Jump to content

Talk:Libertarian Marxism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Trotskyism and "Bolshevik-leninism"

[edit]

I removed the fragment "most of currents of trotskyism or bolshevik-leninism" from the passage on currents in Lib Marxism, since their inclusion contradicts the opening paragraph, "emphasizes the ability of the working class to forge its own destiny without the need for a revolutionary party or state to mediate or aid its liberation." A revolutionary party and state being some of the fundamental characteristics of Trotskyism/Leninism. 59.101.192.54 12:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this original research?

[edit]

Thee are no real references to this other than to Chris Wright's 'map' which just claims people as libertarian marxist. Is there anything that supports such a loose definition of libertarianism - being 'opposed' to the state? Most liberatrians are in favour of some sort of state and, for example, most of these Marxists were supporters of the 1917 revolution in Russia whuch clearly extablished a state. --Duncan (talk) 19:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This website has no sources save a blog (libcom.org) The claim is original research and none of the thinkers self-identify as libertarian Marxists. Mrdthree (talk) 17:52, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
agreei will mark it for deletion Darkstar1st (talk) 19:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the appropriate citations for this article and as a point of clarification libcom.org is not a blog. It contains a vast library of works related to Libertarian Socialism/Libertarian Marxism. Anatoly-Rex (talk) 19:05, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Libertarian Marxism

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Libertarian Marxism's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "EB":

  • From Socialism: social democracy. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved: 25 November 2012.
  • From Freudo-Marxism: "Wilhelm Reich", Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2012: "From 1956 to 1960 many of his writings and his equipment were seized and destroyed by FDA officials. In the 21st century some considered this wholesale destruction to be one of the most blatant examples of censorship in U.S. history."
    • That over six tons of literature were burned, see Sharaf 1994, p. 460: some literature was burned in June 1956, then six tons was burned in August.
  • From Vladimir Lenin: Resis, Albert. "Vladimir lenin". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 11 August 2011.
  • From Che Guevara: Unknown, Autor. "Guevara, Che". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 30 September 2001.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis claims to be libertarian Marxist

[edit]

I came this page to learn about Libertarian Marxism after hearing Yanis Varoufakis claim this is his intelectual position. Given his importance I thought it might be worth adding the page but I am a fish out of water in these fields of economic philosophy so thought I'd leave it to others to jusdge if and where to add it. He probably makes the claim in several places but I heard it 3minutes into this radio interview: http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2015/01/29/talking-to-phillip-adams-on-the-abcs-lnl/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ausrussell (talk • contribs) 18:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

primary source is an obscure blog

[edit]

the primary source [1] appears to be a knockoff of the better known [2] or even [3] blogs. the articles are pdf blog posts by writers of little prominence. perhaps we could find a better source, and until then i will add a tag to the cite. the author of this blog post Wayne Price does not appear to be "scholarly" or "peer-reviewed" Darkstar1st (talk) 21:38, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

secondary source needs page number

[edit]

does anyone here know what chapter or page supports this citation? Darkstar1st (talk) 22:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

actually all of the sources in the lead could use some clarity, none mention page number or quote. Darkstar1st (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh

[edit]

This is one of the most bloated Original Essays that I've ever seen on Wikipedia. Speaking of "Maxism-Leninism" (a post-1924 term) as an ideology opposed by early Left Communism is a particular howler. Rather than attacking this essay with a machete, it's probably best just letting it choke itself with layers and layers of unreadable prose... Not Wikipedia's finest hour, by any stretch... Carrite (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Listing highly centralized and authoritarian DeLeonism as a form of "Libertarian Marxism" is another massive inanity. Carrite (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

People like Anton Pannekoek and Paul Mattick critiziced Lenin directly and those they influenced did the same. Perhaps we should say just "Leninism" instead of "marxism-leninism" although marxism-leninism, as the state ideology embraced by state socialist regimes inspired in the USSR, was also rejected by libertarian marxists. So this is the reason why that should stay. Anyway i am open to discuss these issues here with the user that has commented here but i will ask him to clarify his criticisms while not being afraid to be more extensive in his interventions. But also if he could bring reliable references to support his arguments, that could help his arguments actually becoming part of the text.--Eduen (talk) 06:28, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian vs Liberal vs Classic Liberal

[edit]

This article needs to point out that in the US, "liberal" means leftist while elsewhere, "liberal" means libertarian in the US. And in the US, "libertarian" means "classic liberal", that is Mises, Menger, and Smith, while elsewhere "libertarian" means "leftist".

As this article currently stands, it can only serve to confuse people. RussNelson (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

agreed, the entire article should be merged into an existing article/s Darkstar1st (talk) 15:32, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still Original Research!

[edit]

10 years onwards, this wikipedia page doesn't - as far as I can tell - cite a single source that even mentions the term "libertarian Marxism"! On Google Scholar I cannot find any account of this alleged family of political thought. This page should be deleted ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crashprop (talk • contribs) 16:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Overview of sources used (in order):

"Non-Leninist Marxism", cited in the introduction, does not mention libertarian even once.

Screpanti's book does mention libertarian communism in connection to Marxism, but does not mention libertarian Marxism once.

Hal Draper discusses self-emancipation, which is far from synonymous with libertarian Marxism.

Chomsky's text discusses libertarian strands of thought in socialism, and uses left-wing Marxism to describe what this wikipedia calls libertarian Marxism. He does not use the term libertarian Marxism.

Libcom's libertarian Marxism tendency map is a blogpost, not a scholarly text. Furthermore, it mentions Lenin and Bordiga, who are the farthest from "libertarian".

Varoufakis is one of two (reputable) sources that mentions libertarian Marxism.

Chamsy Ojeili's essay does not mention libertarian Marxism once.

Chomsky's note on anarchism talks of left-wing Marxism (i.e. Left-wing communism), not libertarian Marxism.

I could go on and on and on, but the only sources on this page that I've seen mention "libertarian Marxism" are Varoufakis (in passing!) and Danuel Guerin.

It does appear that some of the source which you have suggested are fictitious do not include content relevant to the sentences in which they are cited. There is no mention of the word "libertarian," so I'm not sure why they were added to begin with. PerpetuityGrat (talk) 17:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Crashprop @PerpetuityGrat: Having just stumbled across this article myself, I'm wondering how much reliable sourcing this article really has ever had behind it. The previous version of the article appeared to consist entirely of original research and this one is now just a short stub with a reference list.
To go through those references:
  1. The one by Guy Aldred never mentioned a "libertarian Marxism", so cut.
  2. I am unable to verify Non-Leninist Marxism, but it seems to be a collection of works about council communism, rather than a "libertarian Marxism". Considering the authors collected in this book are from before the time when the term "libertarian Marxism" was coined (around 1968), I can safely assume it fails verification.
  3. I am unable to verify the International Communist Current books, but those seem to be more explicitly about left communism, rather than any "libertarian Marxism".
  4. L'Autonomie appears to be about autonomism. From past research, I know they tend to use the term "libertarian communism", but haven't seen anything about a "libertarian Marxism".
  5. Communization and its discontents is about communization and never once uses the term "libertarian Marxism", nor even does it use the term "libertarian".
  6. Beyond Post-Socialism mentions the term "libertarian Marxist" once, when briefly discussing the above-mentioned Libcom.org tendency map on page 7.[4]
From the external links too, only two appear to actually be about "Libertarian Marxism":
  1. The text by Daniel Guerin, which by all accounts is the foundational text of this term.
  2. The text by Wayne Price, which is essentially an attempt to synthesise a number of different Marxist tendencies into one umbrella term - some of which are mentioned in this article.
Given all this, it might be worth discussing the deletion of this article after all. At the very least, it is in desperate need of reliable sources that we can verify. Grnrchst (talk) 22:55, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At first glance it looks like it should be deleted. Pretty obviously fails wp:notability. But regarding the reality of the situation, it appears to be just a term mentioned in a few blogs and essays and doesn't appear to actually exist. North8000 (talk) 00:58, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, even the more reliable sources still conceive of it as an umbrella term, not its own thing, which I'm not sure warrants its own article. Maybe it'd be better as a small subsection of a larger article? -- Grnrchst (talk) 09:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Probably good to mention it somewhere, even if it's just to cover what you just said. North8000 (talk) 20:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect it to Marxism#Libertarian and do a double-check of those refs? -- asilvering (talk) 04:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting parts

[edit]

Since there's essentially no one defending the existence of this page or sections, I think it is fair to begin deleting the most obvious original research until someone comes out of the woodworks defending why this page should remain as it is. The entire talk page gives reasons why the page should not exist (at least not in its current form) but no one's arguing why it should. - Chrashprop, 18 05 2021

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Libertarian Marxism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:54, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Libertarian Marxism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing remarks

[edit]

Following the above discussion with @Crashprop, @PerpetuityGrat and @North8000, I've decided it prudent to redirect this article to a subsection of the article on libertarian socialism, which itself has now been substantially reduced and rewritten in order to excise copious original research.

Through looking into this, I've only found two sources on the subject that are both substantial, clearly about the subject and reliable. These being Löwy and Besancenot (2018) and Price (2004). Together, they provide very little to go off and present a lot of red flags when making an article specifically about "Libertarian Marxism". From the introduction to Löwy and Besancenot (emphasis mine):

What is a Libertarian Marxism? It is an enlargement of Marxism, a broadening of its horizon, to incorporate those ideas and practices largely attributed to Anarchists. But giving it an absolute definition would be a mistake. For us, Libertarian Marxism is not a doctrine, not a finished body of theory; rather, it resembles more closely an affinity between certain political and intellectual initiatives which share the common will to ‘get rid’, through revolutionary means, of the dictatorship of Capital and to build a harmonious society, equal and free from the authoritarian shackles of the State. In fact, one single kind of Libertarian Marxism does not exist, but rather it consists of a wide variation of attempts, more or less successful, at building bridges between the two largest revolutionary traditions: Marxism and Anarchism. [...]

As Price's article was written before this Wikipedia article and the Libcom.org blog post that it was clearly based on heavily, it provides the best insight into what "Libertarian Marxism" has been considered historically. Here, Price uses it synonymously with "Autonomist Marxism" and identifies a number of historical tendencies from left communism that he found displayed libertarian characteristics.

I thought there might have been something in Ernesto Screpanti's Libertarian Communism: Marx, Engels and the Political Economy of Freedom, but it never uses the term "Libertarian Marxism", instead exclusively using the term "Libertarian Communism".

If anyone has any issues with this action, please bring it up here, ideally with reference to verifiable and reliable sources. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would oppose this move. Libertarian Marxism is definitely a thing. Let me look at the sources here and comment again. BobFromBrockley (talk) 22:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good move. But if there is suitable material that can be retained IMO it would be good to do that. Even coverage that says that "Libertarian Marxism" is a term that is sometimes used but has no distinct meaning would be useful coverage of the term. North8000 (talk) 19:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, then what should we do with categories like Category:Libertarian Marxism and Category:Libertarian Marxists whose existence suggests that there is a distinct meaning? Charles Essie (talk) 17:21, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry to come to this late. I can't see a link to a deletion discussion, but I would strongly argue for returning to this version but tagging everything that needs citations. Why weren't those tags added earlier if people thought there was a problem? Yes, there's a bunch of unsourced stuff, but there is also loads of useful material, academic references, good further reading, etc, that could form the basis of a strong encyclopedia article. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:39, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS I've moved the old article to my sandbox here and may work on adding refs. Please feel free to edit. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We should make sure that coverage of the term is retained in Wikipedia, even if it's just a few sentences in another article. Again, even coverage that says that "Libertarian Marxism" is a term that is sometimes used but has no distinct meaning would be useful coverage of the term. North8000 (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's been a while but I don't see how the term is any more ambiguous than "Democratic socialism" or "Libertarian socialism". Charles Essie (talk) 17:55, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Ambiguous" is a stronger more negative term that I didn't use and wouldn't use. My point is that it is just a term and, unlike some other terms, doesn't define a distinct topic. And so wording shoulld reflect that. North8000 (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I never thought of "ambiguous" as negative term and I certainly never meant put words in your mouth and for that I apologize. I was just saying that I don't get how "Libertarian Marxism" is any different than any other umbrella term for similar ideologies. Charles Essie (talk) 21:30, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem......I didn't take it in any way that implies a problem. And I agree....all of those terms have the same issues. I guess the really really short version of what I was trying to say is that, (unlike most Wikipedia articles), this is an article about a term, not a topic. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 04:34, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Libertarian_Marxism&oldid=1197591785"