Currently, I am a high school student. If I efficiently improve and maintain my academic performance, I will have more flexibility at school and can skip or attend fewer classes taught by the bourgeoisie elite, using that time to read Marxist theory. My current plan is—
In political economy: to read Nankai University’s “Capitalism—Imperialism Political Economy” and the September 1976 issue of “Socialist Political Economy” from Shanghai.
In philosophy: to supplement with parts of “Outline of Marxist Philosophy” and “Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism” (Beijing, 1973). For historical materialism, I will read Wuhan University’s “Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism.” I have read these before, but I need to review them recently.
Scientific socialism is the theory of proletarian revolution and proletarian dictatorship, as well as the application of Marxism in various fields. I plan to read “What Is to Be Done?” and “The ‘Left-Wing’ Communism: An Infantile Disorder.”
This study cycle should last more than three months. I will post my doubts during this process in this thread.
First of all, there is a question: Are the four books from 1978 titled “Selected Readings of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Mao Zedong’s Works” (Philosophy, Political Economy, Scientific Socialism, Party Doctrine) worth reading?
By 1978, the restoration had already lasted for two years. Under these circumstances, ideological books officially published by the Chinese revisionists were all subject to alteration, making them basically worthless for reading and learning.
Recently, I have mainly been reading “On Practice” and “On Contradiction.” I now have a question: Where should I start? From which part should I begin studying?
Regarding the study of philosophy, I think the articles “On Practice” and “On Contradiction” can be read together when covering the relevant sections in the process of reading “Outline of Marxist Philosophy,” rather than studying them separately for now. Applying dialectical materialism to daily life is a question I remember being mentioned somewhere in the book “Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism,” but I can’t recall the details at the moment. I will get back to you when I have free time after work.
【How to apply dialectical materialism to daily life? I feel that I have only memorized its key points, but the worldview hasn’t changed much.】 First of all, don’t just treat Marxism as a pure doctrine or “knowledge points.” Many Marxist viewpoints are only used when you are actually engaged in social struggles. To apply dialectical materialism to life, you must first avoid a life detached from the people and distant from struggle.
How should one distinguish between the primary and secondary aspects of the principal contradiction and the primary and secondary contradictions of a thing?
The original words of Chairman Mao are as follows: “In the development process of complex things, many contradictions exist, among which there must be a principal contradiction. Due to its existence and development, it determines or influences the existence and development of other contradictions… Not all contradictions in the process can be viewed equally; they must be distinguished into two categories: principal and secondary, focusing on grasping the principal contradiction as mentioned above. But among various contradictions, whether they are principal or secondary, can the two opposing sides of the contradiction be viewed equally? The answer is no.”
Therefore, your question is actually straightforward. Contradictions are absolute, and in complex things, there are multiple contradictions. For example, in the current capitalist society in China, there are many contradictions: the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, contradictions within the bourgeoisie, contradictions between ethnic minorities and the Han nationality, etc. Among these, the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie is the most important and determines China’s destiny. This is the principal contradiction; the others are secondary contradictions.
And in the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the proletariat and the bourgeoisie are the two aspects of this contradiction. Currently, it is still the bureaucratic monopoly bourgeoisie that rules China. Their power is still very strong, so it can be said that the bourgeoisie in China now occupies the main aspect of this contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, while the proletariat occupies the secondary aspect. And precisely because the bourgeoisie still occupies the main aspect, the nature of Chinese society remains a capitalist society. However, although the proletariat occupies the secondary aspect, new things are invincible, and the status between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie will inevitably change, with the proletariat eventually occupying the main aspect. At that time, China’s social nature will transform into socialist society through revolution.
“The Guide to Ideological Struggle” is a very good material that systematically elaborates on the theory of ideological struggle. It clarifies the necessity of ideological struggle, the composition and differences of worldviews of different classes, and also points out the laws and methods of ideological struggle. Besides this, how about the book “Ideological Transformation of the Small Bourgeoisie”? Is it worth using as a learning material for ideological transformation?
This is outrageous. What is this? “Masses Revolution Society”? Stealing the achievements of socialist China during the era and printing them under your own name as “publishing”? That’s extremely reactionary.
Notes when reading about the importance of the party’s leadership—
There is a contradiction here: if the party’s leadership is in the hands of true Marxists, it can promote the development of the socialist revolution. But if revisionists usurp the party’s leadership, then under the premise of centralized leadership, they can also accelerate the implementation of revisionist policies. Therefore, resisting the tide is very important. However, besides the consciousness of grassroots revolutionary party members, should the organizational structure guarantee the rights of grassroots to oppose higher-ups? But this should be a matter within the party; in the relationship between the party and the masses, the party leads everything. But the masses also need the right to propose to the party, and even to oppose revisionism within the party. Chairman Mao said, “The lower ranks are above the higher, the masses are above the leadership,” so what measures should be taken to guarantee the rights of grassroots and the masses to oppose the tide?
When reading about “workers repeatedly提出 increasing wages demands,” I thought—
Recently, the strike struggles in China, mainly demanding wages and resumption of work, are “defensive” strikes. But in the late stage of the rise of capitalism in the 19th century, workers’ demands were mainly about reducing working hours and increasing wages, which were offensive struggles. Clearly, capitalist society exploits the proletariat every moment; why are the demands of workers different in the decayed era and the rising era?
When reading “Marx said: ‘Silesia…realized the essence of the proletariat’”
Does the essence here refer to abolishing private ownership?
When reading “Therefore, at that time, international workers’ organizations like the ‘League of Justice’, the left wing of the Charterists, and advanced workers from various countries sought scientific revolutionary theory. The Manifesto was produced under such conditions, to meet the needs of the proletarian revolutionary struggle.”
Historical development will create great tasks. The emergence of scientific theories like the “Manifesto” is inevitable. Not a “genius” accidental creation. Of course, why Marx and Engels? It is because Marx and Engels’ social activities and lives are themselves historical, adapted to revolutionary practice in historical development. Therefore, it is not others but them who completed the historical task of formulating advanced scientific revolutionary theory, becoming the people who accelerated the wheel of history.
The only fundamental measure is the consciousness of the masses itself. Only by learning and thoroughly understanding Marxism, and improving the ability to distinguish between true and false Marxism, can we prevent revisionism and counter-revisionism. Therefore, intellectuals should be laborized, workers should be intellectualized, and the brain-body distinction should be eliminated. Besides that, all technical means are useless.
Is your question really correct? Don’t workers today struggle for reducing working hours and increasing wages? The characteristic of capitalist exploitation is that it simultaneously creates unemployment while lowering wages, extending working hours, and increasing labor intensity. These situations coexist, so I think your statement has problems.
You should ask the question more completely. However, the Silesian textile workers’ uprising was indeed the first time the proletariat explicitly called for the abolition of private ownership.
What is a defensive strike, paying social insurance and housing fund arrears, and holding a strike due to unpaid wages for several months—are those conservative strikes?