Reading Recommendations

Jason Reyes
Jason Reyes

I'm a left-communist who has recently started to be red-pilled on Marxist-Leninism. I'm a pretty well-read Marxist for a college student. I've read the first two volumes of Capital, Value Price and Profit, the Economic Manuscripts, The German Ideology & the Communist Manifesto. I plan on reading Lenin's major works soon.

I want to learn more about:
1) how the USSR & Chinese states function(ed)
2) the history of these countries
3) the theory of these countries (probably Stalin and Mao)

Could anyone provide me with a reading list?

Attached: IMG5489786632423578086.jpg (76.82 KB, 614x510)

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/12/05.htm
desuarchive.org/marx/thread/6890/

Sebastian Nelson
Sebastian Nelson

claims to be redpilled on ML
hasn’t read the major works of Lenin
Read Lenin.

Tyler Murphy
Tyler Murphy

You're a leftcom but you've only read marx? if not why would you read anything other then lenin after Marx?

Attached: 1448072736309-0.png (1.4 MB, 1074x1598)

Jose Scott
Jose Scott

Ignore all of the philosophical “Marxist-Leninists”, cause they are all academic hacks. You need to read Ultra-Leftism an Infantile Disorder, The Impending Catastrophe and then also read Karl Kautsky’s major works such as The Road to Power, the Erfurt Program, etc (since Bolshevism is really just orthodox Kautskyism applied to Russian conditions). Also, take a look at this much better reading list.

Attached: 4A760B41-72CB-4BBB-8348-88D904938697.png (3.68 MB, 2318x3143)

Easton Anderson
Easton Anderson

A reading list? Well, I'd suggest reading more Marx first. Read the Critique of the Gotha Programme. Actually, just read everything you can get your hands on.
Also, how can you call yourself "redpilled" on Marxism-Leninism without having read Lenin? If you're intent on reading him, the obvious best choices are Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism and The State and Revolution, at least to start.
If you just want info on Stalin and Mao (at least their theories), I recommend going through their Selected Works. I personally really like the fifth volume of Mao's Selected Works.
A good thing to read is the Constitution of the USSR circa 1936 if you want to know how it was run under Stalin's tenure.
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/12/05.htm

Why don't you go over to /marx/index.html and ask Ismail for history books? I have my disagreements with him, but if you want a book on a topic, he can find it for you.

Attached: leninhat.jpg (25.91 KB, 416x520)

Nolan Wilson
Nolan Wilson

OP here. i said i only recently have started to get into ML thought.. that's why i said i plan on reading Lenin. i'm looking for recs after him.

Dylan Rivera
Dylan Rivera

the theory of these countries (probably Stalin and Mao)
tbh fam i'd stay away from Mao and Maoist theory in general. as good as Mao was, a lot of the shit be said was laughable (see Three Worlds Theory) and and we don't need anymore potential MLM LARPers.

Caleb Ortiz
Caleb Ortiz

Kautsky
Second internationalist pls go. Read Korsch.
academic hacks
Oh, never mind. I bet you're the same tard who hates Lukács thought that the incorporation of Aleatory dialectics into Marxism was a mistake just because you failed your one and only Marxian literature class.

Aaron Mitchell
Aaron Mitchell

I'm a left-communist
Not if you haven't read or understood any of the theory. At best you're a dilettante.

Joshua Barnes
Joshua Barnes

anti-dialectics by Rosa Lichenstein
Go kill yourself.

Jack Bailey
Jack Bailey

Wait isnt she that e-celeb from revleft and Quora wtf she has written a book……

Grayson Bailey
Grayson Bailey

guys how can i get flag next to the "anonymous"? i just begin to lurk leftypol

Ethan Hughes
Ethan Hughes

She's an autist 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧anglo🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 with a single obsession: "debunking" dialectics. She's absolutely crazy and harmful. Just take a look at her homepage to see what I'm talking about.

Attached: anti-dialectics.jpg (542.65 KB, 1366x768)

Xavier Morris
Xavier Morris

Post options. If you intend to false-flag, it won't help you, though.

Jaxon Nguyen
Jaxon Nguyen

I'm un-ironically in love with her.

She's utterly fucking mad.

Adam Clark
Adam Clark

Lol fuck off pretentious dimwit, nobody cares about Lukacs and those losers in the real world because they don’t have anything to offer and never did, thus the only groups that picked up on them were academic “Marxists” here in the West so they could show how third way they were between Soviet Socialism and Capitalism. Yeah, cause I love reading why popular things are garbage compared to true “totally not ruling class tastes” of classical German literature and why Jazz is fascist compared to quaint real culture like classical music. Please spare me. Also nice knee jerk reaction to Kautsky, shows how little you know about the actual Bolshevik movement other then the memes spoon fed to you Trots and Stalinists.

Loooool, goes to show dialectics is more a religion then anything to make individuals who have probably never participated in anything other then communist historical re-enactment societies (read any ML party today except the Belgian ML party) feel good about themselves. Yeah the website’s shit, but her critiques are spot on.

Brandon Sullivan
Brandon Sullivan

Dialectics are mystification tool, sorry to burst your bubble.

Austin Anderson
Austin Anderson

knee jerk reaction
<proceeds to make apparent that he never read any of it anyways
I'm glad you can tow a line, but your """practical""" leanings leave a lot to be desired when you make it so clear you don't know enough about what you critique to make any substantive, believable claims.
on Kautsky
See above. You don't know why I even object, but you certainly think you do - must be being told exactly how you're supposed to think about everything.

John Rogers
John Rogers

I don’t need to know much about Korsch nor these other academics cause they have zero relevance to anything going on right now, which is why only highly individualistic persons like you who scorn “practical” stuff and only want to be the center of attention in your own bubble are the ones reading this garbage. DurRhuRR gO aGAInsT wESteRN MArXisT oRThoDOXy yOU bEIng TOld wHAt tO THiNk. Fuck off hegelian retard. The Bolsheviks were an orthodox Kautskyian party plan and simple. It’s a shame that the Second International degenerated in WW1, but Kautsky and the left of the party opposed the war and even formed an independent party to further oppose it. Beyond Lenin’s denunciation, the main benefit of Kautsky’s works is his arguing against coalition politics with liberal parties and for a clear independent working class political party and against ultra-leftism. After the Bolshevik Revolution the Trots adopted the ultraleft line while the Stalin Comintern adopted a coalitionalist approach - which was basically a re-enactment of the same reasons the first Comintern broke with the Second International in the first place. And you probably only don’t like Kautsky cause “waaah he doesn’t do the dialectic right”.

Parker Ramirez
Parker Ramirez

Actually, I apologize for how I’ve been talking to you. I hope you take my explanation in good faith. I was just peeved because of the immediate knee jerk reactions to what I posted and got antagonized. Also, I’d like to state that I was a Western Hegelian Marxist for about two years, read Hegel, Lukacs, raya dunayevskaya, that one random Hegelian Soviet Philosopher, Fromm, etc. I was also part of the Marxist Humanist Organization, and also knew Professor Anderson who wrote Lenin and Philosophy on a personal basis. However, I became disillusioned because they never actually did anything relevant - they only got together to read heavy obscure books on philosophy. So if you think reading Korsch helps then I say go ahead, but also remember that theory doesn’t do anything unless it can be applied to the real world, otherwise it’s just Theory for the sake of theory, rather then freeing the working class.

Dominic James
Dominic James

This is the best ML reading list recommendation thread:

desuarchive.org/marx/thread/6890/

It's a pretty good thread and goes beyond the obvious classics of Stalin and Mao.

Landon Barnes
Landon Barnes

The only problem with that thread is it focuses too much on philosophy, and little on my modern times. Also, it doesn’t seem to have any self critiques of what went wrong with the movement beyond “muh revisionism”. I’d say, before you do anything, read Mike McNairs Revolutionary Strategy before you even delve into any of the classics (excluding Marx of course, cause you should always read Marx.)

Nolan Sanchez
Nolan Sanchez

That image is disgusting

Jaxson Campbell
Jaxson Campbell

Don't worry, I don't take things too seriously, and I am totally understanding of your reasoning there. We're in whole-hearted agreement on the pointlessness of theory, as its own end.

Christian Scott
Christian Scott

Just take a look at her homepage
If you clicked on any of the links, you would see that the articles are just plain text without any funky formatting.
<This site has been set up to substantiate these allegations, as well as to advance several more; among which are the following:
<1) That there is a close link between the class-origin of leading Marxists, the ideas found in DM/MD and the rabidly sectarian nature of revolutionary politics.
<This helps explain why, almost without exception, Marxist parties tend to be small, divisive, and thus almost totally ineffectual.
<2) That none of the major theses advanced by dialecticians stands up to close scrutiny.
<These include the famous "Three Laws" of dialectics (i.e., the 'Laws' of change of quantity into quality, the interpenetration of opposites, and the negation of the negation), the belief that everything is interconnected in a "mediated Totality", and the doctrine that change is the result of "internal contradictions".
<3) That the criticisms dialecticians make of Formal Logic – and the so-called 'Law of Identity' – are as ill-informed as they are misguided.
RL is right on all three points.