Why I Don’t Use My Full Name
by Diadelics (They/Them), August 1st 2022
This is something that nobody has asked me — ever. But I feel like it is a good opportunity to clear up my ideas on fame, popularity, and whatnot as a Marxist.
Amadeo Bordiga is a theorist that some like, a bit more hate, and a majority of people have never heard of. So to give a quick summary of who he was, Bordiga was an Italian Marxist who was heavily inspired by the Russian Revolution of 1917. Cool, so was every Marxist, it’s like saying he was inspired by the Paris Commune. But what makes Bordiga so special is that he deviated from both Left Communism as it stood in the Dutch/German tradition but he also deviated from Lenin himself. This is what we call now “Italian Left Communism.” Bordiga is known for quite a bit when it comes to people who actually know him, but one of my favorite things about him was the way that he published, wrote, and scripted works and barely ever attributed such works to himself. He just wrote them anonymously! This is cool to me for a lot of reasons, but it’s not something that was just done by Bordiga.
In 1930, the Allgemeine Arbeiterunion Deutschlands (General Workers’ Union of Germany) published a work from the Groepen van Internationale Communisten (GIK). This work wasn’t actually written by the entire GIK, though, this monumental development of Marxist and Council Communist economics was written by a single man — Jan Appel.
So it all comes back the big question — why do people who spend so much time perfecting their ideas, writing, etc., all allow their work to remain uncredited to them. Why would you do all of that work and refuse to be recognized for it?
The answer is simple: you don’t actually create ideas, ideas are bestowed upon you and it is your duty to put it out. Therefore, how could you actually reap the benefit of something given to you in good consciousness.
This is going to lead to the materialist conception of the idea. According to Marx, the idea is just something that forms in the mind (which, is material just like everything else) and forms on the basis of the material conditions of your surroundings. This is an argument that Kropotkin also holds, but in a different context. In “The Conquest of Bread,” he says:
“[e]very new invention is a synthesis, the resultant of innumerable inventions which have preceded it in the vast field of mechanics and industry”
Which leads into something which he said earlier in the same book, saying:
“There is not even a thought, or invention, which is not common property, born of the past and present”
Scientific Socialism and its developments can’t be attributed to one person, Marx himself didn’t invent the science, he was simply obligated to spread it. The death of millions of people, thousands of years of history, discourses in philosophy which span across generations — all of this led to the idea of Historical Materialism.
There is not anything which I write down, read, experience, which is entirely unique. That’s fine by me, personally.
Let’s use an example of this, though. When reading Capital, a lot of people understand this application of the dialectic as something that Marx purposefully did. As if he only looked at capitalism through the dialectical lense and disregarded anything that may have contradicted this view. But it was only once he had studied Political Economy, and read thousands of pages about the conditions of England, was the Materialist Dialectic visible. The Materialist Dialectic wasn’t just a solo creation of Marx — it was first, a material deviation from Hegel, and second something that was made visible through understanding the economy.
So this is why I don’t cite my works as being purely mine, attributing them only to my real human self. Diadelics isn’t a one man operation, Diadelics is forever rooted in the whole of human development.
Praxis Makes Perfect