• redtea@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    The question is, did the Nazis know they would fail and pick that title just to troll us?

    • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      They wanted to trick the German people into thinking that they would help them. Since the socialists actually cared about the people.

      Excellent marketing and PR.

      Same reason why Pol Pot was a MLM. Excellent optics that buy you support to then accomplish your real goals.

        • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          He was not. But he called himself one, that’s the point I was making.

          We all know his positions were different, but his optics were focused around using Maoism to his personal advantage.

          • SovereignState@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            A Maoist, not a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. No one really called themselves an MLM til the 80s, when the PCP/Shining Path officially “synthesized” it.

            • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              True, but wouldn’t a Maoist by extension be a Marxist-Leninist? MLM certainly had its connotations because of groups like the shining path, but I meant that more in the way that he used legends from Marxist-Leninism, and Maoism to draw support.

              • SovereignState@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                I would say you are probably correct. A lot of it is semantics - I think prior to the eighties you’re just more likely to run into phrases like “adherent to Mao Zedong Thought” rather than “Marxist-Leninist-Maoist”.

                Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge's words on the matter

                “Our two Parties, two governments and two peoples have maintained a fundamentally identical, correct, Marxist-Leninist stand.”

                Speaking first, Hua Kuo-feng welcomed the Kampuchean comrades, calling their visit a “major event” in the relations between the two parties and countries. He said, “The Communist Party of Kampuchea, headed by comrade Pol Pot, is a staunch Marxist-Leninist Party.” He called the CPK “the force at the core leading the Kampuchean people in seizing victory in their revolution.”

                In warmly praising Mao Tsetung Thought, Pol Pot said, “Following Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, Chairman Mao and his thought have triumphantly stood the test of successive revolutionary storms.” He said that Mao Tsetung Thought today illuminates the path of revolution for people all over the world.

                “More precisely,” Pol Pot said of Mao Tsetung Thought, “It is the most effective and sharp ideological and political weapon which infallibly guides our struggle to victory.”

                emphasis mine


                Undeniably, I would say, they were Maoist, but at the time ‘Maoism’ and ‘Marxism-Leninism’ were considered pretty much one and the same by “anti-revisionists” or those communists who split with the USSR after Khruschev’s coup d’etat. I’d say calling Pol Pot a ‘Maoist’ is a fair enough examination, it’s just that to him “Maoism” and “Marxism-Leninism” were synonymous. I’d maybe go so far as to call him a proto-MLM.

                source: https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-3/cpml-pol-pot.htm