How to organize our study?

It is a truism to say: Marxism needs efforts to be studied. But that mere fact does not help, only concrete ways to organize that study help. Self-study can work, but it is mostly without structure. The best would be of course establishing Marxism courses or even an ideological school, like the UPC operates one. That needs a plan of course.

First of all, the content of the study.

We need to set up a curriculum suiting the Ugandan national conditions that includes: 1. Dialectical and historical materialism; 2. political economy (with a focus on capitalism, including imperialism, and socialism/communism); 3. state theory; 4. role of the vanguard party; 5. trade unions and cooperatives; 6. handling of the national question. These are the most essential topics to be covered to train cadres. According to them also literature needs to be selected that is to be read on each of these topics, preferably works of the Marxist classics Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao themself as well by Obote regarding the Ugandan national conditions.

Of course we need to take into account the experiences and achievements of the communist parties in other countries. Mao once said: “When we see how Lenin and Stalin integrated the universal truth of Marxism with the concrete practice of the Soviet revolution and thereby developed Marxism, we shall know how we should work in China.”¹ Mao was always a big supporter of “integrating the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism with the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution”², but he never left the rich experience of foreign comrades as reference out of sight. Also in Uganda Marxism-Leninism needs to be connected with the concrete national conditions. The Common Man’s Charter could be taken as a basis for drafting an ideological basis for integrating Marxism into the Ugandan national conditions. This is also later essential for the draft of proper party policies that are not created from thin air, but from a deep understanding of the theory and practice of Marxism.

We cannot be arbitrary in our teaching methods.

Hermann Duncker had some advice for students and teachers:

“1. Never use a word that you don’t understand clearly!

2. Never use a sentence whose meaning is obscure to you!

3. Correct understanding of three things is more important than superficial acquaintance with a dozen.

4. Nothing can be clear to you unless you can make it clear to others.

5. Never regard an answer as absolutely wrong! Always recognize the good intention and learn to put the student on the right path.

6. Only if you put a precise question, you can expect a precise answer.”³

He also gave some more detailed advice for teachers especially⁴, but for the start let us focus on these six points. They are enough for the beginning.

Point one means effectively: Do not try to sound more intelligent than you actually are. When you lack the understanding of certain terminology, either first learn it or try to explain it in a manner you self are able to explain it. Maybe the amount of professional terminology will be lower, so also the “academic quality”, but it will at least not cause pseudo-intellectual mush.

Point two is especially relevant when using quotations. Use quotations you understand the meaning of instead of trying to be too “fancy”! The issue is similar like in the first point.

Point three means that it is better to focus on fewer topics and go into the depth in these than to superficially handle many topics. When getting ideological training, several topics must be covered, as listed above. But they need to be covered step by step in several lectures instead of mushing up all topics together in each lecture.

Point four means that you cannot claim to have understood anything unless you are able to explain it to others. When you understand something for sure, you can also explain it.

Point five means that you should try to look at where someone lost track instead of focusing on disciplining for being wrong. There are answers that are completely wrong where this point does not apply, especially in short statements. But when it comes to longer statements, you will find the good in the bad where you can start to grab the thread again. It is about finding the initial mistake and correcting it from there instead of reducing someone to a zero.

Point six means that you can only find proper answers when you ask proper questions. Successful research is more about looking for the proper questions that bring you deep into a subject instead of straightforward searching for the answers. It might seem more efficient to look for the answers only, but this is acting like an AI, not like a human. Even when you will not find the question fully answered you originally asked, you will find answers to many questions you did not ask for, just in the process of looking for that answer. And this is the true learning process; the learning process is an open process.

Enthusiasm for learning is good, but should have a focus.

Hermann Duncker meant it well when saying: “Everyone can learn everything.” and “Anybody can learn to master any job. Once he realises the enormous importance and need, then he can learn to master anything that the socialist community demands of him.”⁵ He went on from a humanist ideal of all-round education and took it too literal. Nobody can literally learn everything. There are people that are incapable of learning certain topics, like having a hard time understanding complicated problems of natural sciences or not grasping the most complex philosophical problems. But anyways people need to set a focus, even though they should learn from everything at least fundamentals to understand the world surrounding them better.

It is like Zhou Enlai said: “Study diligently, grasp essentials, concentrate on one subject rather than seeking superficial knowledge of many.”⁶ Of course, as already stated, fundamentals are vital. But everyone needs to set a focus on certain topics to become an expert in it. There is a German saying: “Who is open to everything, is leaking.” Without reaching expert level on certain topics while not focusing too much on others, a person is hardly of any use. When someone is knowledgeable on many things just a bit – where should you use such a person? It would be like using a spherical stone as a brick – it will not hold. High general knowledge is therefore good, but useless without a focus on professionalizing in more specific topics.

So, let us start!