

Man, I love this place :-)

 

Thanks for the enlightenments!

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 38
Points 1,090

Leninism is a continuation of Marxism. Most contributors to Marxism are also contributors to Marxist-Leninism. There are branches of communists that oppose Leninism. Left Communists, Some Luxemburgists, anarchists, ect

 

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/index.htm

 

A collection of Lenin's works.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (12 items) | RSS