I think we agree that both praxis and theory are generally necessary, but we do have a disagreement about where knowledge begins and that’s no small matter. Knowledge beginning with experience is the materialism of the theory of knowledge. To reject that rational knowledge must be developed from perceptual knowledge is to give in to idealist thought

There is a reason Mao and Lenin and other revolutionaries bothered to discuss these things, and a reason we should as well. Criticism and self-criticism are vital, and as you said yourself “you need to accept being wrong as a Marxist.”

I’ll grant you that reading theory independently of practice gave me a little bit of a leg up. But compared to my comrades who jumped into organizing around the time I started studying? I’m still wet behind the ears

I’d also like to question why your first reaction to the notion of getting organized and putting theory into practice was to say that people shouldn’t be “running around in ‘leftist’ circlejerks.” Is that what you think organizing is? Do you have organizing experience? I wasn’t referring to a reformist party or a glorified newsstand/book club. I joined a revolutionary socialist organization, and they encouraged me to join a mass org that they had a unit in. A mass org that mobilizes the masses to take direct action to create real change; elaborating upon the conditions furnished by the lives of the working class to steadily improve the organization and preparedness of the masses. The only task worthy of a revolutionary, according to Lenin

I think that learning theory without something to apply it to is essentially useless. And that is something I learned from experience as well. I was studying theory for about a year without any organizing experience, repeatedly telling myself “okay, once I understand this stuff, I’ll start organizing.” But I didn’t really understand it because I had very little to relate it to. It wasn’t until I started organizing and studying simultaneously that things really clicked

Again, turning to Mao, “The dialectical-materialist theory of knowledge places practice in the primary position, holding that human knowledge can in no way be separated from practice and repudiating all erroneous theories which deny the importance of practice or separate knowledge from practice.” Lenin also says “Practice is higher than theoretical knowledge, for it has not only the dignity of universality, but also of immediate actuality.”

The Marxist Theory of Knowledge holds that rational knowledge depends upon perceptual knowledge, and that perceptual knowledge must be developed into rational knowledge. That is to say, knowledge begins with practical experience and must be deepened with theory. Then it must once again be practically applied.

To put the Mao quote I used earlier into full context: “From the Marxist viewpoint, theory is important, and its importance is fully expressed in Lenin’s statement, ‘Without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement.’ But Marxism emphasizes the importance of theory precisely and only because it can guide action. If we have a correct theory but merely prate about it, pigeonhole it and do not put it into practice, then that theory, however good, is of no significance. Knowledge begins with practice, and theoretical knowledge is acquired through practice and must then return to practice.”

I know you’re saying you should start applying it within a couple weeks, and applying it is certainly the most important part. But it is a major error to discredit the fact that knowledge must begin with practice, with perception, with matter. The first step of knowledge is and must be coming into contact with the very things you’re trying to change through practice. How can you understand the challenges of organizing without experiencing them? How can you understand what is an ultra-left or rightist error in your specific conditions without witnessing the effects of those incorrect theories? How can you meet the masses where they are at without meeting the masses? You can’t. Not in any reliable sense. The rational is only reliable insofar as its basis in the perceptual. Theory can only progress our knowledge if it is being used to elevate our perceptive knowledge, to rationalize it

Read theory. Stop with the rest.

Don’t stop there. Also get organized and put the theory into practice. You cannot develop one without the other. As Mao puts it “knowledge begins with practice, and theoretical knowledge is acquired through practice and must then return to practice”

deleted by creator

You don’t just magically start a revolution by telling people to revolt over the internet. And you certainly don’t do it by sending some dude to stage an agitational event. It takes dedicated organizing rooted in the masses - the makers of history

“To be successful, insurrection must rely not upon conspiracy and not upon a party, but upon the advanced class. That is the first point. Insurrection must rely upon a revolutionary upsurge of the people. That is the second point. Insurrection must rely upon that turning-point in the history of the growing revolution when the activity of the advanced ranks of the people is at its height, and when the vacillations in the ranks of the enemy and in the ranks of the weak, half-hearted and irresolute friends of the revolution are strongest. That is the third point. And these three conditions for raising the question of insurrection distinguish Marxism from Blanquism.” https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/sep/13.htm

“We, however, are of the opinion that it is only such mass movements, in which mounting political consciousness and revolutionary activity are openly manifested to all by the working class, that deserve to be called genuinely revolutionary acts and are capable of really encouraging everyone who is fighting for the Russian revolution.

What we see here is not the much-vaunted “individual resistance,” whose only connection with the masses consists of verbal declarations, publication of sentences passed, etc. What we see is genuine resistance on the part of the crowd; and the lack of organisation, unpreparedness and spontaneity of this resistance remind us how unwise it is to exaggerate our revolutionary forces and how criminal it is to neglect the task of steadily improving the organisation and preparedness of this crowd, which is waging an actual struggle before our very eyes.

The only task worthy of a revolutionary is to learn to elaborate, utilize and make our own the material which Russian life furnishes in only too great sufficiency, rather than fire a few shots in order to create pretexts for stimulating the masses, and material for agitation and for political reflection. The Socialist-Revolutionaries cannot find enough praise of the great “agitational” effect of political assassinations, about which there is so much whispering both in the drawing-rooms of the liberals and in the taverns of the common people.

It is nothing to them (since they are free of all narrow dogmas on anything even approximating a definite socialist theory!) to stage a political sensation as a substitute (or, at least, as a supplement) for the political education of the proletariat. We, however, consider that the only events that can have a real and serious “agitational” (stimulating), and not only stimulating but also (and this is far more important) educational, effect are events in which the masses themselves are the actors, events which are born of the sentiments of the masses and not staged “for a special purpose” by one organisation or another.

We believe that even a hundred regicides can never produce so stimulating and educational an effect as this participation of tens of thousands of working people in meetings where their vital interests and the links between politics and these interests are discussed, and as this participation in a struggle, which really rouses ever new and “untapped” sections of the proletariat to greater political consciousness, to a broader revolutionary struggle.” https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1902/dec/01.htm

“Proof is provided by the history of the last decade (1904–14), which is most eventful and significant. During these ten years members of these groups have displayed the most helpless, most pitiful, most ludicrous vacillation on serious questions of tactics and organisation, and have shown their utter inability to create trends with roots among the masses.” https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/jun/09.htm