Left-Wing Discussion Thread

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Yes. I know what it is. And I understand how he was some sort of revisionist, of course.

But I fail to see how Trotsky was Liberal (in the sense of economic Liberalism, as I assume you mean).

'Liberal', at least from what I've seen in China, is a term thrown around slapped on anyone with remotely deviating tendencies.

Not what I mean either. Don't start throwing around silly stereotypes when we're having a decent conversation.

[Tafhan]

Yes. I know what it is. And I understand how he was some sort of revisionist, of course.

But I fail to see how Trotsky was Liberal (in the sense of economic Liberalism, as I assume you mean).

That's not what I mean. Liberalism kind of means something different and wider to Marxists and far-left people in general.

Okay. Maybe I need the remember back. I have to admit, I completely forgot what it means to the far-left. Or I just never knew. As I was never the most well informed of the bunch.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

That's not what I mean. Liberalism kind of means something different and wider to Marxists and far-left people in general.

Okay. Maybe I need the remember back. I have to admit, I completely forgot what it means to the far-left. Or I just never knew. As I was never the most well informed of the bunch.

Yeah. We have a lot of specific lingo and terminology that's different from the rest of the political spectrum, gets exasperating sometimes.

[Tafhan]

Okay. Maybe I need the remember back. I have to admit, I completely forgot what it means to the far-left. Or I just never knew. As I was never the most well informed of the bunch.

Yeah. We have a lot of specific lingo and terminology that's different from the rest of the political spectrum, gets exasperating sometimes.

No, I was a far leftist at one point. A Maoist, actually. Although not a very good one.

So what do you mean by liberal? I forgot what you guys mean when you say that.

[Obexer]

I'm not so sure how accurate it is, but I got Economic Left/Right: -8.0 and Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21 on a political compass test. I'm not exactly sure what sort of 'leftist,' that would make me.

[Tafhan]

I'm not so sure how accurate it is, but I got Economic Left/Right: -8.0 and Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21 on a political compass test. I'm not exactly sure what sort of 'leftist,' that would make me.

Libertarian Socialism? Maybe?

[Obexer]

I'm not so sure how accurate it is, but I got Economic Left/Right: -8.0 and Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21 on a political compass test. I'm not exactly sure what sort of 'leftist,' that would make me.

Libertarian Socialism? Maybe?

Hmm... I have no idea. I wouldn't describe myself as anti-capitalist, but I think wealth inequality is a very serious problem--at least in America--and I think freeing up the market even more would make things worse. I think the rich here could definitely stand to be taxed more. I also don't base my belief system out of any preexisting ideology.

[Conscentia]

Why are Trotskyists not liked by other Leftists? I think I heard that somewhere while lurking /leftypol/ at some point

Because to Marxists, Trotsky was a opportunist Menshevik liberal revisionist traitor. And because he crushed insurrectionary Ukraine for anarchists.

He was just a pretty shitty guy, to everyone but Trots.

Trotsky was a Bolshevik.
And the Bolsheviks were more revisionist than the Mensheviks. Mensheviks supported adherence to stageism, wanting to build capitalism in Russia before attempting to build socialism.

[New Giliberafta]

Because to Marxists, Trotsky was a opportunist Menshevik liberal revisionist traitor. And because he crushed insurrectionary Ukraine for anarchists.

He was just a pretty shitty guy, to everyone but Trots.

Trotsky was a Bolshevik.
And the Bolsheviks were more revisionist than the Mensheviks. Mensheviks supported adherence to stageism, wanting to build capitalism in Russia before attempting to build socialism.

But didnt he become a Bilshevik due to pressure of not being one?

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Because to Marxists, Trotsky was a opportunist Menshevik liberal revisionist traitor. And because he crushed insurrectionary Ukraine for anarchists.

He was just a pretty shitty guy, to everyone but Trots.

Trotsky was a Bolshevik.
And the Bolsheviks were more revisionist than the Mensheviks. Mensheviks supported adherence to stageism, wanting to build capitalism in Russia before attempting to build socialism.

Trotsky was a Menshevik who became a Bolshevik once he saw the way the tide was turning, as I've already said.

And that's a matter of opinion, one that I'll defer to actual Marxists.

[Tafhan]

Okay. Maybe I need the remember back. I have to admit, I completely forgot what it means to the far-left. Or I just never knew. As I was never the most well informed of the bunch.

Yeah. We have a lot of specific lingo and terminology that's different from the rest of the political spectrum, gets exasperating sometimes.

So yeah, what do you mean by "liberal"?

[Morr]

Yeah. We have a lot of specific lingo and terminology that's different from the rest of the political spectrum, gets exasperating sometimes.

So yeah, what do you mean by "liberal"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Yeah. We have a lot of specific lingo and terminology that's different from the rest of the political spectrum, gets exasperating sometimes.

So yeah, what do you mean by "liberal"?

Took to the internet to find a better explanation than I could give, so here are the words of some guy on another forum. (Don't want to take credit when it isn't due.)

"Liberalism is an ideology that emerged from the Enlightenment as a bourgeois philosophy which supported the "natural" rights of life, liberty, and property. It was a movement towards representational democracy and capitalism. Commonly, it is associated with political rights (freedom of speech, religion, ect.) and capitalist economy. Classical liberalism puts more emphasis on free-markets, however, during the begining of the 20th century, many advocates proposed to reform the thinking during capitalism's decline to support programs that would salvage it. "Give them reform or they will give us revolution". It is inherently a capitalist ideology. This conservative probably thinks Marxism is all about welfare and progressive taxation, and such. However, although many socialists may support these programs as minimum relief for the working class, they still rest on have a basis of a capitalist system and it is this system that we seek to change." [X]

Basically, liberalism could mean economic liberalism - i.e. capitalism, something the far-left is unified in rabid opposition toward - or even just bourgeois, "individualist," faux-libertarian ideology. It's kind of fluid, in a way... you have to be immersed in the culture to start innately understanding the usage of certain parts of the terminology. *shrugs* The far left is a wacky place, I acknowledge this.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

So yeah, what do you mean by "liberal"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism

Well, see, many MLs insultingly refer to Trotsky as a "liberal Menshevik" or something along those lines, and I've taken it up because I'm pretty firmly opposed to Trotskyism even in the face of classical Marxism and Leninism (but that's another discussion). I think the usage here is more in tune with words like "moderate" or "reformist."

[Morr]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism

Well, see, many MLs insultingly refer to Trotsky as a "liberal Menshevik" or something along those lines, and I've taken it up because I'm pretty firmly opposed to Trotskyism even in the face of classical Marxism and Leninism (but that's another discussion). I think the usage here is more in tune with words like "moderate" or "reformist."

Marx should have just appointed some sort of ongoing authoritative succession of proteges to interpret his works.

[Tafhan]

So yeah, what do you mean by "liberal"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism

That's what I thought and said originally. He apparently didn't mean it like that.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Well, see, many MLs insultingly refer to Trotsky as a "liberal Menshevik" or something along those lines, and I've taken it up because I'm pretty firmly opposed to Trotskyism even in the face of classical Marxism and Leninism (but that's another discussion). I think the usage here is more in tune with words like "moderate" or "reformist."

Marx should have just appointed some sort of ongoing authoritative succession of proteges to interpret his works.

Sounds good at first, but that probably would've resulted in a sort of Shia-Sunni situation.

*pause*

Wait a second. We already have that with revisionism and anti-revisionism.

The Left just has issues, man. Never gonna change.

[Morr]

Sounds good at first, but that probably would've resulted in a sort of Shia-Sunni situation.

*pause*

Just should have made it consensus-based, according to his selected followers. Each follower ordains people in to follow in his stead, and they get councils together and decide which interpretation is orthodox. Islam tried to have just one follower as the legitimate successor (this sort of thing sprung up in Christianity too, with the Pope, but it took a long time).

Wait a second. We already have that with revisionism and anti-revisionism.

The Left just has issues, man. Never gonna change.

There were numerous schisms beforehand, but the biggest one politically was Maoism vs. post-Stalin Bolshevism.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism

That's what I thought and said originally. He apparently didn't mean it like that.

Was my elaboration sufficient?

[Prussia-Steinbach]

There were numerous schisms beforehand, but the biggest one politically was Maoism vs. post-Stalin Bolshevism.

Proud member of the original schismatics from Marxism. *raises fist to nearby portrait of Bakunin*

[Threlizdun]

There were numerous schisms beforehand, but the biggest one politically was Maoism vs. post-Stalin Bolshevism.

Proud member of the original schismatics from Marxism. *raises fist to nearby portrait of Bakunin*

To be fair, the schism more correctly applies to what happened after the existing ideologies of Marx's scientific socialism and anarchism joined together for the First International. It wouldn't be correct to call it a split from Marxism. Modern libertarian socialist theory predates Marxist theory, and libertarian socialism as a theoretical and practiced system predates essentially every other ideology or system.

[Asherahan]

Because to Marxists, Trotsky was a opportunist Menshevik liberal revisionist traitor. And because he crushed insurrectionary Ukraine for anarchists.

He was just a pretty shitty guy, to everyone but Trots.

Trotsky was a Bolshevik.
And the Bolsheviks were more revisionist than the Mensheviks. Mensheviks supported adherence to stageism, wanting to build capitalism in Russia before attempting to build socialism.

Trotsky was an internationalist Menshevik he only joined the Bolsheviks because he understood they were about to do some great shit.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Proud member of the original schismatics from Marxism. *raises fist to nearby portrait of Bakunin*

To be fair, the schism more correctly applies to what happened after the existing ideologies of Marx's scientific socialism and anarchism joined together for the First International. It wouldn't be correct to call it a split from Marxism. Modern libertarian socialist theory predates Marxist theory, and libertarian socialism as a theoretical and practiced system predates essentially every other ideology or system.

I'm fully aware. I just meant the split in the First Internationale. They all got together, and then were like "nah this definitely ain't gonna work."

Believe me, I wouldn't hold to an ideology professing scientific socialism and a transition state. As idealistic as anarchism may be, I think Marxism is irreparably flawed.

[Arkolon]

To be fair, the schism more correctly applies to what happened after the existing ideologies of Marx's scientific socialism and anarchism joined together for the First International. It wouldn't be correct to call it a split from Marxism. Modern libertarian socialist theory predates Marxist theory, and libertarian socialism as a theoretical and practiced system predates essentially every other ideology or system.

I'm fully aware. I just meant the split in the First Internationale. They all got together, and then were like "nah this definitely ain't gonna work."

Believe me, I wouldn't hold to an ideology professing scientific socialism and a transition state. As idealistic as anarchism may be, I think Marxism is irreparably flawed.

What's wrong with scientific socialism and a transition state? At least to me, those two things are the most sensical in all of communist theory.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

I'm fully aware. I just meant the split in the First Internationale. They all got together, and then were like "nah this definitely ain't gonna work."

Believe me, I wouldn't hold to an ideology professing scientific socialism and a transition state. As idealistic as anarchism may be, I think Marxism is irreparably flawed.

What's wrong with scientific socialism and a transition state? At least to me, those two things are the most sensical in all of communist theory.

Scientific socialism is taking political theory and philosophy and forcing it into a mathematical, scientific box it was never meant for. Not to mention the whole process draws false conclusions.

A transition state, most notably, never transitions. Bakunin correctly predicted that an attempt at transition from capitalism to socialism through a worker's state would lead to the State becoming a separate empowered class, just like in every other capitalist nation, and simply devolve into its own self-serving system.