View source for User:NickelBank/RedSpectre/AgainstHoxha

{{NickelBank|Against Hoxhaism|h2 = Against Hoxhaism}}

<dl class="wikitable hue">
{{HueRoster|P=organization| {{E:Q618/ML|Bolshevik Organization}} }}
{{HueRoster|EP=P34| {{E:Q41,03}} }}  <!-- en: field  mainstream Marxism-Leninism -->
</dl>

=== Links ===

* "Red Spectre": {{a|datetime=2024-08-06|href=https://www.theredspectre.com/against-hoxha}}
* "Bolshevik organization": {{a|datetime=|href=https://thebolshevik.org/AGAINST%20HOXHAISM}} [warning: not an actual URL, entire page squashed into javascript interface]

=== Nickel usage or significance ===

* (fill in later)

<!--
== Usage notes ==
-->
== Motifs or claims ==

<ol class="hue clean reset">

{{li|start=y|I=M3/ML|tradition=ML onto MX, ML onto ML|Q=618|Q2=618}}How can one uphold multiple figures that conflict with one another?  ->  wonderful question! there are actually ways to do it. there's the bad way Existentialists do it which is to regard all ideologies through [[E:communicative rationality (Habermas)|group-positivism,]] and then there's the Materialist way where you regard all the countable Marxisms as material objects that all have to interact on a global scale. you want to take the best subset of these theorists and the worker Lattices inside their countries that all approximately fits together but also promotes actually getting to Bolshevism instead of getting stuck in strawberry Marxism. that's it. it's not a conundrum in and of itself.

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618|Q2=618}}If you uphold Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Hoxha, Che Guevara, Ho Chi Minh, and Kwame Nkrumah at the same time your theory must contain an error because these theorists are in conflict  ->  I see only about one point of conflict in here which is that Ho Chi Minh and possibly Che at times condoned strawberry Marxism and the other ones practiced crimson Marxism. but I don't know who Kwame Nkrumah is and how much they could have distorted Marxism.<br/>
Nkrumah: he promoted Pan-Africanism. I see. a thing that some people don't like. I'm confused on how bad this is because. it seems to me like there are many possible "poly" structures you could build across Africa that wouldn't be a problem. aren't there many different kinds of Pan-Africanism in theory that all get back up to the full continent from the small scale differently? I guess one of the biggest problems that could come up in the middle of that is nationalism and failing to redraw internal borders. but other than that isn't joining African countries to each other better than trying to join them to anything outside Africa where nobody actually understands the conditions?

</li></ol>

=== Subjective themes ===

<ol class="hue clean reset">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/ML|Q=618|Q2=618}}anti-Jake theory  ->  a model or organization that has been rebuked by "Jake", the Marxist theorist who was once a real person, but in order to protect the guilty and keep from stirring up arguments that could cloud an objective analysis, is now a hypothetical archetype. this shouldn't be an Item, but Jake's positions are so bizarrely inconsistent that it's impossible to tell whether these positions are accurate or informative or anything just by what things they go against.

</li></ol>


[[Category:Nickel links (NickelBank)]]  <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly URLs incoming
redirects:   (none)
duplication hint:   copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNNN|other nickel]]
-->