“Read theory.”
We say this all the time. It’s basically an expression, isn’t it? It can be advise, bragging, scorn, mockery. It’s all become a bit ephemeral.
That’s not to say that people shouldn’t read theory. Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement. Even so, isn’t it a bit silly to suggest, even implicitly, that being a Marxist or communist boils down to a familiarity with the source material? If that’s not book worship, I don’t know what is.
I understand that this is, on some level, an accusation. I am suggesting that many of our communities are caught up in a somewhat liberal, idealist mindset. We all have an ideology, a set of opinions about the world which we express and propagate at the expense of our competitors. Can we seriously deny this is what we are doing?
If Marxism-Leninism is a science, there must be some technical aspect. What are we supposed to do in the world? How do we do it? And how do we know if it’s working?
Yes we agree. Your comment is an expanded version of what I meant by “We identify those conditions, through application of theory, and use that information to build a revolutionary movement.”
What you’re describing is praxis, the act of engaging with the material world so as to change it. The material world includes these “subjective conditions” you’re taking about. Those conditions are the hearts and minds of other people, and through practical activity in the world we shape and change the world.
Material Conditions are just the conditions under which the intellectual or military or working class or petty bourgeoisie groups live under. We must be able to identify how these groups are uniquely exploited. Then, take that information and use it to build solidarity across those groups.
Obviously were both being a bit pedantic with language here lol, but I often feel that specificity of language is important because we do not want to have misunderstandings, which is easy to do when words can have domain specific meanings and more general meanings.