Short form articles can never be a substitute for heavy Theory; there are many complex ideas which require many words to properly explain. However, shorter pieces can provide a useful supplement; presenting helpful details and specific examples or reframing and rephrasing concepts in ways that finally click when they didn't before. They're also useful for introducing someone to a topic; convincing them to read 10 pages is much easier than convincing them to read 300. Plenty of famous communist theoreticians have written shorter pieces alongside their longer works. In this post however, I would like to share the shorter pieces from more obscure writers (ranging from 20th century political scientists to contemporary amateur writers) that had the greatest impact on shaping my politics into what they are today
The first, and probably most well known on tumblr, would be the 2020 Medium article Where do Tanks come from? by "Dash the Internet Marxist". While I can't vouch for the quality of everything this person has written (they went on to write some very disagreeable things about the supposed "revisionism" of the contemporary PRC for example), I found that this article did a very good job of the specific thing it was intended to: turning anarchists into "tankies". Engaging with the terms of anglophone discourse at the time without totally being subsumed by them, it explains in understandable terms why Marxism-Leninism took the form that it did in contrast to the various "True Socialisms" dreamed up by members of the self-described "Libertarian Left". The fundamental reason of course being: Marxism-Leninism works and all that other shit doesn't. While it didn't change my entire attitude single-handedly, it was a significant contributor to my ideological shift from Anarchism to Marxism-Leninism. It helped me to accept that, whatever failures and short-comings exist in the history of Marxism-Leninism, it's the only method that can produce any real results
If the previous article caused me to shift away from Anarchism, Jo Freeman's Tyranny of Structurelessness (1972) helped me bury the tendencies behind it. While written as a critique of the Left-Liberal Feminist milieu in the the 1960's US, I found that its lessons about hierarchy were broadly applicable. Most importantly, it exposed the futility of treating "non-hierarchical" organisation as an goal by itself. While this structure can may be advantageous in specific circumstances, attempting to pursue it in all cases is stupid, wasteful and typically creates organisations that just don't work. Such pursuits often fail to eliminate "hierarchy" anyway; by avoiding or dismantling De Jure hierarchies that can be properly monitored and held accountable, you just end up with De Facto hierarchies that can't even be talked about (let alone dealt with) because they supposedly don't exist. The anarchistic obsession with "direct democracy" and "horizontal organisation" represents a fatal ideological weakness that should be avoided by anyone who hopes for consistent political success
Now that I'd shifted away from Anarchism, Socialism or Reformism (2010) by Prabhat Patnaik helped to make me a more uncompromising Marxist. Because fighting for various concessions to the working classes may not be a total waste; it can relieve suffering in the present and form a base for further movements in the future. But you just can't stop at reform. As long as the Bourgeoisie remain in power, structural forces are going to work against any "mixed economy" social democratic compromises. This is especially true in the Imperial Periphery, where these regimes face opposition from both local reactionaries and foreign capitalists while being inextricably tied to a global economic system they have little control over. Whether we're talking about the world's most strategic tariff policy or the best welfare system imaginable, no specific set of policies under a Bourgeoisie government can meaningfully secure the well-being of a nation's working class. These arrangements are inherently unstable; proletarian policy can only be guaranteed by a proletarian dictatorship
Because class dictatorship can manifest in many ways, but the foundational question of any government system is "which class holds power?". This was reinforced for me by Roderic Day's 2021 article Really Existing Fascism, exploring Fascism in terms of its roots within Liberalism and their ongoing relationship. Because while many people see them as complete opposites, Fascism and Liberalism exist very comfortably alongside each other both historically and in present times. Rather than being awkwardly ignored, this needs to be accepted and explored when fitting these ideological tendencies into a broader conceptual framework. While I wouldn't consider this article to be the ultimate explanation for such questions as "What is Fascism?", it does an excellent job of opening the discussion and focusing exactly where it needs to be focused: on class relations before all else
Finally, if the previous sources helped me define what I am not politically then this article series helped me define what I am. Published in 1975 Apartheid South Africa by an anonymous author under the nom-de-plume Dialego, Philosophy and Class Struggle is probably the best introduction to Marxism-Leninism that I've read. Taking the time to explain why any of this is even necessary, it then goes on to present the most important lessons of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Mao in a concise and understandable yet still useful form. It uses illustrative examples from Apartheid South Africa, as an adaption to the time and place it was written in, but they're all basic enough that it doesn't take much historical knowledge to grasp them and apply their lessons in other contexts. While no replacement for the giants of theory that it summarises, I'd consider this article to be a great primer that leaves you well positioned to start learning more. And it's just plain impressive how many big ideas were effectively presented in such a short form
Of course there are countless other smaller and lesser known works that shaped me, but these 5 are probably the most significant and the most I'd want to share. The first probably isn't necessary if you're already Marxist-Leninist but the rest I'd consider worth reading; even if you're already familiar with the lessons they contain, it's often useful to see them presented again in different forms. Check them out if you can. They helped me a lot, so I hope they have a chance to help you
