Every communist should be familiar with the core philosophy and principles of Marxist analysis. That information and methodology is very hard to just naturally luck into without reading the theory -- especially if you grew up in a sea of liberalism.

Our adherance to past principles of organizing needs to be dynamic and not dogmatic though.

That being said, there’s merit to the idea that lockstep dogmatism to a 175 year old definition of a political model isn’t necessarily a successful model for any given present day era.

Theory is useful to learn how to figure out what to do. Some of Marx's predictions ended up being wrong, most notably his prediction that the already industrialized countries would be first to revolution. However, his work on how to understand how society works and how to change it isn't outdated. To make an analogy, any scientific theory may be proven wrong, but the scientific method will always remain a valid tool for understanding the world.

This is why I’m wary of “read theory.” Sure, read theory, but don’t treat it like a Bible. Expand, adapt, update, adjust.

Coincidentally enough, there is theory about this very issue. Dogmatically following theory when it is not applicable to your material conditions is a problem Marxists regularly grasp with.

True, there is a great danger in dogmatism. That’s why Marxists emphasize the scientific and changing nature of our worldview. “Read theory” shouldn’t mean “just read Marx and Lenin” it means you should also read Mao, Amin, Horne, and so on. Read it critically, notice changes, notice contradictions and consider different perspectives.

Bookchin argues we toss out Marxism as a whole because not everything Marx says can have held up. However, Marxists recognize that and critique and change the theory. We adapt to our conditions. Bookchin denies the method of proletarian revolution which we still uphold because we see it worked. He does not see it worked because he accepts the anti-communist alternative history.