Header Ads

Header ADS

What is Marxist Leninist assessment and its process?

Lenin, while not explicitly detailing assessment techniques, through his approach emphasizes analysing and evaluating any given situations within a specific ideological framework, focusing on policy, policy effectiveness and continuous adjustments towards the targeted goals on a given subject.

Why is it that assessments are essential and important?

Every stand to be taken for any given phenomenon is a tactical decision in different degrees of importance and prepares the path for the success of a strategy. As Stalin eloquently explains; “The strategy changes at moments of historical turns, turning points, it embraces the period from one turn (turning point) to another, therefore it directs movement towards a certain common goal that embraces the interests of the proletariat for this entire period; it strives to win the war between classes that fills the entire given period, which is why it remains unchanged during this period.

Tactics, on the contrary, are determined by the ebb and flow of the tides based on a given turn, a given strategic period, the relationship of the contending forces, the forms of struggle (movement), the pace of movement, the arena of struggle at each given moment, in each given area, and since these factors change depending on the conditions of place and time from one turn to another, then tactics , embracing not the entire war, but only its individual battles leading to the winning or losing of the war, changes (can change) several times during the strategic period.

The strategic period is longer than the tactical period. Tactics are subordinated to the interests of strategy. Tactical successes, generally speaking, prepare the way for strategic successes. The task of tactics is to lead the masses into battle in such a way, to give such slogans, to lead the masses to new positions, so that the struggle results in the total winning of the war, that is, strategic success. But there are cases when tactical success undermines or delays strategic success, which is why tactical successes should be neglected in such cases.” (1)  

The most important task of tactics is to determine those ways and means, those forms and methods of struggle that most closely correspond to the specific situation at a given moment and most likely prepare strategic success. Therefore, the actions of tactics and their results should be assessed not in themselves, not from the point of view of the immediate effect, but from the point of view of the tasks and capabilities of the strategy.” (2)

The dialectical connection between the strategy, assessments and determining the tactics are crucial for the success of struggle. However, we should not confuse the assessment of tactics for a given particular phenomenon with the proletarian tactics; for the former may be temporary and change drastically while the latter is a tactical line of proletarian action. “An assessment of “mood”, therefore,” says Lenin, “may be necessary to determine the moment for some action, step, appeal, etc., but certainly not to determine proletarian tactics. To argue differently would mean replacing sustained proletarian tactics by unprincipled dependence on “mood”. And all the time, the point at issue was that of a line and had nothing to do with a “moment”. Whether or not the proletariat has at present recovered  is of importance in deciding the “moment” for action, but not in determining the tactical line of action of the working class. (3)

Marxism-Leninism without the application of dialectics of Marxism turns it into  a soulless theory where learned by rote  abstract slogans and statements repeated on any given issue. Application of dialectics, however, requires thorough analysis, not application of ready-made schemas fitting all the conditions and situations in all the countries regardless of their past and present. “Marx’s method consists, first of all, in taking due account of the objective content of a historical process at a given moment, in definite and concrete conditions.” (4) “Genuine dialectics,” Lenin wrote, "proceeds by means of a thorough, detailed analysis of a process in all its concreteness. The fundamental thesis of dialectics is: there is no such thing as abstract truth, truth is always concrete.” (5)

Application of general rules, learned by rote theories in most cases will not represent the truth and thus the stand and  tactics should be determined not based on  abstracts assumed to be the truth. “Marxism requires of us a strictly exact and objectively verifiable analysis of the relation of classes and of the concrete features peculiar to each historical situation.” (6) Marxists do not proceed from the generalized theories to assessment of a given situation which renders subjectivity and arbitrariness but proceed from the assessment of concrete situation to the application of theories.” Marx”, says Lenin, "... speaks only of the concrete situation; Plekhanov draws a general conclusion without at all considering the question in its concreteness.(7)

Memorizing and sloganizing some theories and applying them as prescription that fits all is due to either a petty bourgeois laziness or the confusion and assumption that theories are principles. Theories are simply the generalization of the conclusion of a given specific analysis for a given subject under a given condition and situation.   “Principles are not an aim, a programme, a tactic, or a theory. Tactics and theory are not principles…” (8)

“It is not enough to learn the slogans by heart “ (9) says Lenin, a Marxist "demands a strict historical examination of the problem...to treat the problem as separate from the concrete historical situation is an error of betrayal of the fundamental principles of dialectical materialism." (10) Marxist must proceed not from what is possible, but from what is real." (11)

The fundamental reason for deducing wrong approach and drawing wrong conclusion from the right theories is that the "theories" remain abstract and thus prevents formulating any concrete tactics for the specific conditions and situation, in a way that can be understood by the masses.

Lenin was warning against such practice of applying general principles and rules as prescription for the determination of the tactics and stands to be taken. “Of course, in politics, in which sometimes extremely complicated—national and international—relationships … have to be dealt with...” says Lenin, but “it would be absurd to concoct a recipe, or general rule... that would serve in all cases. One must have the brains to analyze the situation in each separate case.(12)

The approach...cannot be based on the generalization of “era” and prescriptive application of to all. “To hold such a view “says Lenin, “is to reduce the whole thing to an absurdity and apply a ridiculous stereotype in place of a concrete analysis.. (13)  

Marx and Engels always used to say, rightly ridiculing the learning and repetition by rote of 'formulas' which at best are only capable of outlining general tasks that are necessarily liable to be modified by the concrete economic and political conditions …It is essential to realize the incontestable truth that a Marxist must take cognizance of real life, of the concrete realities, and must not continue to cling to a theory of yesterday."(14) Practice of applying general principles and rules as prescription formulas for the determination of the tactics and stands to be taken in a given situation is a betrayal to the sole of Marxism and its dialectics.

Marxist analysis proceeds from the analysis of economic and political situation in any given particular with direct connection to the same for world in general. “In order to make a genuinely Marxist assessment of the revolution, from the standpoint of dialectical materialism, it has to be assessed as the struggle of live social forces, placed in particular objective conditions, acting in a particular way, and applying with greater or less success particular forms of struggle. It is on the basis of such an analysis, and only on that basis of course, that it is appropriate and indeed essential for a Marxist to assess the technical side of the struggle, the technical questions which arise in its course.” (15)

Not the doctrinaire and pedantic assessments based on learned by rote and sloganized general theories and application of ready-made schemas, but objective assessments sets the foundation for  drawing correct practical conclusions.  “Marxist dialectical method forbids the employment of “ready-made schemes” and abstract formulas, but demands the thorough, detailed analysis of a process in all its concreteness, basing its conclusions only on such an analysis. The dialectical method demands, first, that we should consider things, not each by itself, but always in their interconnection with other things. “This sounds “obvious.” Nevertheless, it is an “obvious” principle which is very often ignored and is extremely important to remember. We have already considered it and some examples of its application in discussing metaphysics, since the very essence of metaphysics is to think of things in an abstract wayisolated from their relations with other things and from the concrete circumstances in which they exist. (16) “ we do regard it as our duty to help as far as possible to arrive at a correct theoretical assessment of the new forms of struggle engendered by practical life. (17)

To give a proper assessment of the significance of any phenomena, we must consider them in conjunction with the whole. Part is dialectically connected to the whole and subordinated the interests of the whole. If the subject is war, for example, a correct assessment of diplomacy followed by belligerent countries depends on a correct general assessment of that given war. Material used for the assessment covered up by “Left” and supposedly revolutionary phrases cannot bring about a correct conclusion. That type of subjective assessments will not come as a practical conclusion from a class analysis and assessment of a particular moment in history, but as a charm with which a tendency has been provided through ready made schemes. They, inevitably, be vague for the large masses to understand the abstract repeated theoretical slogans.

Marxist Leninist analyzer  must be objective in the light of the present objective conditions and of an assessment of social forces. “Naturally, there are individual cases of exceptional difficulty and complexity when the greatest efforts are necessary for a proper assessment.. Of course, in politics, where it is sometimes a matter of extremely complex relations—national and international—between classes and parties, very many cases will arise that will be much more difficult”. (18) And this requires that, in the interests of the movement as a whole, one must analyze the situation in each separate case, deciding what policy to pursue in each case in the light of the concrete circumstances. On general questions, too, the greatest confusion can arise from forgetting the dialectical principle that things must not be considered in isolation but in their inseparable inter-connection. Hence, in order not to err in policy, in order not to find itself in the position of idle dreamers, the party of the proletariat must not base its activities on abstract "principles of human reason," but on the concrete conditions of the material life of society, as the determining force ; not on the good wishes of "great men," but on the real needs of development …The fall of the utopians… was due, among other things, to the fact that they did not recognize the primary role which the conditions of the material life of society play … and, sinking to idealism, did not base their practical activities on the needs of the development of the material life of society, but, independently of and in spite of these needs, on "ideal plans" and "all-embracing projects" divorced from the real life of society.(19) 

Theoretical or from the practical aspect, an assessment can only be equally correct if the assessment is based on correct and validated data and the assessment considered the particular and general with the application of dialectics of Marxism.

 

What is this “assessment” of concrete situation and the process of assessment?

To understand any given situation and determine the required tactics and the stand correctly is only possible by means of a careful, concrete, profound analysis and understanding of this process. The process cannot be cut short and drawn a conclusion, but the concrete totality of the situation must be the result and the final stage of conclusions.

An assessment is a systematic evaluation process used to analyze specific conditions and situations. Assessment is not made to promote, confirm and satisfy one’s own ideological perception. It is an objective process in search of the truth which starts with establishing clearly why the assessment is being conducted and what specific aspects or criteria need to be evaluated. This sets the foundation for the entire assessment process.

Assessment process fundamentally contains two studies in it, each of which contains numerous dialectically related collection of data and studying the collected data. That follows with determination.

1)      Analyzing;

Analysis is the process of breaking a complex issue into smaller related parts and the in-depth study of each and all -in any given particular and in general - in order to gain a better understanding of the issue at hand.

Study of each given situation will differ with new material for the evaluation of the tactical approach and stand.

Determining the purpose and the criteria is followed by gathering  relevant objective data through various methods chosen which should align with the nature of the condition or situation being assessed. The criteria here is the theories of Marxism Leninism against which the condition or situation will be measured. This ensures that the assessment is focused and objective.

Analysis of collected data against the established criteria is a long process after which comes summarizing and outlining the findings in a clear and actionable manner to ensure that the assessment is well-rounded and that feedback can be implemented effectively if there are team members to include into discussion.

2)      Evaluation;

Evaluation, following the core analysis made and based on the conclusions thereof, is the process of analyzing the issue’s merit and significance as far as the interests of the laboring people and of their struggle is concerned- in that given particular and in general. Identifying the options for dealing with the issue on hand based on the analysis.

Communists are guided by Marx’s principle that “they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole. (20)

By following these steps, an assessment can provide valuable insights that lead to informed decision-making and proactive improvements.

The evaluation is not the starting point but follows the process of analyzing.

Only then can we determine the tactics to be used and/or stand to be taken regarding that issue. That is, drawing the practical conclusions from the assessment and determining which option is likely be serving best to the interests of laboring people.

Assessment, thus, is the process of the concrete calculation of the concrete conditions of a concrete situation which always derives from and dialectically connected to the interests of the laboring people and of their struggle, their demand. Determination follows the assessment.

“If there are no isolated phenomena in the world, if all phenomena are interconnected and interdependent, then it is clear that every social system and every social movement in history must be evaluated not from the standpoint of "eternal justice" or some other preconceived idea, but from the standpoint of the conditions which gave rise to that system or that social movement and with which they are connected.” (21)

And thus; “A concrete analysis of the status and the interests of the different classes must serve as a means of defining the precise significance … when applied to this or that problem. “ (22)

Conclusion

It is not which option that fits the prescribed principles of a memorized and sloganized theoretical formulation which ends up in subjectivity and arbitrariness (unfortunately, this is the current dominant practice) but it is the conclusion of the concrete assessment process that determines the correct practice and stand to be taken.

Any law and any formula  does not contain “indications” of the manifestation of its own substance in specific circumstances. A formula may be drawn only from experience, and experience alone takes it from realm of formulas into the realm of reality, endowing it with flesh and blood, making it concrete, and thereby modifying it. It is extremely important to take this into account today when social life has become incomparably more complex, when laws as the predominant trend force a road for themselves through a mass of concrete and frequently contradictory phenomena that modify the operation of these laws and must be taken into consideration in the practice of applying them.

From this, proceeds the principle of the concrete situation, which is of the utmost importance... A concrete analysis of the concrete situation makes it possible to avoid subjectivism, harebrained schemes, and arbitrariness(23)

Preferring abstract theories and reasoning them for the conclusions rather than relying on the concrete assessment not based on the facts but based on memorized theories and application of it is a betrayal of Marxism Leninism, it is liberalism which is the worst kind of opportunism.

“Abstract theoretical reasoning” says Lenin “may lead to the conclusion at which Kautsky has arrived—in a somewhat different fashion but also by abandoning Marxism..” (24)

Although it is a different subject, but the same “prescription” approach with cherry-picked sloganized theories and disregarding the dialectics of Marxism is applied to the question of imperialism and war. In these subject, there is really no objective assessment but ambiguities and use of ready made schemes which inevitably concluded with abstract at best, wrong at worse determinations. “It goes without saying, that there can be no concrete historical assessment of the current war, unless it is based on a thorough analysis of the nature of imperialism, both in its economic and political aspects… From the standpoint of Marxism, which states most definitely the requirements of modern science on this question in general, one can merely smile at the “scientific” value of such methods as taking the concrete historical assessment of the war to mean a random selection of facts which the ruling classes of the country find gratifying or convenient, facts taken at random from diplomatic “documents”, current political developments, etc.…  The scientific concept of imperialism, moreover, is reduced to a sort of term of abuse applied to immediate competitors, rivals, and opponents...(24)

Marxist Leninist objective assessment is the study of concrete conditions and situation which prevents subjective, learned by rote sloganized theories, arbitrary conclusions that has no bearing with the interests of laboring people and of their struggle, neither in particular nor in general. Abstract slogans repeated and presented as "evaluation" and "determination of a stand" on a given subject or event has no value as far as the masses are concerned. Contrary, they are harmful because in most cases they are either wrong or do not tell anything about the subject other than repetition of the memorized slogans that most working class people are tired of hearing since they are disconnected from the current realities of laboring people. As once said, memorized and sloganized theories tell everything in general but tells nothing in specific conditions to the masses. 

 

Erdogan A

February 9, 2025

Bangkok

Notes;

1-      Stalin, "On Political Strategy and Tactics"

2-      Stalin, "On the question of strategy and tactics"

3-      Lenin, On the Question of a Nation-Wide Revolution

4-      Lenin: Under a False Flag

5-      Lenin, One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

6-      Lenin, Letters on Tactics

7-      Lenin, Plekhanov's Reference to History

8-      Lenin, Speech In Defence Of The Tactics Of The Communist International

9-      Lenin, A caricature of Bolshevism

10-  Lenin, Guerrilla War

11-  Lenin, Letters on Tactics

12-  Lenin, Left-wing Communism

13-  Lenin, A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism

14-  Lenin-The Tasks of The Proletariat in Our Revolution

15-  Lenin, The Assessment of the Russian Revolution

16-  Maurice Cornforth, Materialism, and the Dialectical Method

17-  Lenin, Guerrilla Warfare

18-  Lenin, “Left-Wing” Communism: an Infantile Disorder“

19-  Stalin, History of Communist Party of The Soviet Union (B)

20-  Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto,

21-  Stalin, Dialectical and Historical Materialism

22-  Lenin, The Development of Capitalism in Russia

23-  Lenin Principles Underlying the Scientific Direction of Communist Construction

24-  Lenin, Preface to N. Bukharin’s Pamphlet, Imperialism, and the World Economy

 

No comments

Powered by Blogger.