Hacker News Reader

Comment by steveklabnik | Hacker News Reader

Especially given that Marxism is a science, and has undergone major changes as things are learned. Hence "Marxism" vs. "Marxism-Leninism" vs. "Marxism-Leninism-Maoism."

Edison: "I have not failed 1,000 times. I have successfully discovered 1,000 ways to NOT make a light bulb."

View on HN

If Edison had killed even a millionth as many people failing to invent the light bulb as socialists did failing to invent socialism, I suspect he would have stopped trying.

Capitalism has also killed millions of people. Feudalism has killed millions of people. Mercantilism has killed millions of people.

Did someone just finish a game of Civ?

Leninism (and Trotskyism and Stalinism, depending on which side of the Stalinist/Trotskyist divide you fall on as to which one was simply fidelity to Leninism and which one was a substantial revision that unfairly characterized the other) and Maoism were not scientific revisions of Marxism; that is, they were not a result of Marxism being a hypothesis that was empirically tested, failed, and alternative hypothesis whih better fit the available evidence being offered and tested.

My understanding is that ML and MLM _were_ considered to be legitimate, scientific advancements, and that's why it's just M, ML, and MLM, and why Trotskyism/Stalinism/Hoaxianism/Luxemburgism don't get the full-on status that the top three too. That said, I am not as educated on the topic as I would like to be.

Also, let me just say that I never expected to read a post like yours or type a post like mine into an HN comment box, kudos.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com