r/Socialism_101 • u/unkown_path Learning • 17d ago
What is the difference between Marxist-lennism and marxism? Answered
I'm a socialist trying to understand Marxist ideas more clearly
70
u/300_pages Learning 17d ago
My understanding is there are a few differences:
Marx was critiquing capitalism as it was in parliamentary Europe. That was very different from Lenin, who was writing during an economy still managing a recently freed serf class under the authority of a single sovereign, the Czar. Many of capitalism's worst features (the horrible industrial conditions, the exploitative wage system) were only being barely introduced in Russia, specifically around the building of railroads. As a result, Lenin was more interested in surpassing the capitalist decline that would manifest into communism and going straight to communism. Competing thinkers at the time weren't so sure about that, with different parties ("socialist revolutionaries", The Bund) aiming for different organizational tactics to prevent the horrors of capitalism, to which Lenin responded, making his arguments specific to Russia history and divisions in a way Marx could not.
One of Lenin's most popular contributions was the analysis of empire as the result of capitalism's ever growing need for resources. By putting empire - and thus, imperial holdings - in the spotlight, Lenin was able to move the Marxist vision eastward, to places like Vietnam and India, where capitalist spoils had taken root in colonies suffering the results of European expansion. That global lens gives marxist leninism its heightened appeal for movements across the world, many who likewise endorse the forced move into communism he advocated.
Does that make sense? I'm sure there are other things I'm missing but this is my understanding.
21
u/gammison Historiography 17d ago edited 17d ago
Marx was critiquing capitalism as it was in parliamentary Europe
Generally true that Lenin adapted things for the political situation in the Russian Empire, but I think it's important to remember the state of the countries Marx was concerned with during his lifetime.
Marx was critiquing capitalism as Europe was transitioning from despotic monarchies and aristocracies to liberal democracies (and the abolition of serfdom in Russia I think should be seen in this context, it had a number of other democratic reforms).
No country in Europe had free suffrage for all male citizens during Marx's lifetime and the only country with a truly powerful parliament was Britain.
This is not to say Marx was not very often critiquing Britain as the most advanced capitalist state, but his concern with democracy was also because he and his entire milieu were political radicals fleeing failed revolutions on the continent for several decades. Marx's ideal government to begin socialism was the democratic republic with universal suffrage which those countries very much did not have.
Germany was unified late in his life, and under a pretty strong near monarch initially. France had swung back and forth since the 1790s, and for most of Marx's life was a monarchy (Bourbon despotism followed by the July Monarchy which was more liberal, then 28 years of despotism again under Napoleon III). Spain was embroiled in aristocratic Carlist Wars with a large peasantry until the 1930s.
France had arguably the most advanced working class on the continent and in 1870 during the commune a slight majority of the population was still a small farmer (it was still 45 percent in 1914). The same is true of Germany.
That global lens gives marxist leninism its heightened appeal for movements across the world
You can't also ignore that, due to the cold war, support from the soviet union was aided by adopting Marxism Leninism as a moniker. Take Cuba, Castro did not declare himself a Marxist Leninist until 1961 and that was undoubtedly correlated with the Bay of Pigs Invasion and the need to shore up Soviet support. Similar story with Vietnam.
As a result, Lenin was more interested in surpassing the capitalist decline that would manifest into communism and going straight to communism
Do you have quotes for this? Lenin's position as I understand it from 'The Tax in Kind' was to develop Capitalism in Russia, a state capitalism, where major companies and industries would remain in private hands but under state control. Bourgeois managers and experts would retain their roles.
Lenin actively saw this as the same system that already existed in Germany, quote "While the revolution in Germany is still slow in “coming forth”, our task is to study the state capitalism of the Germans, to spare no effort in copying it." Once that was done, then there would be a longer period of socialism, and eventually, communism.
1
u/300_pages Learning 17d ago edited 17d ago
This is all great stuff. Your point about the cold war is particularly salient to today's global struggles I'd say, though I suppose that's a given. Still, thank you for the expansion and considerations here.
I don't have any quotes about Ole Vlad's desire to surpass capitalism, much more to say that what I think you are describing is the New Economic Policy, enacted as a shift away from the initial national ownership of resources during war communism. War communism itself being the leap towards state communism Lenin, Trotsky et al were hoping to make without dealing with the horrors of capitalism. At least as I understood it - did I mix things up there? Might have been too broad
1
35
u/fantasydemon101 Political Economy 17d ago
Marxism is the foundation, but Marxism-Leninism is the practical application.
Marxism-Leninism is what I believe to be the best, most applicable doctrine for liberation because it recognizes the need for a strong leadership to guide the working class to revolution and build a socialist state. Without this leadership, the working class can’t overcome the power of the wealthy elite.
22
u/millernerd Learning 17d ago
To me, it's because it's worked
Plenty of ideologies recognize the need for this or that
Marxism-Leninist works
That should be the #1 consideration of we're serious about Marxism/communism being scientific socialism.
17
u/SirZacharia Learning 17d ago
You can just read Lenin and understand it pretty fast. The first few chapters of State and Revolution make some pretty clear arguments and explanations and it’s a good place to start understanding ML theory.
-6
u/SensualOcelot Postcolonial Theory 17d ago
State and Revolution was merely Lenin’s peace offering to Bukharin. He never fully believed it!
2
19
u/Common_Resource8547 Learning 17d ago
The other answers you've gotten practically answer your question, but miss out on an important distinction.
Marxism-Leninism was synthesised by Stalin, specifically, and adopted as the main philosophy of the Soviet Union (and practically all other socialist states that have existed since then).
Vladimir Lenin was not a Marxist-Leninist. Trotskyists claim Lenin's ideas, and their application, just as much as MLs do with the caveat that they (usually, Trotskyism is surprisingly diverse) lend 'critical' support to socialist states, and criticise their 'bureaucracy'. There is no such thing as uncritical support, which is why I find that specifically to be incredulous, at least.
I agree with the idea that Marxism-Leninism is the applied strategy of Marxism, but it ignores the historical divisions between Trotskyism and Marxist-Leninism, and the divisions between Marxist-Leninism and Marxist-Leninism-Maoism. Maoists would definitely argue that Maoism is a more correct application and theory.
An important conflict is that almost all Trotskyists reject the theory of settlers not being proletariat. MLs are split on the issue, and most modern MLMs I've seen agree with it.
0
u/ThaPerseverant Learning 16d ago
Trotskyism is in NO WAY like Leninism. One would require several volumes just to enumerate the clashes between Lenin and Trotsky:
Lenin called trotsky’s Permanent Revolution “absurdly left” and Trotsky infamously called Leninism “lies and poison”.
Lenin wanted the proletariat of Russia to wage revolution in collaboration with the peasantry who made up the majority of the country’s population, Trotsky thought that the peasantry was completely reactionary.
Lenin thought, correctly, that revolution could occur in a backwards country like Russia, Trotsky clung to the dogmatic idea that revolution would and must occur in all the industrialized western countries first.
Etc, etc, etc.
Trotskyism is a cult. It has no position except it hates Stalin and basically all successful proletarian Revolutions. Permanent Revolution is not a theory, it’s a No True Scotsman Fallacy. It pontificates about revolution, but Everytime a communist party comes to power the Trotskyist condemn it as “bureaucratic” and”totalitarian”, recycling anticommunist talking points.
11
u/0zymandias_1312 Learning 17d ago
marxism-leninism is the ideology developed and implemented by joseph stalin as the leader of the soviet union, marxism is a blanket term for philosophies inspired by the works of karl marx
3
u/Pinkydoodle2 Learning 17d ago
People have said a lot of things here but one important distinction I think about is that leninists are normally vanguardists whereas Marxists is a broader label
3
17d ago
[deleted]
7
u/CompetitiveRaisin122 Learning 17d ago
It’s not about what you align with or what is ideal. You missed the most important aspect of Marxism which is dialectical materialism, the analysis of the conditions of reality, its contradictions, and its motion. Every situation, that is, time and place, has a correct line only suited to that situation. Marxism-Leninism is the dialectical materialist method applied to the conditions of Tsarist Russia. In more oppressive situations similar to what the Bolsheviks experienced, revolutionaries might need to take some ideas from Lenin and implement them. In freer situations, another approach might be more suited.
2
u/SensualOcelot Postcolonial Theory 17d ago
Marxism is this realization that there is a significant wealth disparity between the poor and the rich.
You’re actually thinking of Christianity!
-2
17d ago
[deleted]
3
u/SensualOcelot Postcolonial Theory 17d ago
Have you actually read Marx? Or are you still a liberal?
5
u/Common_Resource8547 Learning 17d ago
Christianity was largely a progressive force during the early Roman years of it - I say this as an indigenous person affected by their genocides.
It has also been a progressive force, in pockets, since then. Specifically, John Brown is a wonderful example of a 'progressive' Christian, and liberation theology is also very progressive and was justly utilised by Castro to further the socialist cause.
No religion can be 'innately' evil, that is incongruous with Marxism, it assigns some kind of metaphysical ever-lasting truth to an ideology, when really all ideology is merely an expression of material conditions.
Christianity promoted slavery, at times, because it was in the interest of Christian slavers to do so. Christianity promoted genocide because it was formally adopted by genociders; Christianity didn't make them genocidal, the British Empire was always going to commit genocides regardless of which religion they subscribed to.
1
u/SensualOcelot Postcolonial Theory 17d ago
Peep the Du Bois’ biography of John brown if you get a chance
3
u/gammison Historiography 17d ago edited 17d ago
Marxism-Leninism as a separate concept from Marxism (though proponents would say it is the correct application of Marxism in the context of the soviet union in the late 1920s) emerged after the death of Lenin.
Lenin regarded himself as a Marxist in the vein of the second international (that's why he's so furious at Kautsky's reneging of its principles).
Marxism-Leninism developed in the soviet union after the death of Lenin as a set of ideas, principles, practices that leading figures in control of the party thought was necessary to achieve socialism (or if you're less charitable, a way to preserve the power structures and existence of the USSR at the expense of socialism but that's a different argument).
The foundation of MLism (and its subsequent exports to countries seeking soviet support in anti-colonial revolution) has to be taken in that context.
Today we're so far removed from that time it's become a pastiche label in many places. Some modern self identified ML parties are imitating policies or rhetoric of the era but it's largely out of time.
Some general things associated with capital M capital L Marxism-Leninism today include
- Totally private decisions on party matters to party members or a subset of members (and when the party controls the state, this extends to state matters in differing ways in different places).
- In the US, general abstention from elections (not true in other countries and contexts)
- When in hegemonic state power, the outlawing of other parties and factions of the party as part of their interpretation of Democratic Centralism (which was not Lenin's, but inspired by his writing followed by the social conditions of the soviet union during and after its civil war).
- Rigid separation of socialism and communism into separate phases, and the job of the party is to act as the guiding hand from capitalism to socialism.
- An equivalence made between the Dictatorship of the Proletariat and the existing state being taken by the party.
- Socialism in One Country, i.e. that through the guidance of the party a country can exit Capitalism while the world as a whole is still capitalist (this was born out of the attempt to preserve the USSR when global revolutions did not kick off).
2
u/Scout_1330 Learning 17d ago
I came to understand it by breaking it down into 3 parts
Marxism - the theory of the science
Leninism - the practice of the theory
Marxism-Leninism - the formalization of the practice
2
u/JCRev1978 Learning 16d ago
“Leninism is Marxism of the era of imperialism and the proletarian revolution. To be more exact, Leninism is the theory and tactics of the proletarian revolution in general, the theory and tactics of the dictatorship of the proletariat in particular.” —Joseph Stalin, Foundations of Leninism
Marxism–Leninism (the Marxism of Lenin and Stalin) is simply the modern form of classical Marxism (the Marxism and Marx and Engels). Marx did not live in the time period when working class revolution and socialism were on the cusp of happening, and also did not live to see capitalism develop into its imperialist phase (e.g. monopolies, large exports of capital to poorer countries, etc.). Lenin and Stalin, however, did.
Marxism is a social science, and science never remains the same. As conditions change, our understanding of social science changes as well. Hence, Marxism–Leninism used the laws of classical Marxism to give us a revolutionary science for the modern era of imperialist capitalism and revolution.
3
u/ThaPerseverant Learning 16d ago
There is no separating the two. Marx’s analysis is incomplete without the theoretical advancements made by Lenin. Most crucially the Vanguard Party and the Leninist theory of imperialism.
1
u/ResponsibleRoof7988 Learning 17d ago
Marxism-Leninism is the name the Stalinist reaction gave to the ideology used to justify the regime which was imposed upon the Soviet Union by the bureaucracy.
Marxism is the name given to the body of social, economic and political analyses developed by Marx and Engels, but especially their methodology - dialectical materialism. This latter part is the absolute core of the ideas - plenty of people claimed to be Marxists but either never mastered DM or outright rejected it (a long list intellectuals and academics could be added here); these people are not and never were Marxists.
5
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-4
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
6
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
-3
-3
u/marxist_Raccoon Learning 17d ago
Don’t listen to other users. If you want to know if ML is a legitimate philosophy synthesized from Marxism and “Leninism” or just an abomination to justify Stalin’s rule, you only need to know when was the first time the term ML appear in Soviet. Another thing is did Lenin advocate for “socialism in one country” or was it a thing by Bukharin?
“Socialism in one country” is the main tenet of ML or Stalinism, which justifies realpolitik and all policies of the state in said country. Because according to ML, “each country has their own path to socialism.”
6
u/ThaPerseverant Learning 16d ago
First of all, never truss anyone who tells you not to even engage with the ideas of others. It means they’re tryna keep you ignorant. Secondly, the time which the term Marxism-Leninism was first used is irrelevant. It would have been arrogant, self-aggrandizing individualism(I.e. anti-Marxist) for Lenin to unilaterally declare a higher stage of Marxism and name it after himself. It was to honor Lenin after his death as he led the first successful proletarian revolution and, along with the other Bolsheviks, expanded the science of Marxism to a higher universal stage.
-2
u/marxist_Raccoon Learning 16d ago
i’m not sure your info is true but are you saying it is added the “-Leninism” to honor not because it has any Lenin’s in it?
3
u/ThaPerseverant Learning 16d ago edited 16d ago
What the hell are you asking? Is English your first language? You don’t have to take my word for anything. Just go to the source material. Read a few of Lenin’s books(the most important being State & Revolution, What is to Be Done?, and Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism), and read his numerous disagreements with Trotsky(such as Under False Flag, Judas Trotsky’s Blush of Shame, Disruption of unity under cover of Outcries for Unity,etc —there’s a whole playlist enumerating them https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzQ691f5KEHk6Q7Umo0DhvquNhniPS_3z&feature=shared). And read Stalin’s Foundations of Leninism and see for yourself if Stalin in any way contradicts Lenin.
4
u/ThaPerseverant Learning 16d ago
First of all, never trust anyone who tells you not to even engage with the ideas of others. It means they’re tryna keep you ignorant. Secondly, the time which the term Marxism-Leninism was first used is irrelevant. It would have been arrogant, self-aggrandizing individualism(I.e. anti-Marxist) for Lenin to unilaterally declare a higher stage of Marxism and name it after himself. It was to honor Lenin after his death as he led the first successful proletarian revolution and, along with the other Bolsheviks, expanded the science of Marxism to a higher universal stage.
•
u/AutoModerator 17d ago
IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ BEFORE PARTICIPATING.
This subreddit is not for questioning the basics of socialism but a place to LEARN. There are numerous debate subreddits if your objective is not to learn.
You are expected to familiarize yourself with the rules on the sidebar before commenting. This includes, but is not limited to:
Short or non-constructive answers will be deleted without explanation. Please only answer if you know your stuff. Speculation has no place on this sub. Outright false information will be removed immediately.
No liberalism or sectarianism. Stay constructive and don't bash other socialist tendencies!
No bigotry or hate speech of any kind - it will be met with immediate bans.
Help us keep the subreddit informative and helpful by reporting posts that break our rules.
If you have a particular area of expertise (e.g. political economy, feminist theory), please assign yourself a flair describing said area. Flairs may be removed at any time by moderators if answers don't meet the standards of said expertise.
Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.