By SJ Otto

The question has been raised to me recently that there are limitations on Leninism. I have to admit that I believe that now and have believed it for most of my life. Last summer I visited Cuba and wrote several articles on life there.[1] Marxist-Leninism works there. I wrote well about my experiences there. But at the same time, I still believe that philosophy/ ideology left some things to be desired. When I began to lean towards Maoism, back in the late 1970s, a lot of what attracted me to that ideology was the emphasis on democracy. I have always believed in the need for democracy and it was the Maoist emphasis on democracy that attracted me to that ideology.

Marxist-Leninism is a good philosophy but there are reasons some of us look up to other additions to Marxist philosophy, including Maoism[2]. I am not a Trotskyist (of Leon Trotsky) but I do understand why some people are attracted to that philosophy. As with Maoism, the Trots believe there are things that must be added to Marxist-Leninism to make it work more democratically. As Maoists we also see serious flaws of the Trots. Their view of Marxism after the death of Lenin, completely departs from those of the Maoists, Joseph Stalinists and others.

Maoist and Trots are not very far apart on their actual analysis of capitalist society. We do see a need for addition to the M-L beliefs. For me, and many like me, Maoism is much about democracy. Mao seriously felt that the Soviet Union, under both Stalin at first and then Nikita Khrushchev, simply was not democratic enough.

Here are some notes, according to author Stuart Schram,[3] on Mao’s view of the Hungarian uprising of 1956:

“Why was it possible for the counter-revolutionaries to succeed to this enterprise? The two reasons given in the editorial of December 1956 clearly foreshadow not only Mao’s policy of the controlled release of tension announce in his speech of the following February, but the ultimate issue of that policy. On the one hand ‘the democratic rights and revolutionary enthusiasm of the Hungarian working people were impaired’ as a result of the errors by the leadership; on the other hand ’the counterrevolutionaries were not dealt the blow they deserved’, and ‘Hungary had not yet made a serious enough effort to build up its dictatorship of the proletariat’, In his speech of February 27, 1957 Mao applied the Hungarian lesson to China:

“Within the ranks of the people we cannot do without freedom, nor can we do without discipline; we cannot do without democracy, nor can we do without centralism…Under democratic centralism, the people enjoy a wide measure of democracy and freedom, but at the same time they have to keep themselves within the bonds of socialist’s discipline. All this is well understood by the masses of the people.”

I have found many of Mao’s writings over the years that show his beliefs that democracy were important to a Marxist country. One of my favorite Maoist passages; “Let a hundred flowers bloom, and a hundred schools of thought contend.”

There are many writers who try to claim that Mao was either anti-democratic or that he wrote about democracy without being sincere in the belief. I take him seriously enough that his writings definitely point to the need for Marxist regimes to have aspects of democracy to them. It is my opinion that Mao did believe in democracy. If his regime actually lacked democracy in reality, his writings point to a serious need for democracy. As Maoists we are following an ideology and not just the examples of a former leader.

There are other Marxist leaders who present us with examples of using democracy in a Marxist system. This is just one example of the reasons why Marxist-Leninism by itself is not enough.

I am not the only person or group of people who feels that Mao has made significant contributions to Marx and Lenin. There are Maoist groups and there are a few who follow Chairman Gonzalo. With or without Gonzalo we still have Maoist who believe that Maoism is the next and better developed stage after Marx and Lenin:

Why is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism the highest stage of revolutionary communist/socialist thought? Is there any critisicm towards it from other strands of marxism or socialist theory?

I guess this question is directed at /u/theredcebuano but all answers are welcome

theredcebuano:

Long Live the Eternal Science of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism! -2 years ago

Ideology and theory develop in quantitative and qualitative leaps. Marx made quantitative advancements to what the bourgeois philosophers, economists and utopian socialists presented, and qualitatively created Marxism, synthesized by Engels. Lenin made quantitative advancements to Marxist philosophy through practice and through the consistent criticism of the various errors made by the Second Internationale, which became Marxism-Leninism qualitatively, synthesized by Stalin. Similarly, Mao made quantitative advancements to what was already known by Marxist-Leninists, criticizing and pinpointing the origins of revisionism within the Eastern Bloc countries and revitalizing socialism in China through the Great Leap Forward, and qualitatively this became Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, synthesized mainly by Abimael Guzman (Chairman Gonzalo) of the Communist Party of Peru but I would also add Charu Mazumdar of the Communist Party India-Maoist and Jose Maria Sison of the Communist Party of the Philippines.

What were the advancements that Chairman Mao Zedong made?

1. The Law of Contradictions and other Philosophical Achievements

a. Chairman Mao pointed out that the main and only law of dialectics is the law of contradictions. All else is a manifestation of this law. The relationship between quantity and quality, as we have seen above in the development of ideology, and the negation of the negation (seeing how Marxism-Leninism negates Marxism, and MLM negates ML), are simply forms of the law of contradictions and not at all separate laws.

There is also this passage by Chairman Gonzalo himself:

In defense of the life of Chairman Gonzalo,
hoist higher the flag of Maoism!

Finally now, listen to this. As we see in the world, Maoism is marching unstoppably to lead the new wave of world proletarian revolution. Listen well and understand! Those who have ears, use them. Those who have understanding - and we all have it - use it! Enough of this nonsense. Enough of these obscurities! Let us understand that! What is unfolding in the world? What do we need? We need Maoism to be embodied, and it is being embodied, and by generating Communist Parties it shall drive and lead this new great wave of the world proletarian revolution that is coming. (Speech of Chairman Gonzalo, Sep. 1992)

So whether it is more democracy or other reasons, we see that there are many people in the world who see the need for ideas to be added to Marx and Lenin. And for me and those others mentioned above, those additional philosophical ideas are of the Maoist persuasion.