this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2025
19 points (100.0% liked)

GenZedong

4869 readers
80 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

See this GitHub page for a collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml
ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml
Elara@lemmygrad.ml
American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml
19
John Smith railing against ML and CPC, knowledgeable comrades please comment (edit: also Zak Cope is a capitalist apologist now, WTF) (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by Red_Scare@lemmygrad.ml to c/genzedong@lemmygrad.ml
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

"Imperialism in the 21st century" was a very eye opening read for me and I was surprised to see this from Smith in an interview, comrades please help me understand:

“Marxist-Leninist” refers to the ideology espoused by the bureaucratic rulers of the former Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China and all those around the world who look to them for leadership, but in my opinion, there is no Marxism or Leninism in so-called “Marxism-Leninism”. We cannot get anywhere until we call things by their true names, so I insist on describing both the Moscow or Beijing varieties of these ideologies as Stalinist. This might upset some people or be misinterpreted as factional name-calling, but the alternative is to perpetuate an extremely harmful falsehood—one which is energetically promoted by bourgeois politicians and opinion-formers of all types, from the liberal left to the far right, all of whom are aware of how much damage they can do to the revolutionary workers’ movement by identifying socialism, communism and the liberatory ideas of Marx and Lenin with the disgusting brutality and corruption of the bureaucratic castes which once ruled the Soviet Union and which continue to rule over China (indeed, the capitalist ruling class presently in power in Russia is almost entirely composed of former “Marxist-Leninists”).

“Marxism-Leninism” served the rulers of the USSR and PRC not as a guide to action, but as a cloak of deception, a means of legitimizing their rule. They claimed allegiance to the same theories and philosophies as do I, but their doctrine of “peaceful coexistence” with imperialism stands in the clearest possible contradiction with everything that Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin stood for.

https://mronline.org/2019/03/19/john-smith-on-imperialism-part-1/

[Edit] Following from this I looked to my other eye-opening author, Zak Cope (Divided World, Divided Class) and found this where he disavows his entire work and all anticapitalism, just read the abstract and note 1:

https://link.springer.com/rwe/10.1007/978-3-031-25399-7_82-2

What the fuck is happening?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Munrock@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This was my read as well. His Stalinism is to us Marxism-Leninism, and his 'true' Marxism Leninism is to us Trotskyism.

If China had followed the kind of Leninism he advocates, of just relentless hostility to the West, it'd be as broken and hopeless as Russia is now.

I think the most powerful response to someone accusing China of peacefully coexisting with the West lies in three observations:

• The people that control the Western world clearly see China as a threat to them and want to destroy it

• AES and anti-imperialist states around the world are either explicitly protected by China from US hostility, or rely on China's economic stability to survive the West's economic hostility.

• Anyone who has actually been to mainland China will agree that the quality of life for workers is far, far better for Chinese than it is even for the Western labour aristocracy. The only exceptions are people who have an income stream based on maintaining anti-China rhetoric and internet debate bros who would 'lose' if they admit it.

[–] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 month ago

If the PRC was too hostile in 1990, it would no longer exist today. I think the dengist reform in china were inevitable for the continued survival of the PRC during the 90s.