5
Dispatch → Bulletin → News
The Red St★r Volume 7 Issue 3
News Service of The Leftist Assembly Vol. 7 · Iss. 3
Comrade Quotes
You don’t fight fire with fire. You fight fire with water. We’re gonna fight racism with solidarity. We're not gonna fight capitalism with Black capitalism. We’re gonna fight capitalism with socialism. Socialism is the people. If you’re afraid of socialism, you’re afraid of yourself.
- F. Hampton, The Murder of Fred Hampton
Hello Comrades,
This fortnight has seen some interesting events. Notably the 21st marked 170 years since the publication of the Manifesto of the Communist Party. Such a book has been extremely influential in the socialist movement since its very inception.
In far lesser happenings, the 23rd was harvest day at my local community garden. There is a lesson to be learnt from it, which is the free rider problem. The free rider problem is a market failure which occurs when people take advantage over a common good without paying, or in this case working, for it. My community garden has to deal with people who take our produce without contributing to the garden. Yet from our last haul which costed easily $50 from our local grocery store was plentiful. It should be noted that the haul we got is but a portion of the overall pickings, as we also have to share what is grown with everyone else, so our $50 was but a part of a 4 way split, meaning that if everyone else got the same, over $200 worth of produce would have been made. Our community garden deals with the free rider problem by producing everything in abundance. Communism is a post-scarcity society, which means that the free rider problem would be solved in such a manner.
A new election season is upon us, with nominations opening up on March 1 and closing March 4. I hope everyone planning to run for office does so! Comrade Secretary 
South Miruva has announced that he will not be running for reelection as Secretary, so we will require a new secretary of the region. I would recommend any comrades with a guiding vision of the region and enough free time to enact that vision to step forwards and nominate yourself and your prime minister. Afterwards, the debate season is upon us, which will close on the 11th, from there voting will be open, which will close on the 14th.
Unity in Diversity,
- Veg,
Editor of The Red Star
-A brief overview of the cult of personality in Marxism by the infallible dearest leader Vegemiteisgross, who brings the sun up in the mornings and knows what you are thinking!
What is the Cult of Personality?
The cult of personality is a near-religious cult centred around political figureheads. It is the elevation of a person to near-godlike status. A personality cult can be observed in varying degrees on all representative individuals, but this will be focusing specifically on Marxism. It should be restated that a cult of personality does form around all significant individuals in politics, not just Marxism. There is a cult of personality present in anarchism (Marcos), just the same as liberalism (Mt. Rushmore), conservatism (Thatcher), fascism (Pinochet), religion (Jesus) and so on and so on (Zizek sniff).
Where does it come from?
The cult of personality forms around ‘significant’ individuals. It is engineered through many forms, some happening naturally, some happening purposefully. A naturally occuring cult of personality is created by people external to the cult, for example, a personality cult centered around Jesus Christ could be spread by the general populace, of course, this is not excluding the efforts pushed by the official organisations. A second example is the cult of personality formed around Karl Marx during his lifetime. Marx wrote this:
“Neither of us cares a straw for popularity. Let me cite one proof of this: such was my aversion to the personality cult that at the time of the International, when plagued by numerous moves—originating from various countries—to accord me public honour, I never allowed one of these to enter the domain of publicity, nor did I ever reply to them, save with an occasional snub. When Engels and I first joined the secret communist society, we did so only on condition that anything conducive to a superstitious belief in authority be eliminated from the Rules.” (Marx 1877)
The second, more important cause of the cult of personality stems from propaganda. A cult of personality purposely formed around significant individuals, an example being Jesus Christ by the church.
Strongman politics:
Strongman politics breeds the cult of personality, as the leader of the party is forwarded as the perfect example of the party’s ideology. Cultural ideals like that of “the philosopher king” in ancient Greece can also breed a cult of personality for leaders. Education can also play a part in the normalisation of cultish tendencies for leaders. History classes in school are almost always centered around “great” individuals, we read about Caesar, Henry VIII, Adolf Hitler, they are pushed almost to the point where history seems to follow great man theory, it seems almost natural then for the students of today to form the personality cults of tomorrow.
Khrushchev:
Khrushchev is attributed to his secret speech which would herald the de-Stalinization period in the USSR. Khrushchev blames Stalin for the creation of his cult of personality (Khrushchev 1956). This claim will be examined, as Khrushchev’s secret speech main focus was on Stalin’s cult of personality.
This is not to say that the cult of personality is a positive thing, on the contrary, the cult of personality is extremely troubling and must be opposed at all instances. Men are not gods, men are men.
Failure to destroy it:
The cult of personality must be resisted by the leaders of the communist party. They must be actively opposed. Yet, most personality cults are made powerful posthumously. Communist parties must celebrate the life of their comrades and leaders, yet must also resist pushing these comrades into godhood.
Lenin’s attempts:
Lenin never had a cult of personality during his lifetime. The man himself was uncharismatic. If one looks at soviet posters between 1917-1923, Lenin is not present in the vast, vast majority of posters. Lenin’s cult of personality was formed around him posthumously, specifically by the communist party. Both Stalin and Trotsky talked extensively about Lenin’s greatness. Lenin, against his will, was mummified and to this day, remains in Red Square.
“Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will live forever!” writes a poster, made during Stalin’s government. Lenin, through his actions was immortalised in theory, through the actions of his peers was immortalised in the flesh, and history has immortalised his actions.
Stalin’s attempts:
Stalin purposely created a cult of personality around Lenin. Stalin always fashioned himself as a faithful student of Lenin. During Stalin’s time, the posters of the USSR depict Lenin, in far, far higher frequency than under Lenin’s government. Stalin publicly denounced a cult of personality forming around him, yet a cult of personality formed around himself despite his public condemnation. Posters depicting Stalin beside Lenin began in production. Stalin was depicted as the overseeing father of the revolution, placed in his position simply because Lenin died and Stalin was the great Lenin’s student.
Stalin’s cult of personality grew from Lenin’s own, as Zizek calls them, as perfect servants of the revolution (Zizek 2012). Zizek explains some of the reasons for a cult forming as to humanise alien leaders, Lenin as a man who loves cats and children, Stalin as a benign father of the revolution (Zizek 2012).
Stalin’s condemnation of his cult of personality is very obvious.
“I must say in all conscience, comrades, that I do not deserve a good half of the flattering things that have been said here about me. I am, it appears, a hero of the October Revolution, the leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the leader of the Communist International, a legendary warrior-knight and all the rest of it. That is absurd, comrades, and quite unnecessary exaggeration. It is the sort of thing that is usually said at the graveside of a departed revolutionary. But I have no intention of dying yet.” (Stalin 1926)
Stalin was also quick to reprimand his comrades who spoke to him in such a manner privately as well. In a letter to Shatunovsky, Stalin writes:
“You speak of your "devotion" to me. Perhaps it was just a chance phrase. Perhaps. . . . But if the phrase was not accidental I would advise you to discard the "principle" of devotion to persons. It is not the Bolshevik way. Be devoted to the working class, its Party, its state. That is a fine and useful thing. But do not confuse it with devotion to persons, this vain and useless bauble of weak-minded intellectuals.” (Stalin 1930)
Stalin was very much against the publication of a book about his childhood, stating that the publication of such a book “has a tendency to engrave on the minds of Soviet children (and people in general) the personality cult of leaders, of infallible heroes. This is dangerous and detrimental.” (Stalin 1938)
And finally, Stalin’s public condemnation of his personality cult.
“MOLOTOV—coming to the speaker's tribune completely admits his mistakes before the CC, but he stated that he is and will always be a faithful disciple of Stalin.
STALIN—(interrupting Molotov) This is nonsense. I have no students at all. We are all students of the great Lenin.” (Stalin 1952)
Today:
The cult of personality continues to this day, with some communist parties forming a cult of personality, the most noted example is the American RCP. The RCP intentionally has attempted to build a cult of personality around their leader, Bob Avakian. As Marxists, we should reject the cult of personality and appreciate individuals based on their merits, rather than any superstition to authority. Leaders like Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and so on must be appreciated for their merit, their contributions to theory and praxis, not pushed as unaccountable, perfect beings.
References:
Khrushchev, N. 1956, “19th Party Congress to the CPSU” Marxists.org
Marx, K. 1877, “Letter to Wilhelm Blos” Marx & Engels Collected Works vol. 45, p. 288
Stalin, J. 1926, “Reply to the Greetings of the Workers of the Chief Railway Workshops in Tiflis” Marxists.org
Stalin, J. 1930, “Letter to Comrade Shatunovsky” Marxists.org
Stalin, J. 1938, “Letter on Publications for Children Directed to the Central Committee of the All Union Communist Youth” Marxists.org
Stalin, J. 1952, “Unpublished Speech by Stalin at the Plenum of the Central Committee, CPSU” NorthStar Compass
Zizek, S. 2012, “The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology”, Zeitgeist Films
Comrade
New Arkados has asked what some different left tendencies are, a very brief overview of a few is outlined by Vegemiteisgross.As a disclaimer, I have tried to keep impartial, naming only the very basics of each ideology. I did not wish to put my own feelings into this. So my own criticisms of each ideology have remained separate, that being said, I have alleviated some common myths surrounding some of the ideologies present.
Social Democracy:
Social democracy is the root of almost all socialism. It was the original name of all the socialist parties of the 20th century, namely the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, which would grow to be the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Similarly, the left Social Democratic Party of Germany was the party which was the vanguard of the Spartacist Uprising. The right faction in of the Social Democratic Party of Germany would also spell the downfall of the Spartacist Uprising, becoming affiliated with the fascist Freikorps (Precursors to the Nazi Sturmabteilung) and suppressing the revolution.
Social democracy would be forever separated from socialism after the Second International and the rise of the Bolsheviks in Russia, the socialists who named themselves social democrats would call themselves socialists or communists from then on, the German Social Democratic party split into the Communist Party of Germany, while the moderate social democrats stayed. Nowadays, social democracy can be seen as “capitalism with a human face”. The Nordic model is often used to describe social democracies, countries like Sweden especially. Social democracy believes in private ownership of the means of production alongside state ownership and a market mechanism. Social democracy is almost never associated with socialist thought by socialists, rather is named socialist by some social democrats, namely Bernie Sanders. That being said, those who follow the Nordic model do not identify it as socialist. “I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism, therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” - Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmusse.
Democratic Socialism:
Democratic socialism is the second split from social democracy, favouring electoral politics rather than revolution. A democratic socialist believes that they can have their party elected, and once elected, their party can instill broad, democratic changes to the economy to bring about socialism. Many electoral socialist parties, some of which are Marxist, are democratic socialist parties. A good example is Nepal, which recently elected the Communist Party of Nepal, another example is the communist faction of the Greens in Australia, Left Renewal. Democratic socialism is one of the three main schools of socialist thought. My personal favourite example is the Chilean Allende government.
Socialism:
Socialism is often called the lower stage of communism. It is characterised by the democratic control of the means of production, the factories and so on, in the hands of the worker’s through the worker’s state. It bears the birthmarks of the previous system it came out from, capitalism. Therefore socialism requires some of the things inherent to capitalism, it requires a state to manage a transformation from capitalism to communism, it contains a class divided society, being the workers and the remnants of the capitalists, or the proletariat and the remnants of the bourgeoisie. Once there are no longer any class antagonisms, socialism finalises the transformation into communism. Socialism seeks to smash the bourgeois state and instate a worker’s state in its place. Private property is abolished into state property, and in most cases, the market is abolished.
Communism:
Communism is a stateless, classless, often currencyless commune. All the means of production is owned by the workers. Communism is different to socialism due to the state withering away as the workers no longer require a state to continue the running of day to day life. Communism is found in a state of post-scarcity, that means all goods are in abundance.
Marxism:
The ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels are the basis of Marxism, or scientific socialism. Marxism is one of the three main schools of socialism. Marxism acts as a guide to transform society from bourgeois society, that is capitalist society, through to socialism, and finally to communism. Marxism, like anarchism, has many subschools of thought.
Leninism:
Marxism-Leninism became popular since the early 1900s, where the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) popularised Marxism among the Russian working class. The Bolsheviks would come out on top at the end of the October Revolution and showcasing the effectiveness of Marxism-Leninism in regards to the USSR. Marxism-Leninism would also be showcased by many other countries across the globe, specifically Cuba, Burkina Faso and so on. Marxism-Leninism is arguably the largest Marxist tendency with hundreds of political organisations around the globe leading their own revolutionary struggle.
Trotskyism? Stalinism?
Trotsky and Stalin were two of the less important theorists around Leninism. Trotskyism ended up seeing the USSR, and subsequently every other successful Marxist country as a degenerated workers’ state, or in the case of some Trotskyists, “state capitalist”. Trotskyism is a very broad school, ranging from Marcyites to Pabloites to Bolshevik-Leninists to Cliffites.
“Stalinism” is essentially a nickname for Marxism-Leninism created by Trotsky to denounce Stalin, despite Stalin being a Marxist-Leninist, and his policies being Marxist-Leninist. Today the word almost always used to denounce Marxist-Leninists by Trotskyists, left communists and anarchists, despite this, it has been accepted by the anti-revisionists, or the Stalinist-Hoxhaists.
State Capitalism?
State capitalism is a term often given to the USSR and China by their detractors, notably the Cliffite Trotskyist tendency and anarchists like Goldman and Bookchin. State capitalism believes that countries like the USSR, Cuba and China achieved state capitalism, not socialism. State capitalism is where the state acts as the sole capitalist in the nation. Anarchists like Emma Goldman and Murray Bookchin see state socialism as state capitalism. Engels talked about state capitalism as the final stage of capitalism before socialism. I will be making a TRS article on state capitalism in the future to expand on this argument.
Maoism:
Maoism is built upon Marxism Leninism with the theory created by Mao Tse-Tung. Maoism generally is an “anti-revisionist” line of thought, siding with China in the Sino-Soviet split, although this is debated hotly among leftists. Modern day China, Vietnam and Laos are generally seen as Maoist, modern day movements like those in Bengal are Maoist.
Left Communism:
Left Communism was made popular by Lenin, who denounced left communism as an “infantile disorder”. Left communism is typically a form of Marxism which is in opposition to Leninism and Maoism. Left communism is championed by theorists like Bordiga, Pannekoek and others. Strangely enough, Rosa Luxemburg is included as a left communist, despite being an orthodox Marxist. Luxemburg was critical of Leninism, yet also supported the socialist movement. Most left communists are seen as the stereotypical armchair revolutionaries. Left communism is an umbrella term. Bordiga considered himself “More Leninist than Lenin,” Pannekoek was a council communist and Luxemburg was an orthodox Marxist. Left communism is heralded by anti-Bolshevik (and subsequently, anti-Maoist and so on) attitudes. Left communists today typically stand opposed to all actually existing socialism with some exceptions.
Libertarian Socialism:
Libertarian socialism is ‘anti-authoritarianism’ socialism. It espouses broad decentralised political organisation. Libertarian socialism is a big tent ideology, being in parts of left communism, communalism, syndicalism, anarchism and so on. Libertarian socialists, similarly to left communists, often stand in opposition to bolshevism, and sometimes in opposition to Marxism. More often than not, libertarian socialism attempts to combine many of the aforementioned ideologies as a big tent, pan-leftist movement. The Zapatistas are one of the most famous forms of libertarian socialism.
Religious Socialism:
Many people are religious. Naturally, religion is used to justify politics, as religion is political in of itself. There are as many types of socialism for every religion. Some notable examples are Ba’athism which became popular in the 19th century.
Market Socialism:
Market socialism has many different forms. Marxist market socialists generally see a combination of Marx with the ideas of his predecessors, Adam Smith and David Ricardo. Market socialism is pretty much explained by the name, it is socialism with a market mechanism. Yugoslav communism is seen as market socialism.
Syndicalism:
Syndicalism is a form of government made up by self managed syndicates. A syndicate can be something like a trade union, or a local council. Syndicalism can come in anarchist or non-anarchist forms. Noam Chomsky has called himself an anarcho-syndicalist before. The CNT:FAI along with the IWW the most famous forms of syndicalism. Syndicalism usually comes with a market mechanism and the abolition of private property for state (or in the anarchist variety, non-state) property.
De Leonism:
Daniel De Leon was a syndicalist Marxist. He combined the ideas of syndicalism with orthodox Marxism to form a style of government based off the worker’s state, with worker unions controlling the means of production as guided by the vanguard party. Despite this, it is quite decentralised in comparison to Marxism-Leninism. This is due to the power being put into the hands of the trade unions. De Leon would inspire many other socialists across the globe, including James Connolly in Ireland.
Anarchism:
Basics:
Anarchism is a big tent ideology, encompassing views from the far left (Anarcho-Syndicalism, Anarcho-Communism) to a more centred approach (Mutualism, Market anarchism) to a far right (“Anarcho”-capitalism). Some anarchism does not have a coherent position on a political compass, (Anarcho-Transhumanism, Anarcho-Pacifism).
In the end of the day, all these different types of anarchism share very little in common, although the more coherent varieties, i.e. anarchism which is on the left to the centre, all share one similarity: The rejection of unjust hierarchy.
To the anarchist, all hierarchy must be questioned, and if it is unjustified, it must be abolished. The slogan, “No gods, no masters” is an anarchist slogan, it gives some idea of the position of anarchists. A common misinterpretation of anarchy is lawlessness, where people go and steal, kill and do whatever they please as there are no laws, this is incorrect. In all actually existing anarchist communes, there are, or were, rules which everyone agreed upon and abided by. Anarchism is often misconstrued as being simply anti-state, a mistake that the “anarcho”-capitalists make. This is incorrect, while the anarchist does believe in the abolition of the state, the state is not the be all and end all of oppression. The classic anarchists fought quite strongly against the hierarchy of the church, hierarchy of violence, even with some, the violence inherent to the hierarchy of animal agriculture.
As anarchism can be a left or right wing ideology, this also splits anarchism as being individualist or social. Individualist anarchism, like egoism and “anarcho”-capitalism focuses on the self, while social anarchy focuses on the many.
Anarcho-Communism:
If we remember earlier to our definition of communism, it’s quite easy to see that it is an anarchist ideal. Anarcho-communists generally are characterised by the belief that revolution, or mass strike etc. will bring about a near immediate spontaneous form of anarcho-communism. Anarcho-communists reject the Marxist argument of a transition period between capitalism and communism, arguing that the bourgeois state can be abolished and no worker’s state is required to take its place. Instead the state will be abolished completely. Kropotkin is arguably the most famous anarcho-communist. Anarcho-communism abolishes the market, private property and state property for a gift economy based on free association using the means of production.
Mutualism:
Mutualism is a form of government created by Proudhon. Mutualism follows that each and every person owns some form of means of production, whether in a voluntary commune or owned privately. Mutualism requires a mutual credit banking system, to stop people living off credit and the like. Mutualism is often seen as the middle point between social anarchism and individualist anarchism.
Anarcho-Communalism:
Anarcho-communalism is a form of government often associated with Bookchin. Communalism looks to create a federation of anarchist communes, where all means of production is held in those small communes. The market is abolished and private and state property is communal property. Rojava is described as communalist.
Anarcho-Primitivism:
“Oorg ee ah ah eee oh!”
*Dances around bonfire*
“Eek eek! Aiy!”
- 
AnPrimus
Anarcho-primitivism seeks to return to the Marxist understanding of primitive communism. Primitive communism is generally understood as hunter-gatherer society. It is seen as an extreme form of green-anarchism, which is simply just eco-friendly and sustainable anarchism.
Now there are many, many different leftist tendencies, far, far more than I have described here. Not only that, but many leftists take parts of many ideologies and merge them together. That being said, I hope this article has remained faithful to the ideologies present, if not, please don’t hesitate to contact me and I will edit this article as necessary.
Also, if you feel like such a short summation of your ideology does not do it justice, please submit an article talking about your ideology!
