When we say that we are Marxist-Leninists, we mean that we have studied and understood the classical principles of scientific socialism and that we have adapted these principles to our own situation for ourselves.
He criticizes some aspects of Marxism and especially some ML movements, but he nonetheless identifies the BPP as belonging to the ML lineage.
The Black Panther Party called itself a Marxist-guided organization. It made the study of Marxism-Leninism compulsory among the leading cadre. This step was unprecedented in the history of the Black Liberation struggle. The Panthers did not lift the Black Liberation movement to an international level.
The Communist Party of the U.S.A. had already done that. That is why it was feared and all progressive steps were charged to it. Black and White Communists had stood in international bodies to proclaim that inseparable relation of the struggle of Blacks in the U.S.A. to the world-wide freedom struggle. The Black Liberation struggle no less needs the guidance of a scienct: than does every other liberation struggle. Social revolution is a science, as the Communists have said many times, a science to be creatively used has to be mastered and the science guiding revolution must of historical necessity be a universal science. That science is Marxism-Leninism.
He says some strange things about Lenin and the BPP not being historical materialists but being dialectical materialists that I don’t really understand, but generally we can say that he explicitly aligns the BPP with his views on ML theory.
I think that someone misinformed you on the BPP for the sake of some sort of anti-Lenin revisionism. They were very big fans of Mao, but “Maoism” as a thing opposed to “Leninism” didn’t really exist yet and Mao himself clearly didn’t like such a characterization.
This doesn’t disprove what I was saying. Which is in reference to the post where the person on camera said the BPP was Marxist Leninist. (In reference to a fight between MLs and Maoists.)
Mao was who they aligned with the most, even if there weren’t “Maoists” at this time. I wasn’t fooled by anyone I just thought it was odd they brought up them being MLs in this context.
The term “Maoist” doesn’t just mean “fan of Mao” though. It’s kind of a difficult label to discuss because many groups use it in very different ways, most infamously the “Maoists” of the Shining Path, otherwise referred to as Gonzalites. I really think the most accurate thing to call them, based on the timelines involved and explicit statements like what we saw above, was that they were primarily their own adaptation/interpretation of Marxism-Leninism who were big fans of the guy they saw as the greatest global pioneer of nonwhite Marxism-Leninism, Chairman Mao (and the Cleaver text especially supports the characterization, imo). We can’t especially tie them to the Red Guards (despite common influence) or Gonzalites (thank God) or other “Maoist” movements.
I think the “Maoist” label is inaccurate, and again would repeat that Mao himself rejected such a term. It’s an ideological muddying akin to saying the BPP was Juche because they also spoke very highly of Kim Il-Sung as a foundational figure in the development of nonwhite socialism (see Cleaver). I think the resident Dune fan’s correction was fair enough and your “correction” of the OOP was not justified.
Not really, Maoism as a distinct ideology wasn’t formed until much later. They were definitely big Mao supporters, though.
I understand, that’s why I said were more. They also never claimed the ML title either.
Eldridge Cleaver – “On the Ideology of the Black Panther Party” (1969)
He criticizes some aspects of Marxism and especially some ML movements, but he nonetheless identifies the BPP as belonging to the ML lineage.
Huey P. Newton – “To Die for the People” (1972)
He says some strange things about Lenin and the BPP not being historical materialists but being dialectical materialists that I don’t really understand, but generally we can say that he explicitly aligns the BPP with his views on ML theory.
I think that someone misinformed you on the BPP for the sake of some sort of anti-Lenin revisionism. They were very big fans of Mao, but “Maoism” as a thing opposed to “Leninism” didn’t really exist yet and Mao himself clearly didn’t like such a characterization.
This doesn’t disprove what I was saying. Which is in reference to the post where the person on camera said the BPP was Marxist Leninist. (In reference to a fight between MLs and Maoists.)
Mao was who they aligned with the most, even if there weren’t “Maoists” at this time. I wasn’t fooled by anyone I just thought it was odd they brought up them being MLs in this context.
The term “Maoist” doesn’t just mean “fan of Mao” though. It’s kind of a difficult label to discuss because many groups use it in very different ways, most infamously the “Maoists” of the Shining Path, otherwise referred to as Gonzalites. I really think the most accurate thing to call them, based on the timelines involved and explicit statements like what we saw above, was that they were primarily their own adaptation/interpretation of Marxism-Leninism who were big fans of the guy they saw as the greatest global pioneer of nonwhite Marxism-Leninism, Chairman Mao (and the Cleaver text especially supports the characterization, imo). We can’t especially tie them to the Red Guards (despite common influence) or Gonzalites (thank God) or other “Maoist” movements.
I think the “Maoist” label is inaccurate, and again would repeat that Mao himself rejected such a term. It’s an ideological muddying akin to saying the BPP was Juche because they also spoke very highly of Kim Il-Sung as a foundational figure in the development of nonwhite socialism (see Cleaver). I think the resident Dune fan’s correction was fair enough and your “correction” of the OOP was not justified.