Vejas Liulevicius

So I think that he'd probably have tried to be patient about the turn of events and We mentioned at the outset that Marx felt it was unlikely that a workers' revolution would break out in the Russian Empire because for that you needed lots of industrial workers and they didn't have a lot of industry. There's a footnote to add there, and it proves his flexibility.

a Russian socialist wrote to Marx asking, might it not be possible for Russia to escape some stages of capitalist development? I mean, do you have to rigidly follow that scheme? And Marx's answer was kind of alluded, but it wasn't a no. And that suggests that Marx was willing to entertain all sorts of possible scenarios and

a Russian socialist wrote to Marx asking, might it not be possible for Russia to escape some stages of capitalist development? I mean, do you have to rigidly follow that scheme? And Marx's answer was kind of alluded, but it wasn't a no. And that suggests that Marx was willing to entertain all sorts of possible scenarios and

a Russian socialist wrote to Marx asking, might it not be possible for Russia to escape some stages of capitalist development? I mean, do you have to rigidly follow that scheme? And Marx's answer was kind of alluded, but it wasn't a no. And that suggests that Marx was willing to entertain all sorts of possible scenarios and

I think he would certainly have been very surprised at the course of events as it unfolded because it didn't match his expectations at the outset.

I think he would certainly have been very surprised at the course of events as it unfolded because it didn't match his expectations at the outset.

I think he would certainly have been very surprised at the course of events as it unfolded because it didn't match his expectations at the outset.

Well... we don't know what Marx would say if he were posed that question deliberately, but we do know in the case of a Marxist historian, Eric Hobsbawm, who was, um, a prolific and celebrated British historian of the 19th and 20th centuries. And, and he was, he was put this question in the nineties after the collapse of the Soviet union. And he stated forthrightly that, um,

Well... we don't know what Marx would say if he were posed that question deliberately, but we do know in the case of a Marxist historian, Eric Hobsbawm, who was, um, a prolific and celebrated British historian of the 19th and 20th centuries. And, and he was, he was put this question in the nineties after the collapse of the Soviet union. And he stated forthrightly that, um,

Well... we don't know what Marx would say if he were posed that question deliberately, but we do know in the case of a Marxist historian, Eric Hobsbawm, who was, um, a prolific and celebrated British historian of the 19th and 20th centuries. And, and he was, he was put this question in the nineties after the collapse of the Soviet union. And he stated forthrightly that, um,

Because the Soviet Union failed, such sacrifices were inordinate. But if the experiment had succeeded and a glorious future had been opened for mankind as a result of the Soviet Union's success, that would lead to a different reply. And that is one person's perspective.

Because the Soviet Union failed, such sacrifices were inordinate. But if the experiment had succeeded and a glorious future had been opened for mankind as a result of the Soviet Union's success, that would lead to a different reply. And that is one person's perspective.

Because the Soviet Union failed, such sacrifices were inordinate. But if the experiment had succeeded and a glorious future had been opened for mankind as a result of the Soviet Union's success, that would lead to a different reply. And that is one person's perspective.

So Mao takes a page from the Book of Lenin by adapting or seeking to adapt to Marx's ideology to a context that would have surprised Marx significantly. And that is not only to set the revolution in an as yet not industrialized country, but moreover to make the peasants, rather than being conservative sacks of potatoes, to make them into the prime movers of the success of this political venture.

So Mao takes a page from the Book of Lenin by adapting or seeking to adapt to Marx's ideology to a context that would have surprised Marx significantly. And that is not only to set the revolution in an as yet not industrialized country, but moreover to make the peasants, rather than being conservative sacks of potatoes, to make them into the prime movers of the success of this political venture.

So Mao takes a page from the Book of Lenin by adapting or seeking to adapt to Marx's ideology to a context that would have surprised Marx significantly. And that is not only to set the revolution in an as yet not industrialized country, but moreover to make the peasants, rather than being conservative sacks of potatoes, to make them into the prime movers of the success of this political venture.

That's of the phenomenon that we talked about earlier. When is an adaptation of an ideology or a change to an ideology a valid adjustment that you've made or adaptation? And when is it already so different that it's something entirely distinct? Maoism was very clearly intended to answer this question for the Chinese context and by implication, other non-Western parts of the world.

That's of the phenomenon that we talked about earlier. When is an adaptation of an ideology or a change to an ideology a valid adjustment that you've made or adaptation? And when is it already so different that it's something entirely distinct? Maoism was very clearly intended to answer this question for the Chinese context and by implication, other non-Western parts of the world.

That's of the phenomenon that we talked about earlier. When is an adaptation of an ideology or a change to an ideology a valid adjustment that you've made or adaptation? And when is it already so different that it's something entirely distinct? Maoism was very clearly intended to answer this question for the Chinese context and by implication, other non-Western parts of the world.

This was in part Mao's way, whose ambition was great, to put himself at the head of a successful international movement and to be the successor to Stalin, whose role he both admired and resented from having to be the junior partner