More than a century ago, Rosa Luxemburg was brutally tortured and murdered by the proto-Nazi Freikorps at the behest of the abominable, backstabbing SPD. After her death, her legacy was tarnished by Stalinists and other reactionary traitors. Today, few self-proclaimed Marxists recognize Luxemburgism as a Marxist tendency...

Despite all this, there are those of us who have read her works and accepted her theories as the correct evolution of Marxist thought; we recognize Rosa Luxemburg as Marx's truest ideological successor. We seek to bring awareness of her theories and inspire grassroots revolutions throughout the world to establish international communism.

In spite of a history of unjust deminishment and dismissal, Red Rosa's legacy burns bright to this day. And we can not let it deminish. I'm creating this brief tributary post in hopes of reigniting this subreddit, so that Luxemburgists can have a place to discuss socialism and communism through the lens of Luxemburg's theories, without having to constantly defend them, and without having to hold back our sharpest critiques of other claimed descendents of Marxist thought out of trying to avoid sectarianism.

While her life ended far too early, and in a horrific way she never deserved, Red Rosa lives on as she "affect[s] people like a clap of thunder, inflame[s] [our] minds with the breadth of her vision, the strength of [her] conviction and the power of [her] expression." ~Rosa Luxemburg (a letter to Leo Jogiches, 1899)

Hello!

I would like to get to know Luxemburgism better, and I think the best way to do that is to read books by Rosa Luxemburg. I assume that one of her more important books is The Accumulation of Capital, but I would like to hear from those who know this political direction better.

As today is #BastilleDay, I've put together a series of perspectives on the French Revolution from a working-class perspective. Here's Rosa Luxemburg's view on how the French Revolution. She shows that failure of the bourgeois class to realise its own aims, such as economic equality, led to conflict with its erstwhile allies, the propertyless and poor classes of France. However, those groups, as yet undeveloped as a working-class, meant that their class consciousness was not at a level of development required to take power. Additionally, the means of production were as yet undeveloped as the Industrial Revolution was just beginning. Ultimately, the working class could not yet take power, and the bourgeoisie could not achieve the abstract ideals on which the revolution was based. In Luxemburg's view, it requires a working class revolution to make a material reality of the idealist, abstract "dreams" of the otherwise "well intentioned" bourgeois Jacobins.

https://proletarianperspective.wordpress.com/2024/07/13/perspectives-on-the-french-revolution-rosa-luxemburg-on-the-year-1793/

#July14 #14July

Hello dear comrades! I have made a discord server for a reading group of Rosa Luxemburg’s works: https://discord.gg/vrzHw6sC

It seems this sub is a little dead, but I hope that those who are still active will join!

Hello, this sub seems a little dead, but I just started to read Rosa Luxemburg, and i had some questions about it.

Generally I was wondering what could be the analysis of our word today from the Luxembourgist point of view ?

Is a revolution coming or are we more on a path to barbarism, and how to know if this is the case ?

And what could we do, if not organising the proletariat with party or union, to help the rise of a communist regime ?

H,i I am an American who is going to Luxembourg for a business trip in early January(7-21) for 2 weeks any advice for things to do.

I'm familiar with Luxemburg's critique of Lenin and Leninism. However when I discuss these topics, all critiques of Leninism are often met with something around the lines of "sure, but later in life she moved closer to Lenin's position" thereby implying that Luxemburg's arguments no longer hold any value. What I want to ask is, in what ways did Luxemburg move closer to Lenin later in life, and in your mind, does this somehow refute her earlier critiques?

Can I get the basics pls? Like I get it’s based on Marxim and stuff, but what makes it different? What are its main tenants? Goals and methods? Why did succdems murder Rosa?

Greetings, (Wow this sub is kinda dead) I really want to learn more about luxemburgism, do you have any youtube links and recommend some books. I really would apreciate your help. Thanks in advance!

She poses the question: how do capitalists maintain c + s + v needed for reproduction in a fluctuating market?

C = capital/commodity costs (real estate, machinery, etc)

S = labor costs/wages

V = surplus value

She considers 40c + 10s + 10v as the proportion needed for a particular business. Investing half of 1 yr of v translates to the new proportion 44c + 11s + 11v.

Question 1: How does she get that new proportion out if half of 10v?

Question 2: Is she saying capitalism is like a poker game of higher and higher stakes, or is her point that to maintain surplus value at least = to labor costs capitalists have a constant pressure to reduce labor costs, or something else?

Question 3: I'm kinda lost on the big picture here, whats the point of her analysis here?

As an anarchist, I'm very keen to learn about aspects of libertarian marxism, what are my fellow luxemburgist comrades think of us anarchists? I think Luxemburg herself didn't liked very much. But i don't know about contemporary luxemburgism.

Knowing the strong criticism that Luxemburgism doesn’t have enough foundation to be a full theory, have there been any attempts to flesh it out in recent times? I absolutely adore her ideas on revolutionary socialist democracy, her criticisms of Lenin, and I genuinely believe it’s adaptable for the 21st century.

First to preface this I am new around here so the answers to my questions may be obvious so sorry about that.

I have been studying up on Luxemburgism recently and have begun to read Reform or Revolution, only gotten a chapter in so far. I read in my initial study that Rosa was generally pro revolution saying that change can’t come from purely reforms. Now mentally I agree with this notion yet it is kinda a personal conflict. I am a pretty avid pacifist and won’t even set violent rat traps much less advocate for an armed revolution where tons of people could die. So I ask would a peaceful revolution be possible, could change come without violence?

Thanks for any answers!