View source for User:RD/9k/Q19,10

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=Anarchism or Socialism?|User=RD|E=Q19,10|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">

{{li|I=Z1/ML|Q=19,10|Q2=1910}}<cite>Anarchism or Socialism?</cite> (Stalin 1906) [https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm]

</li></ol>

== Motifs or claims ==

<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=26,92|Q2=2692}}Marx going meta / ([[User:RD/9k/Q26,92|9k]])  ->  Stalin says that Marxists 'do not simply wave anarchism away' but try to do class analysis to determine what anarchism is made of and how it will develop. if done well at a level that's good enough to be predictive this is a violet statement.

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}Liberal-republicanism is divisible into different trends corresponding to different strata of the bourgeoisie

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}"Socialism" is divided into reformism, anarchism, and Marxism  ->  all right, but which one is Deng Xiaoping Thought? it didn't reform capitalism, it flat-out birthed it out of nothing specifically to put a border around the country. that's very unusual and I'm not sure it fits into any of these three.<br/>
I think... he's defining it to be reformism? he says if you're utopian and a republican or utopian and trying to build transition to Bolshevism inside a republic of capitalists you're a reformist. but the third thing he says is that class collaboration is a hallmark of reformism. and that's like, the only thing that China didn't fall into because whatever the party-nation is it has actually subdued capitalism and become capable of regulating it sometimes. {{em|some}} class is struggling against the capitalists and leaping its State over them despite there still being a lot of them, and the only question is which class this is.<br/>
mainstream Marxism-Leninism and meta-Marxism have some points where what they say is just exactly the same, notably that Liberal capitalism is a blue [[E:Social-Philosophical System (meta-Marxism)|SPS]] with chiefly big or small bourgeoisie forming a State that leaps over the rest of the area, and that Bolshevism is a crimson SPS which is closely aligned with the proletariat and leaps its state over the bourgeoisie inasmuch as they still exist until their class territories are abolished; the bourgeois class territories are these little free-floating corporate territories but the proletarian class territory looks a little more like the whole country put together and not divided any more. what confuses me is who exactly is leaping over China, Cuba, North Korea, or Vietnam to create Deng Xiaoping Thought. [[E:Careerist layer (meta-Marxism)|Careerists]]??

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=33,90|Q2=3390}}Anarchists are material enemies of Marxism (Stalin) / Anarchism is something to overthrow

{{li|I=F2/ML|Q=618}}Marxism already is meta-Leninism / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,29|9k]])  ->  Stalin says dialectical materialism 'is not only the theory of socialism'. by socialism he almost certainly means the realization of Bolshevism, because that's what they did post-1910, and he brings up the dictatorship-of-the-proletariat multiple times, suggesting this is the only real way forward. but you can already see the contradiction here. he says dialectical materialism isn't only a theory of how to realize Bolshevism, but he dismantles any possibility of realizing anarchism (at length, granted. not saying he did a bad job) and gives what sounds like a dismissal of Deng Xiaoping Thought being socialism, as well as strongly implying that {{em|if you aren't realizing Bolshevism}} you aren't a revolutionary. doesn't that mean dialectical materialism {{em|is}} only the theory of socialism? he seems to be saying that you're only allowed to realize mainstream Marxism-Leninism or you're a risk to the Soviet Union, possibly but not certainly an enemy.<br/>
I'm not really trying to defend early Trotskyism here because in practice they did nothing but crush socialism, but as for anarchism and [[E:Deng Xiaoping Thought|Deng Xiaoping Thought]], those are basically the only progressive movements still alive today. one of them trying to act like reformism is the best thing since sliced bread and everything gets better as long as everybody does it, one of them becoming the only form of workers' state that survives for a whole century and the only real way to have a Second World that chains multiple countries together like you really need if you want to defend an era of socialism. the power of First World countries to all chain together and crush a specific country was greatly underestimated, and these [[E:Deng Xiaoping Thought|strawberry]] compromises basically became mandatory just to try to buy enough time to chain countries together without getting pulverized first. it's like.... they thought the proletariat exists but in reality you have to successfully join populations together {{em|as nationalities}} before you have a proletariat and don't have to rely on hiding a herd of cats behind the bourgeoisie. or something.<br/>
it's false when Marx says it because he couldn't predict Trotskyism and it's false when Stalin says it because he couldn't predict Deng Xiaoping Thought. but both of these Marxisms exist and attempt to organize workers or integrated Third World populations. you need [[E:meta-Marxism|violet Marxism]] to properly understand that multiple countable instances of Marxism with different inner workings exist and they develop in different ways but you still need them to work together because them getting divided from each other while groups of Liberal-republican countries or mountains of capital can still unite is fatal.

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=618|h4 = Regard life as it actually is }} / We must regard life as it actually is (dialectical materialism) / The life of a population is a series of material objects growing, dying, joining, splitting, and rearranging, and we must understand its development in terms of the way it actually functions or the way that interactions between currently apparent objects or processes create new kinds of objects or processes (existential materialism, meta-Marxism)

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=29,68|Q2=2968|h4 = The existiest will win }} / That which is born and grows is invincible; that which is aging and crumbling suffers defeat (Stalin) / When all are Subjects, the existiest will rule ({{TTS|tts=meta-Marxism onto Existentialism|MX onto ES}}) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q29,68|9k]])

{{li|I=F2/PT|Q=618}}A bunch of Narodniks will win because they are many and they are poor  ->  they didn't win, did they?

{{li|I=S2/ML|tradition=ML, A|Q=618}}Quantity stacks into quality / Minor quantitative changes stack up into major qualitative changes / Evolution pre-configures revolution  ->  I think this is one of the concepts that anarchists really abuse, because every time they do some small act of "direct action" they totally think they're doing that

{{li|I=S1/STM|tradition=STM|Q=618}}Neo-Lamarckism [https://banotes.org/biological-anthropology/evolution-neo-lamarckism-inherited-acquired-traits/#what-is-neo-lamarckism]

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}Orbitals illustrate quantity-to-quality (dialectical materialism) / Electron quantum numbers stacking up into new periods illustrate quantity into quality

{{li|I=F2/A|tradition=A onto AS, A onto PT|Q=618}}Hegel was a monarchist so he never could have said anything correct

</li></ol>

== Related ==<!--

<ol class="hue clean">

</li></ol>-->

== Ideology codes ==

<ol class="hue clean compound">
{{HueNumber|Q83|ML / dialectical materialism}}
</ol>
<!--
* ML / dialectical materialism
-->
* ML / Stalin
* A / anarchism
* AS / Hegelianism
* PT / monarchism
* A onto AS
* A onto PT


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]  <!-- page ends here.  TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
redirects:   [[User:RD/9k/Q1910]]
duplication hint:   copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN|9k/Q19,10]] -->