Is Luxemburgism an Ideology?

One of the few things leftists can agree on is that Rosa Luxemburg is pretty cool. For some, she's so cool that they identify as Luxemburgists.

However, I was looking through the Preliminary Survey thread, and I saw a comment from u/kc_socialist that expresses a sentiment I've also seen from a few other socialists:

Lol Luxemburgism isn't even a thing.

So where does Rosa Luxemburg fit in for you? Does she have a distinct ideology, does she fit into some other established ideology (like Leninism), or is she just an orthodox Marxist?

Posted Dec 17, 2016, 8:31 AM UTC · edited

1431
vanityobsceneMarxist•

Luxemburgism isn't a tendency of its own, is what is meant by that statement. In fact, most people who call themselves Luxemburgists do so to distinguish themselves from 'Leninists.' There is nothing in Luxemburg's work that can be distinguished from Marxism in general. Therein she is simply a Marxist (albeit one of the more profound Marxist leaders).

Personally, I view Luxemburg, Lenin and Trotsky as part of an important discourse during those revolutionary years, and each of them have provided a wealth of important lessons to draw from. Luxemburg was a strong political leader and galvanized many toward the cause of socialism and self-emancipation. She made mistakes, mistakes that arguably cost her, her life down the road. But the same can be said of all three of those leaders. Mistakes were made. Of course they were made.

13
MercianSupremacyLuxemburgist•

Her ideas at the time were simply Marxism, with perhaps a focus on the libertarian side of things.

However, the history of Socialist and Marxist thought changes from pre and post Russian Revolution. I think that now you can say people took Rosa's ideas and ran with them, creating a particular strain of Libertarian Marxism which is distinct from the practical applications of Marxism we have seen in history.

I personally identify as a Luxemburgist - to me this means a focus on keeping Democracy at the heart of Socialism (something which Marx did believe in) and utilisation of strike action without being a Democratic Socialist or a DeLeonist.

What I mean by this is that I am NOT a reformist, I subscribe to a mix of classical Marxist thought with a libertarian slant. Luxemburgist just sums it up more succinctly. :)

5
bnmbnm0Luxemburgist with anarchist leanings•

Can you expand on your view on DeLeonism?

1
MercianSupremacyLuxemburgist•

By that I mean as Luxemburgist, Unions are an incredibly important part of building Working Class solidarity and power. Particularly where I am (England) which George Orwell called, "the most class-ridden country under the sun". Here, the basis of our political rights were given to us by Unions. Working Class men couldn't vote until 1918, and Women were only extended this right in full in 1928. Our main Working Class Party (Labour Party) grew out of the Trade Unionist and Socialist movement.

However, as important as I believe Unions to be, from my experience in this country they cannot be the driving force of the emancipation of the Working Class, as DeLeon posited. I think it is possible to make them more powerful and radical - but whether they can lead a working class power struggle is debatable. Once the current Capitalist cyber Economy of the world is brought to its knees either by competitive governmental hacking, massive income inequality disrupting sales or Market Oligopoly decaying the system, can we count on the Unions to make their voices heard and emerge as candidates to help lead the nation out of hardship and towards equality? I'm not sure.

To clarify, I completely eschew the view that there is one "correct way" to stage the revolution/transfer of power from the Bourgeoisie to the Workers. Every nation needs its own, tailor made plan to overthrow the ruling class . And each new nation needs to be run a little differently based on the society and its means, so DeLeonism could potentially work in a Society which fits the description (powerful unions, weak executive branch of government).

However, Rosa makes it clear in Reform or Revolution that a gradual, democratic transfer of power can never work in a powerful Bourgeoisie society. DeLeon thought that Unions could become as powerful as parties and execute in effect a bloodless, voter backed coup and replace the government. Back in the early 1900s it may have been a possibility but now, when the Ruling Class can see it from a mile off, and own all of the major news outlets they can stifle any movement for freedom in its crib.

2
bnmbnm0Luxemburgist with anarchist leanings•

Holy crap we're like the same politically speaking.

2
MercianSupremacyLuxemburgist•

This proves it: Luxemburgism is an ideology of its own! ;)

2
TurbbagoodCommunist•

Yeah she was just a Marxist. I would basically say the same about Lenin though so maybe I'm just weird.

3
bnmbnm0Luxemburgist with anarchist leanings•

For me I identify as a Luxemburgist for a few reasons, firstly because it's easier to talk to none leftist than if I were to say "Orthodox Marxist" or "Council Communist." Secondly it is a way of pushing away Leninism while not wholesale rejecting some things, basically pushing away both Leninism and LeftCom (from my identity not necessarily others with that thought or tendency). Often when speaking to Anarchists I've found that things are smoother by identifying as a Luxemburgist rather than an Orthodox Marxist (though Council Communist is also pretty accepted). My tendencies are also very fickle, I really want to be an Anarchist, but can't quite get there as far as trust goes, but sometimes it changes, I find myself sort of being centered around Luxemburg. I've also found that Luxemburg/ism has a unifying aspect, like you said a lot of leftists Marxist or Anarchists have some affinity to her, I've found that being a "Luxemburgist" helps draw leftists together, so while ideologically it might be similar to others, in a material way there is a difference insofar as how it's taken by others. Lastly I settled on Luxemburgist because she kept coming up. I'd describe my ideas and they would say "like Luxemburg" or something along those lines and I went with it.

3
MoonMouse5Marxist•

From the introduction to The Essential Rosa Luxemburg.

She has been cast as an anti-Leninist who denounced the allegedly anti-democratic actions of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution. Yet Luxemburg and Lenin were close allies for many years, and of the Bolsheviks in 1917 Luxemburg wrote: "Their October uprising was not only the actual salvation of the Russian Rev­olution; it was also the salvation of the honor of international social­ism." In turn, Lenin said of Luxemburg that "she was and is an eagle, and not only will she be dear to the memory of Communists in the whole world, but her biography and the complete edition of her works... will be a very useful lesson in the education of many generations of Communists."

She has been portrayed as a "spontaneist" who eschewed the vanguard party or any centralised leadership organisation; but in many of her most celebrated essays she repeats the fundamental lesson of The Mass Strike, where she writes that socialists "are the most enlightened, most class-conscious vanguard of the proletariat. They cannot and dare not wait, in a fatalist fashion, with folded arms for the advent of the 'revolutionary situation.'"

Luxemburg was far closer to Lenin than most make out.

2
DaschlubaTranshumanist/Luxemburgist/Space-Communist•

1 The quote where she praises the bolsheviks is part of a big critice of them that needs to be read as a whole to understand her position, because she also says that lenins politics are unsocialistic.

2 Her understanding of the vanguard is very different from lenins vanguard. She emphasises the control of the normal people over it, in direct contrast of the bolshevik vanguard that just crushed the people (Kronstadt). Makhno also supported a vanguard, doesnt make him close to leninism.

0
MoonMouse5Marxist•
  1. Constructive criticism.

  2. I disagree with your view of Leninist vanguardism. However the author's point stands: Luxemburg did not argue for a spontaneous revolution. She understood the need for agitation and organisation.

2
DaschlubaTranshumanist/Luxemburgist/Space-Communist•

She critisised nearly every aspect of leninism like national question, democratic centralism<- especially this one, to a level where she completely rejects the things( like the above mentioned) as unsocialisic. This may very well be constructive critisism, but especially the rejection of democratic centralism makes her an opponent to lenin and not closer to him than one may think.

1
MoonMouse5Marxist•

She was wrong on the national question.

She didn't agree with democratic centralism but nor did Trotsky at first. Rejecting spontaneous revolution and advocating a revolutionary vanguard made her much closer to Lenin than the left communists.

4
modobonaSocialist•

Where did Luxemburg criticize DemCent?

1
TurbbagoodCommunist•

You misunderstand the nature of disagreement between Luxemburg and Lenin. They had tactical differences not differences of principles (like Luxemburg had with Bernstein for example.)

1
DaschlubaTranshumanist/Luxemburgist/Space-Communist•

They had more than that. Vanguard for instance. Luxemburg said it needs to be completely democratic the same with the party, she also said that multiple partys need to be allowed. Lenin on the other hand came up with democratic centralism that was in the end, like luxemburg said, an dictatorship of an small elite. His Vanguard was also completely independend from the peoples will and also acted that way.

1
TurbbagoodCommunist•

Pretty biased view of Lenin it seems.

1
TurbbagoodCommunist•

You're criticizing what Russia turned into, much of it happening post-Lenin and you're not taking material conditions into account. Lenin acknowledged that Russia had became bureaucratic and he viewed that as am unfortunate development. Luxemburg's main problems with Lenin was not democratic centralism.

1
CommunizerTheory is my Praxis•

Luxemburg was an orthodox Marxist, so if you like her id start there.

1
DaschlubaTranshumanist/Luxemburgist/Space-Communist•

I answered to that comment of him/her in that thread. So for my view just read my comment there. But to make it short, if trozkyism is its own thing instead of being just called leninism then luxemburgism is its own thing and not just orthodox marxism.

1
MoonMouse5Marxist•

Trotskyism is only it's own thing because Zinoviev, Kamenev and Stalin formulated the term to discredit Trotsky and make out he was anti-Leninist.

3