Most Trotsky lovers fetishize the concept of the world revolution to a terrifying extent.
Thank Christ that meme of a pipe dream died at the doors of Warsaw.
Advertisement
by Western Vale Confederacy » Mon Dec 24, 2018 4:23 am
by Vassenor » Mon Dec 24, 2018 4:47 am
by Reikoku » Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:12 am
Vassenor wrote:Reikoku wrote:
The number of people who think that Trotsky was some sort of demsoc hero and the true successor of Lenin because he opposed Stalin is fucking hilarious.
Have you actually read Lenin's Testament? Where he said that Stalin should be removed from any positions of power within the party?
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 the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing somebody else differing in all other respects from Comrade Stalin solely in the degree 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. But I 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 detail, or it is a detail which can assume decisive importance.
by Auze » Mon Dec 24, 2018 6:29 am
by Eodor » Mon Dec 24, 2018 6:33 am
Reikoku wrote:Vassenor wrote:
Have you actually read Lenin's Testament? Where he said that Stalin should be removed from any positions of power within the party?
Yes I have, probably more than you.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 the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing somebody else differing in all other respects from Comrade Stalin solely in the degree 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. But I 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 detail, or it is a detail which can assume decisive importance.
Lenin did not believe that Stalin was fit for the role of Secretary General, but he certainly didn't want Stalin removed from "any position of power within the party." and the testament criticizes other major Bolshevik party officials as well.
by Novus America » Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:46 am
by Autarkheia » Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:56 am
I used to think this when I was an edgy teen, but I now have to conclude that Trotsky would have become corrupt and dictatorial as well. It was inherent in the structure of the Soviet governmental system. Trotsky talked a lot about the need for democracy, but would never have allowed true pluralism. Same as Mao.Reikoku wrote:The number of people who think that Trotsky was some sort of demsoc hero and the true successor of Lenin because he opposed Stalin is fucking hilarious.
by The New California Republic » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:04 am
by Autarkheia » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:09 am
by Reikoku » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:16 am
Autarkheia wrote:I used to think this when I was an edgy teen, but I now have to conclude that Trotsky would have become corrupt and dictatorial as well. It was inherent in the structure of the Soviet governmental system. Trotsky talked a lot about the need for democracy, but would never have allowed true pluralism. Same as Mao.Reikoku wrote:The number of people who think that Trotsky was some sort of demsoc hero and the true successor of Lenin because he opposed Stalin is fucking hilarious.
He would have been better than Stalin of course, but that's not setting the bar very high. Probably more like Tito.
by The Galactic Liberal Democracy » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:48 am
Reikoku wrote:Autarkheia wrote:I used to think this when I was an edgy teen, but I now have to conclude that Trotsky would have become corrupt and dictatorial as well. It was inherent in the structure of the Soviet governmental system. Trotsky talked a lot about the need for democracy, but would never have allowed true pluralism. Same as Mao.
He would have been better than Stalin of course, but that's not setting the bar very high. Probably more like Tito.
Trotsky had absolutely no problem crushing other socialists (Mensheviks, Free Territory, Kronstadt, etc.) who disagreed with him until finally he was the one being dealt with by his rival. The fact he has managed to recast himself as some sort of moderate is one of the greatest historical ironies of the 20th century.
Cossack Khanate wrote:This shall forever be known as World War Sh*t: Newark Aggression. Now if I see one more troop deployed, I will call on the force of all the Hindu gods to reverse time and wipe your race of the face of the planet. Cease.
The Black Party wrote:(TBP kamikaze's into all 99999999999 nukes before they hit our territory because we just have that many pilots ready to die for dah blak regime, we also counter-attack into your nation with our entire population of 45 million because this RP allows it.)
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:Galatic Liberal Democracy short-circuits all of NS with FACTS and LOGIC
by Hurdergaryp » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:50 am
The Galactic Liberal Democracy wrote:Reikoku wrote:
Trotsky had absolutely no problem crushing other socialists (Mensheviks, Free Territory, Kronstadt, etc.) who disagreed with him until finally he was the one being dealt with by his rival. The fact he has managed to recast himself as some sort of moderate is one of the greatest historical ironies of the 20th century.
Trotsky was always in the minority of socialists. As a Menshevik and other socialist movement members, he had never agreed with the ones in charge. He was less radical than Stalin and Lenin, but people like them are never moderate.
by The New California Republic » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:50 am
The Galactic Liberal Democracy wrote:Trotsky was always in the minority of socialists. As a Menshevik and other socialist movement members, he had never agreed with the ones in charge. He was less radical than Stalin and Lenin, but people like them are never moderate.
by Autarkheia » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:53 am
Which is the thing - I had no idea he did any of that until some anarchists told me about it on the internet. In history class we were just told that Trotsky opposed Stalin and got killed for his trouble, which makes him sound like a good guy. There is also a widespread belief that Lenin was a good guy and his atrocities are glossed over.Reikoku wrote:Trotsky had absolutely no problem crushing other socialists (Mensheviks, Free Territory, Kronstadt, etc.) who disagreed with him until finally he was the one being dealt with by his rival. The fact he has managed to recast himself as some sort of moderate is one of the greatest historical ironies of the 20th century.
by Liriena » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:28 am
Western Vale Confederacy wrote:Reikoku wrote:
The number of people who think that Trotsky was some sort of demsoc hero and the true successor of Lenin because he opposed Stalin is fucking hilarious.
Most Trotsky lovers fetishize the concept of the world revolution to a terrifying extent.
Thank Christ that meme of a pipe dream died at the doors of Warsaw.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Autarkheia » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:40 am
by Liriena » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:41 am
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Liriena » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:42 am
Autarkheia wrote:I love the idea of "right-wing socialism", it's got to be my favourite political oxymoron aside from when Marxists talk about "the people's democratic dictatorship".
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Autarkheia » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:47 am
I think the right-libertarians know this too, because they get super defensive if you bring up the alt-right pipeline and vehemently deny it's a thing.Liriena wrote:I personally get more enjoyment out of ancaps. Scratch an ancap, and you'll find an avowed Pinochetist under the surface every single time.
by Vassenor » Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:05 am
by Autarkheia » Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:06 am
Just because fascism originated in Europe doesn't mean only Europeans can be fascist. So did communism, and no one argues Asian communism isn't a thing.Reikoku wrote:Labeling Asian figures as "fascist" is very Eurocentric, ngl.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhirisian Puppet Nation, Ancientania, Andoros, Attestaltarragaby, Bouncepot, Castelia, Corporate Collective Salvation, Dimetrodon Empire, Fachumonn, Hidrandia, Ifreann, Imperializt Russia, Ineva, Mad Jack Is Rejected, Pale Dawn, Too Basedland, Valrifall, Valyxias, Wilet
Advertisement