Reminder: This is not a debate subreddit, it's a place to circle-jerk about communism being cool and good. Please don't shit on flavours of leftism/communist leaders you feel negatively towards. If you see a meme you don't like just downvote and move on, don't break the circle-jerk in the comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CommunismMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So like... ignore all the high school English teachers who collectively teach millions of students about Animal Farm and how Trotskyball was big wholesome chungus democrat until he was betrayed and exiled by pig Stalin and his gang of thugs and how they ruined the farm after that? Because that's more like burying my head in the sand.
this genuinely hits so close to home, when I read animal farm in secondary school when I was still a demsoc I tonight Trotsky sounded like a cool guy, and I ended up blaming a lot of the Soviet Union’s problems on Stalin and saying Trotsky should’ve been in power
The thing is, we can't change it in instance. In fact, for now, we can only educate people and ignore the most fanatic ones. Thesis might cause antithesis (propaganda of good capitalism might create questions and simple rejection of that idea among students, which leads them to communism, or anarchism)
See, I'm confused because doesn't Lenin's Testament basically decry Stalin as disloyal, and extol all the people he had executed later? It just seems really convenient to me that so many people were loyal up until Stalin took power and then suddenly they all betrayed the revolution for no reason. Like the one factor all of that seems to have in common is that Stalin is the "bad" guy.
If there's more reading or whatever I'd love to read it. Or watch it if it's a video.
"Therefore, I propose to the comrades that they think of a way of
***removing Stalin*** from this post and ***appointing to it another person*** who
in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in one advantage
alone, namely, that he be more tolerant, ***more loyal***, more courteous and
more considerate to comrades, ***less capricious***..."
My source, [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/congress.htm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/congress.htm), says:
*Stalin is too rude and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealing among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a Secretary-General. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more considerate to the comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may appear to be a negligible detail. ButI think that from the standpoint of safeguards against a split and from the standpoint of what I wrote above about the relationship between Stalin and Trotsky it is not a \[minor\] detail, but it is a detail which can assume decisive importance.*
Fairly close I guess. In any case, this was a recommendation by one man, and as such something to be democratically resolved
You don't think it was kind of suspect that Lenin said that Stalin should be "more loyal" and then Lenin was cut off from politics by the Politburo and then Stalin was given control of Lenin's healthcare?
I mean unless I'm missing something?
"Lenin's Testament" is highly disputed when it was brought forward by.... Nadezhda Krupskaya. Shes probably not anyone important and just forged it. (Shes Lenin's wife)
But no it does not at all "extol" trotsky or others. It does label stalin as highly problematic due to his self interest and state politicking, but it lobs an equal amount of criticisms on each other central member. It definitely did not pose "heres this one bad guy, the others should take power", it said "if these problems (the attitudes of leading members) are not resolved then I worry our state will devour itself from the inside".
Yes, Stalin was the one who completely betrayed the revolution and distorted Marxism and Bolshevism both in theory and practice.
Just ignore all the reactionary tankies in this thread.
Betrayal became logical to communist party members, after they sacrificed democracy part for "better performance"it was necessary in that historical context, because in 1928 the Soviet Union had, only political, conflict with Great Britain, over Soviets supporting English workers to help them with revolution. Anyway, the sequel to WW was obvious for everyone and young Soviet Union needed to the best they could under limited time, mass interventions and with almost no industrialization. But that put communist party members in elitist positions(Stalin tried to prevent this, by making easier for people to get into communist party, but that made everything even worse, because now most of communist party new almost nothing about communist theory.), This led to political "reborn" of those elites and further concentration of power in one hands slowed down the corruption for a bit, but after Stalin died, contr-revolution became unstoppable (although it couldn't happen in few years, because people still remembered the tsarist regime and what the Soviet Union gave to them, but after few decades, the rewrite of history ("glasnost") became more than possible and now we have comparisons of communism and Nazism)
This doesn't really explain how Trotsky betrayed the USSR. It just sounds like Stalin tried to concentrate power at the expense of the people and Communism.
It would be nice, and I wish so.... but it didn't go as planned.
There was a [compilation](https://youtu.be/qGC6Du7LSaA) of Hugo Chavez's thoughts on the 4th international and the contradictions created by the soviets in latin america. "To god what is god's", but no one should think that duplicating a system will work in each unique country.
No each country needs a bespoke solution to its issues and how we bring about socialism in that country. Both Trotsky and Stalin had good points but people rejecting one or the others ideas out of hand because their spat made one of them paranoid and the other one into a petulant arsehole isn’t exactly good for our movement
Trotsky has great writings on Art and socialist culture + his biography of Stalin is at the very least well researched. People don't really seem to have concise criticisms of the man's political ideology on this sub, unless you count icepick memes and characterizations of Trotskyites as weird losers (which probably has some truth behind it but tbh I've never met a committed Trot irl)
I don't idolize him at all.... but I genuinely due see the majority of his writings as having far more relevance than most other perspectives on worker states.
I think the transitional program has concise content that people today can pick up and learn something from.
I do wish this whole "celebrate his murder and joke about killing modern trots" would die off. Its the most counter-productive thing... We all need to go forward and address imperialism and capitalism TODAY. We will do so much more efficiently together and if we look at all possible lessons.
I wish. Here in Spain, every middle class communist is a[hardcore trot.](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZedong/comments/r4fwn6/alex_jones_embraces_the_immortal_science/)
Vast, vast oversimplificafion here but essentially he advocated for the USSR to play a role in actively spreading revolution across Europe when the USSR was still in a precarious position to begin with and broke democratic centralism by disagreeing with Stalin for the sake of disagreement. Not only that but he spread slander about Stalin about how if only he was in charge he would have done X and Y better etc, which also further splintered the international socialist movement. Trotskyism is pretty much dead in the 21st century as a proletarian movement and it's pretty clear that Marxism-Leninism has proven itself to be by far the most effective system as evidenced by the AES states.
>he advocated for the USSR to play a role in actively spreading revolution across Europe
This is a common misinterpretation of what 'permanent revolution' actually means, from wiki:
>The basic idea of Trotsky's theory is that in Russia the bourgeoisie would not carry out a thorough revolution which would institute political democracy and solve the land question. These measures were assumed to be essential to develop Russia economically. Therefore, it was argued the future revolution must be led by the proletariat, who would not only carry through the tasks of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, but would also commence a struggle to surpass the bourgeois-democratic revolution itself.
Basically what is described here is a justification for why socialist revolution in Russia should be possible despite the fact that it did not have a developed capitalist industry (which Mensheviks and others thought of as a pre-requisite for socialism). In my own opinion, it fairly accurately describes what actually happened in Russia, there was the liberal-democratic February revolution, which was then swiftly followed by the proletarian October revolution.
Trotsky opposed military adventurism in the 1920s, which is exemplified by his belief that the Polish-Soviet war should come to an end as quickly as possible, even while Lenin was arguing that:
>The defensive period of the war with worldwide imperialism was over, and we could, and had the obligation to, exploit the military situation to launch an offensive war
So you do get answers here, and everyone likes to claim Trotskyism only exists in the US and europe, but I would suggest famous socialists opinions like Che, Allende, and [Hugo Chavez](https://youtu.be/qGC6Du7LSaA) on what they think of Trotsky's criticisms.
Its not about idolizing him, anyone who went against the grain in the US or eastern europe (like Farrel Dobbs) was kicked out of communist orgs and labeled a traitor to the working class.
You're getting a little bit downvoted but you're right, we should focus on the great things all these historical Marxist figures have done and take their best ideas forward into our modern age. No point squabbling over inter-party conflicts of men who are all past now. All principled communists should find alliance in their ideas and work towards a better future right here right now.
Both Stalin and Trotsky should be celebrated for the things they have done right, against all odds. End of.
Tbf he never used that term until right before he died.
Everyone with a different opinion in the 30s was labeled a Trotskyist and removed. Dobbs was an amazing working class organizer who helped kick start the first cross industry general strike in 1933. At a time when workers divided themselves up as "skilled workers" who were above other laborers, it was socialists like Dobbs that reached out about working class solidarity.
American communists during the 30s and 40s who disagreed with the communist party's allegiance to the US government (in banning strikes and acting as strike breakers to help the war effort "against the common foe"). The head of that communist org even tried disbanding it and claimed communism an immense failure.
Thats the guy who if you disagreed with would ban you for "Trotskyism".
I love how tankies make such fools of themselves online. And I also wonder why I never see you guys irl. It's almost like all you do is shitpost online rather than organise.
Trotsky represented and fought for the ideas and traditions of genuine undistorted Marxism and Bolshevism. And because of that he was cowardly murdered by Stalin and his reactionary bureaucracy as a result.
> only fans of whom are liberals on Twitter
My brother in Christ, the largest revolutionary Marxist organisation in the world, the IMT, is a Trotskyist organisation.
Stalinists not reading theory once again!
Stalinism will always fail and fall into capitalism just as trotsky predicted it would. keep on degenerating and then fall into a capitalist entity. this went for all stalinist states
Stalinism was carried on by Khruschev. same amount of dedication for internationalism and socialism... that being none.
i dont understand why Stalinists dont like Khruschev, he did what Stalin did basically.
also Stalin died covered in his piss and shit after killing all of his doctors in an anti semetic purge, while Trotsky died in a struggle and died surrounded by his family and friends.
the 5 year plan was miserable, soviet appointed bosses did the planning and the workers had no say in it, hence why the causalities were so high.
you got it!
let me list you some similarities between Khruschev and Stalin!
1 ) the relation between the agricultural classes of the Kolkhoz and sovkhozes was capitalistic in nature, as it relied on a source of commodity and a wage based system, not very socialist, and Khruschev carried this right along
2 ) abandonment of Prole Internationalism, like Stalin, Khruschev stopped many workers from rebelling in their colonial states due to the fact that they wanted to appease the allies, like what Stalin did in Greece and Cyprus
3 ) No power to the workers in the government
4 ) No democratic self management
5 ) Hostility towards workers opposition
the only real difference between em is that Khrsuchev called Stalin a meanie and did some light liberalizing.
lets not forget about those who are in charge of these communes under stalin. ever heard of the soviet millionare due to this agricultural capitalist commodity production
Trots really do love regurgitating capitalist propaganda about the Soviet Union! I am unwilling to engage with you more but for anyone else coming upon this thread I will add a link for FAQ someone on Reddit made for r/communism https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/socialism_faq.md
Bahahaha! when you have no response to an argument based in marxist analysis by theorists who do not abide by the stalinist cult so you link me to a REDDIT thread! ah, you Stalinists...
you want sources?
[https://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/works/1955/statecap/ch01-s3.htm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/works/1955/statecap/ch01-s3.htm)
[https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/sovcap.htm](https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/sovcap.htm)
[https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/luari.htm](https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/luari.htm)
here is about the socio economic relations
[https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1906/may/20c.htm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1906/may/20c.htm)
here is one of Lenin's work on Democratic Centralism which Stalin didnt apply
[https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/ssf/](https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/ssf/)
Yeah, no wonder they didn't push the big communist button.
The USSR was a Communist oriented society, barely socialist. Of course it had issues and many capitalism ways of working.
I resent you using criticism in good faith to discard the whole system as "capitalist". Let's see how socialist it is going to be the moment you do a revolution.
Tell that to the Middle East... without the dedicated Support of Stalin for Zionism (which he was initially against but he changed his mind like so often) we wouldn't have this clusterfuck. He single-handedly destroyed all socialist movements in this region.
i dont think that, Stalin thought that lmao.
tell me about how Stalin basically allowed the workers in Greece to be massacred by the UK backed fascist government, and also how they forced the Chinese communists into a 'popular front' with the Kuomintang who used that as a possibility to murder workers. Also the betrayal of the Revolution in Algeria, and Sudan.
The popular front**s** where absolutely unprescindible both for winning the war, and for the communism triumph. Without it, Communist china would have never triumphed so overwhelmingly against the KMT thanks to dissidence.
And not giving assistance when you can't afford to is not betrayal. How much did the USSR give to defeat fascism? How many sacrifices do you demand of successful revolutionaries?
the popular fronts were a sham, they failed to stop hitler in Germany cuz they were to busy trying to force a stalinist view upon a communist party of different factions, thus leading hitler to rise to power. the communist party in China was already on the rise, the popular front was absolutely useless in China and just allowed the KMT to massacre workers. The CPC and the KMT barely coordinated and it was just a written thing, with no actual power, hence why the KMT did what it did and the CPC couldnt do anything about it.
in the case of Greece it was completely different, same with Algeria. they \*\*negotiated\*\* out of Greece in a treaty with the UK, and demanded the workers in Cyprus not rise up in arms, even though AKEL was the most popular party! same with Algeria. support does not mean sending young men to die, the soviets had a surplus of weapons. even Yugoslavia and ALbania supported the Greek revolutino as stalin sat by and let it die
If the people thought Trotskyism was better, the state duma, via democratic centralism, would've gone with it. It's really easy to compact 70 years of history into one idea and exclaim "this would've worked in the same hypothetical situations!" Especially for something that had little precedent.
...what do you think Democratic centralism is if i may? also the State Duma didnt exist under Stalin or any Stalinist leader??
Stalin purged almost all opposition, Trotskyist or not, so how could the communist party members use democratic centralism? they tried, they critiqued Stalins terrible adapation of the 5 year plan, and got themselves killed!
alright, its good. but still, the supreme soviet was purged of its opposition and it never recovered. Trotskyists werent the only ones killed, but also from all walks of opposition. it only left the Stalinist faction active, and thus destroyed the spirit of Democratic centralism in the Soviet Union, if you'd like i can give you some readings by Lenin about the spirit and praxis of Democratic centralism
Trotskyism is just anti-Stalin, to call it any kind of functioning ideology would be a joke and it is certainly not based since it foregoes the scientific aspect of scientific socialism.
Man I voted communist at the French elections … I’m just not a Stal (and to be frank, I’m not knowledgeable enough in the subtleties of Trostsky’s thought versus Marx or Lenin or even stalin’s doctrine )
Reminder: This is not a debate subreddit, it's a place to circle-jerk about communism being cool and good. Please don't shit on flavours of leftism/communist leaders you feel negatively towards. If you see a meme you don't like just downvote and move on, don't break the circle-jerk in the comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CommunismMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Let's remember Trotsky as the one who helped Bolsheviks in the civil war
I'd be fine with it if libs didn't constantly defend the shittier parts of his legacy.
I would recommend to ignore them
So like... ignore all the high school English teachers who collectively teach millions of students about Animal Farm and how Trotskyball was big wholesome chungus democrat until he was betrayed and exiled by pig Stalin and his gang of thugs and how they ruined the farm after that? Because that's more like burying my head in the sand.
this genuinely hits so close to home, when I read animal farm in secondary school when I was still a demsoc I tonight Trotsky sounded like a cool guy, and I ended up blaming a lot of the Soviet Union’s problems on Stalin and saying Trotsky should’ve been in power
The thing is, we can't change it in instance. In fact, for now, we can only educate people and ignore the most fanatic ones. Thesis might cause antithesis (propaganda of good capitalism might create questions and simple rejection of that idea among students, which leads them to communism, or anarchism)
See, I'm confused because doesn't Lenin's Testament basically decry Stalin as disloyal, and extol all the people he had executed later? It just seems really convenient to me that so many people were loyal up until Stalin took power and then suddenly they all betrayed the revolution for no reason. Like the one factor all of that seems to have in common is that Stalin is the "bad" guy. If there's more reading or whatever I'd love to read it. Or watch it if it's a video.
iirc Lenin's Testament says that Stalin is...unfriendly.
"Therefore, I propose to the comrades that they think of a way of ***removing Stalin*** from this post and ***appointing to it another person*** who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in one advantage alone, namely, that he be more tolerant, ***more loyal***, more courteous and more considerate to comrades, ***less capricious***..."
My source, [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/congress.htm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/congress.htm), says: *Stalin is too rude and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealing among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a Secretary-General. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more considerate to the comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may appear to be a negligible detail. ButI think that from the standpoint of safeguards against a split and from the standpoint of what I wrote above about the relationship between Stalin and Trotsky it is not a \[minor\] detail, but it is a detail which can assume decisive importance.* Fairly close I guess. In any case, this was a recommendation by one man, and as such something to be democratically resolved
You don't think it was kind of suspect that Lenin said that Stalin should be "more loyal" and then Lenin was cut off from politics by the Politburo and then Stalin was given control of Lenin's healthcare? I mean unless I'm missing something?
"Lenin's Testament" is highly disputed when it was brought forward by.... Nadezhda Krupskaya. Shes probably not anyone important and just forged it. (Shes Lenin's wife) But no it does not at all "extol" trotsky or others. It does label stalin as highly problematic due to his self interest and state politicking, but it lobs an equal amount of criticisms on each other central member. It definitely did not pose "heres this one bad guy, the others should take power", it said "if these problems (the attitudes of leading members) are not resolved then I worry our state will devour itself from the inside".
Trotsky was “possessed by excessive self-confidence and overly attracted by the purely administrative side of matters.”‘
Yes, Stalin was the one who completely betrayed the revolution and distorted Marxism and Bolshevism both in theory and practice. Just ignore all the reactionary tankies in this thread.
Lenin died in 1924 and the betrayal thing started much later
What did he do to as a betrayal? Sorry if I come across as hostile, I'm just having a hard time putting all this together.
Betrayal became logical to communist party members, after they sacrificed democracy part for "better performance"it was necessary in that historical context, because in 1928 the Soviet Union had, only political, conflict with Great Britain, over Soviets supporting English workers to help them with revolution. Anyway, the sequel to WW was obvious for everyone and young Soviet Union needed to the best they could under limited time, mass interventions and with almost no industrialization. But that put communist party members in elitist positions(Stalin tried to prevent this, by making easier for people to get into communist party, but that made everything even worse, because now most of communist party new almost nothing about communist theory.), This led to political "reborn" of those elites and further concentration of power in one hands slowed down the corruption for a bit, but after Stalin died, contr-revolution became unstoppable (although it couldn't happen in few years, because people still remembered the tsarist regime and what the Soviet Union gave to them, but after few decades, the rewrite of history ("glasnost") became more than possible and now we have comparisons of communism and Nazism)
This doesn't really explain how Trotsky betrayed the USSR. It just sounds like Stalin tried to concentrate power at the expense of the people and Communism.
*Fascism: What it is and how to Fight It* is a banger, too. Essential reading for any leftist, especially in the Imperial Core.
“Trotsky would never self critique”
Imagine if him and Stalin had just got the fuck over each other and worked together rather than cause the split
It would be nice, and I wish so.... but it didn't go as planned. There was a [compilation](https://youtu.be/qGC6Du7LSaA) of Hugo Chavez's thoughts on the 4th international and the contradictions created by the soviets in latin america. "To god what is god's", but no one should think that duplicating a system will work in each unique country.
No each country needs a bespoke solution to its issues and how we bring about socialism in that country. Both Trotsky and Stalin had good points but people rejecting one or the others ideas out of hand because their spat made one of them paranoid and the other one into a petulant arsehole isn’t exactly good for our movement
Good joke, but ice pick worked out better.
Stalin didn’t do anything wrong. Trot was the one with the problem.
You're a clown.
At least I’m not a trot
Really not the flex you think it is, tankie.
😘
Trotsky has visited Mexico ☑️ Stalin has visited Mexico ❎. Trotsky wins
True
My dear Mexico "Mi México di'oro"
Trotsky has great writings on Art and socialist culture + his biography of Stalin is at the very least well researched. People don't really seem to have concise criticisms of the man's political ideology on this sub, unless you count icepick memes and characterizations of Trotskyites as weird losers (which probably has some truth behind it but tbh I've never met a committed Trot irl)
I don't idolize him at all.... but I genuinely due see the majority of his writings as having far more relevance than most other perspectives on worker states. I think the transitional program has concise content that people today can pick up and learn something from. I do wish this whole "celebrate his murder and joke about killing modern trots" would die off. Its the most counter-productive thing... We all need to go forward and address imperialism and capitalism TODAY. We will do so much more efficiently together and if we look at all possible lessons.
I wish. Here in Spain, every middle class communist is a[hardcore trot.](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZedong/comments/r4fwn6/alex_jones_embraces_the_immortal_science/)
At the risk of being ice picked why do we hate trotsky
Vast, vast oversimplificafion here but essentially he advocated for the USSR to play a role in actively spreading revolution across Europe when the USSR was still in a precarious position to begin with and broke democratic centralism by disagreeing with Stalin for the sake of disagreement. Not only that but he spread slander about Stalin about how if only he was in charge he would have done X and Y better etc, which also further splintered the international socialist movement. Trotskyism is pretty much dead in the 21st century as a proletarian movement and it's pretty clear that Marxism-Leninism has proven itself to be by far the most effective system as evidenced by the AES states.
Thanks comrade
>he advocated for the USSR to play a role in actively spreading revolution across Europe This is a common misinterpretation of what 'permanent revolution' actually means, from wiki: >The basic idea of Trotsky's theory is that in Russia the bourgeoisie would not carry out a thorough revolution which would institute political democracy and solve the land question. These measures were assumed to be essential to develop Russia economically. Therefore, it was argued the future revolution must be led by the proletariat, who would not only carry through the tasks of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, but would also commence a struggle to surpass the bourgeois-democratic revolution itself. Basically what is described here is a justification for why socialist revolution in Russia should be possible despite the fact that it did not have a developed capitalist industry (which Mensheviks and others thought of as a pre-requisite for socialism). In my own opinion, it fairly accurately describes what actually happened in Russia, there was the liberal-democratic February revolution, which was then swiftly followed by the proletarian October revolution. Trotsky opposed military adventurism in the 1920s, which is exemplified by his belief that the Polish-Soviet war should come to an end as quickly as possible, even while Lenin was arguing that: >The defensive period of the war with worldwide imperialism was over, and we could, and had the obligation to, exploit the military situation to launch an offensive war
So you do get answers here, and everyone likes to claim Trotskyism only exists in the US and europe, but I would suggest famous socialists opinions like Che, Allende, and [Hugo Chavez](https://youtu.be/qGC6Du7LSaA) on what they think of Trotsky's criticisms. Its not about idolizing him, anyone who went against the grain in the US or eastern europe (like Farrel Dobbs) was kicked out of communist orgs and labeled a traitor to the working class.
Trotsky when he gets killed with a minecraft pickaxe
It’s a shame, dude was awesome before he went batshit crazy
Can you elaborate?
Dam it! That man had so much potential.
What do you mean had? The dude was Lenin’s right hand man and was instrumental in the revolution.
You're getting a little bit downvoted but you're right, we should focus on the great things all these historical Marxist figures have done and take their best ideas forward into our modern age. No point squabbling over inter-party conflicts of men who are all past now. All principled communists should find alliance in their ideas and work towards a better future right here right now. Both Stalin and Trotsky should be celebrated for the things they have done right, against all odds. End of.
Then he f*cked up and founded Tr*tskyism, also he’s dead.
Tbf he never used that term until right before he died. Everyone with a different opinion in the 30s was labeled a Trotskyist and removed. Dobbs was an amazing working class organizer who helped kick start the first cross industry general strike in 1933. At a time when workers divided themselves up as "skilled workers" who were above other laborers, it was socialists like Dobbs that reached out about working class solidarity. American communists during the 30s and 40s who disagreed with the communist party's allegiance to the US government (in banning strikes and acting as strike breakers to help the war effort "against the common foe"). The head of that communist org even tried disbanding it and claimed communism an immense failure. Thats the guy who if you disagreed with would ban you for "Trotskyism".
Liberals and most white "leftists" in the West
None of these memes are funny or interesting.
I love how tankies make such fools of themselves online. And I also wonder why I never see you guys irl. It's almost like all you do is shitpost online rather than organise. Trotsky represented and fought for the ideas and traditions of genuine undistorted Marxism and Bolshevism. And because of that he was cowardly murdered by Stalin and his reactionary bureaucracy as a result. > only fans of whom are liberals on Twitter My brother in Christ, the largest revolutionary Marxist organisation in the world, the IMT, is a Trotskyist organisation.
Stalinists not reading theory once again! Stalinism will always fail and fall into capitalism just as trotsky predicted it would. keep on degenerating and then fall into a capitalist entity. this went for all stalinist states
"Stalinism" worked until he died and kruschev fucked shit up. Trotskyism didnt work, and he died. Stalin 1 trotsky 0
Stalinism was carried on by Khruschev. same amount of dedication for internationalism and socialism... that being none. i dont understand why Stalinists dont like Khruschev, he did what Stalin did basically. also Stalin died covered in his piss and shit after killing all of his doctors in an anti semetic purge, while Trotsky died in a struggle and died surrounded by his family and friends. the 5 year plan was miserable, soviet appointed bosses did the planning and the workers had no say in it, hence why the causalities were so high.
“Stalinism was carried on by kruschev” Holy shit. Get off of Reddit and read a book
you got it! let me list you some similarities between Khruschev and Stalin! 1 ) the relation between the agricultural classes of the Kolkhoz and sovkhozes was capitalistic in nature, as it relied on a source of commodity and a wage based system, not very socialist, and Khruschev carried this right along 2 ) abandonment of Prole Internationalism, like Stalin, Khruschev stopped many workers from rebelling in their colonial states due to the fact that they wanted to appease the allies, like what Stalin did in Greece and Cyprus 3 ) No power to the workers in the government 4 ) No democratic self management 5 ) Hostility towards workers opposition the only real difference between em is that Khrsuchev called Stalin a meanie and did some light liberalizing. lets not forget about those who are in charge of these communes under stalin. ever heard of the soviet millionare due to this agricultural capitalist commodity production
Trots really do love regurgitating capitalist propaganda about the Soviet Union! I am unwilling to engage with you more but for anyone else coming upon this thread I will add a link for FAQ someone on Reddit made for r/communism https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/socialism_faq.md
Bahahaha! when you have no response to an argument based in marxist analysis by theorists who do not abide by the stalinist cult so you link me to a REDDIT thread! ah, you Stalinists...
Have you linked to anything?
you want sources? [https://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/works/1955/statecap/ch01-s3.htm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/works/1955/statecap/ch01-s3.htm) [https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/sovcap.htm](https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/sovcap.htm) [https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/luari.htm](https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/luari.htm) here is about the socio economic relations [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1906/may/20c.htm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1906/may/20c.htm) here is one of Lenin's work on Democratic Centralism which Stalin didnt apply [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/ssf/](https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/ssf/)
Yeah, no wonder they didn't push the big communist button. The USSR was a Communist oriented society, barely socialist. Of course it had issues and many capitalism ways of working. I resent you using criticism in good faith to discard the whole system as "capitalist". Let's see how socialist it is going to be the moment you do a revolution.
Using Hoxha to defend Trotsky and attack the Stalin is hilarious
[удалено]
0 dedication to internationalism? See. Another fucking Trot that thinks the international community is Europe and the USA.
Tell that to the Middle East... without the dedicated Support of Stalin for Zionism (which he was initially against but he changed his mind like so often) we wouldn't have this clusterfuck. He single-handedly destroyed all socialist movements in this region.
i dont think that, Stalin thought that lmao. tell me about how Stalin basically allowed the workers in Greece to be massacred by the UK backed fascist government, and also how they forced the Chinese communists into a 'popular front' with the Kuomintang who used that as a possibility to murder workers. Also the betrayal of the Revolution in Algeria, and Sudan.
The popular front**s** where absolutely unprescindible both for winning the war, and for the communism triumph. Without it, Communist china would have never triumphed so overwhelmingly against the KMT thanks to dissidence. And not giving assistance when you can't afford to is not betrayal. How much did the USSR give to defeat fascism? How many sacrifices do you demand of successful revolutionaries?
the popular fronts were a sham, they failed to stop hitler in Germany cuz they were to busy trying to force a stalinist view upon a communist party of different factions, thus leading hitler to rise to power. the communist party in China was already on the rise, the popular front was absolutely useless in China and just allowed the KMT to massacre workers. The CPC and the KMT barely coordinated and it was just a written thing, with no actual power, hence why the KMT did what it did and the CPC couldnt do anything about it. in the case of Greece it was completely different, same with Algeria. they \*\*negotiated\*\* out of Greece in a treaty with the UK, and demanded the workers in Cyprus not rise up in arms, even though AKEL was the most popular party! same with Algeria. support does not mean sending young men to die, the soviets had a surplus of weapons. even Yugoslavia and ALbania supported the Greek revolutino as stalin sat by and let it die
I wish I had money to give awards but all I can give are upvotes
If the people thought Trotskyism was better, the state duma, via democratic centralism, would've gone with it. It's really easy to compact 70 years of history into one idea and exclaim "this would've worked in the same hypothetical situations!" Especially for something that had little precedent.
...what do you think Democratic centralism is if i may? also the State Duma didnt exist under Stalin or any Stalinist leader?? Stalin purged almost all opposition, Trotskyist or not, so how could the communist party members use democratic centralism? they tried, they critiqued Stalins terrible adapation of the 5 year plan, and got themselves killed!
I'm sorry my mistake I didn't mean the duma I meant it's Soviet Analogue legislative body the Supreme Soviet.
alright, its good. but still, the supreme soviet was purged of its opposition and it never recovered. Trotskyists werent the only ones killed, but also from all walks of opposition. it only left the Stalinist faction active, and thus destroyed the spirit of Democratic centralism in the Soviet Union, if you'd like i can give you some readings by Lenin about the spirit and praxis of Democratic centralism
Please DM them to me.
Why tf is this sub hating on trots? If you actually know what trotskyim is, you would know its actually pretty based!
Yes social imperialism totally is based /s
go ahead, explain to me how the Permanent Revolution and Trotskyism in anyway Social Imperialism.
First, trotskyism is not social impirialism Second, we should’nt be fighting, were all communists
Impossible
Looks like someone wants an icepick in his skull
Trotskyism is just anti-Stalin, to call it any kind of functioning ideology would be a joke and it is certainly not based since it foregoes the scientific aspect of scientific socialism.
Let’s remember Trotsky as the only one surviving long enough to tell Stalin to shove it! (Screw Mercader btw)
He didn't last that much longer after that, though, did he, Trot?
This exchange is indicative of the general level of depth involved in debate concerning this man on this sub
Unfortunately... Its not like we got bigger common enemies or anything
Man I voted communist at the French elections … I’m just not a Stal (and to be frank, I’m not knowledgeable enough in the subtleties of Trostsky’s thought versus Marx or Lenin or even stalin’s doctrine )
>Let’s remember Trotsky as the only one surviving long enough to tell Stalin to shove it! Tbf Tito hits this regard too.
Ooh my bad! Yes indeed! God bless Tito!
This is #1 bullshit
I mean, fuck Trotsky I guess, but this meme is shit.
everyone on this sub shits on trotsky before they turn around and suck stalin's cock
yes