:frothingfash: :chad-trotsky:
(Just gonna put out there that this is a common myth among neonazis. An Indian Affairs officer coined the term)
Anyway, I’m shocked Mr. Resting-Dipshit-Face’s sub reclined into open fascism.
:live-tucker-reaction:
:frothingfash: :chad-trotsky:
(Just gonna put out there that this is a common myth among neonazis. An Indian Affairs officer coined the term)
Anyway, I’m shocked Mr. Resting-Dipshit-Face’s sub reclined into open fascism.
:live-tucker-reaction:
idk why people are so anti-trot, look where the fuck russia and the rest of the world is, did socialism in one country work out?
like i understand not having a positive opinion, but having such an anti Trotsky opinion seems odd unless you just are an epic stalinist memer doing it as a joke
This is the same argument chuds use against communism.
no? because i am talking about internationalism/pushing revolution around the world, not hurr durr communism nevar work/not real communism
You think focusing on exporting arms and ammunition out of the USSR and gambling them on other revolutions in the lead-up to the second world war would have been a better idea than reinforcing the Soviet Union where the revolution had already won and was able to wage a genuine existential threat to global capital for 70 years and crush axis fascism
The cold war was more or less unwinnable, especially after the Sino Soviet split. There's a reason basically all the Bolsheviks thought permanent revolution was the worse option. Especially considering how weak the eastern european communist parties were (exported revolutions) compared to the CPSU and CPC.
Nevermind that the Soviet Union and China managed to create Cuba, the DPRK, Laos and Vietnam and were actively exporting revolution where they thought they could succwed.
deleted by creator
The amount of soviet involvement required in Germany during the 30s to have the communists come out on top (especially since the SDP was anti communist and non cooperative to its core) would be paramount to starting a full scale civil war there and then being forced to directly being involved military wise for the german communists in a open proxy war against the liberal/right wing side that would be backed by the entirety of global capital while you are...the USSR of the 30s. At a point where the USSR couldnt project that kind of power let alone defend from it . They industrialization, militarization , modernization etc wherent even halfway done. Chosing to openly wage a proxy war in germany and spain during the state of material and military development they were in the 30s would be paramount to suicide with an extremely high chance of those countries NOT turning red, being invaded by fascism while in a much worse position or just not achieving the objectives in spain and germany and collapsing internaly much earlier
After the war again the USSR had to rebuild the entire eastern front from rubble without imperialist or colonial extraction to back that transformation up . What particular revolution post WW2 you think about where the USSR should have been much more involved ? Vietnam ? How much more ? They still won there and had a pro soviet state. Cuba? They did. Join in on the Greek civil war in the 40s? Maybe. I am greek so this is really interesting what if tho i cant help but think this would end up in a Korean war situation and due to it being a war on european soil again years after WWII it could have expanded into even worse outcomes
I agree with everything you’re saying but you’re giving waaaaay to much credit to China for revolutions in other countries. China left SU on an island when it came to ideological alignment in foreign policy, to say China was a major positive contributor to the Cuban revolution and even Vietnam is a bit off mark with what actually happened
this but more, Germany, France, etc..
because the USSR had no major allies who were ideologically aligned with them after world war 2 due to their isolationist perspective in the previous years. the national bourgeois in the west was able to suppress socialist movements.
I'm not saying it 100% would be better, I'm saying socialism in one country 100% was a failure in the USSR, so why are people so ardently anti Trot when his perspective has not been shown to be a failure?
deleted by creator
Germany when ? During the 10s and 20s? This isnt Stalin's policy vs Trotsky's policy. Trotsky was there and backed the party's foreign policy approach on those issues ?
In the 30s?
The amount of soviet involvement required in Germany during the 30s to have the communists come out on top (especially since most of the SDP was anti communist and non cooperative to its core) would be paramount to starting a full scale civil war there and then being forced to directly being involved military wise for the german communists in a open proxy war against the liberal/right wing side that would be backed by the entirety of global capital while you are…the USSR of the 30s. At a point where the USSR couldnt project that kind of power let alone defend from it and a failure of that attempt would leave them extremely weak. The industrialization, militarization , modernization etc wherent even halfway done. Chosing what would logicaly lead to open proxy war in germany and spain during the state of development and organization they were in the 30s would be paramount to suicide imo with an extremely high chance of those countries NOT turning red, USSR invaded by the subsequent fascism while in a much worse position or just not achieving the objectives in spain and germany and collapsing internaly much earlier and never having even an "eastern bloc" allied to them
I prefer communists that didn't get their head split open with an ice pick.
everyone dies, many in far worse ways :dean-smile:
The USSR failed because it didn't export revolution enough? It imploded, so this would require a "the best defense is a good offense" style of argument.
Also, China is an example of the opposite case. They are modest in supporting revolution elsewhere, happily trade with the most imperialist of imperialists, and focus heavily on domestic conditions.
deleted by creator
How do you explain the subsequent revolutions that happened after ww2. The soviet Union was able to establish trade relations through the COMINTERN. Of course that had its own problems but I don't see how these problems would have not arisen if the German Rebolution succeeded
What? The SU became the joint strongest world super power. Maybe on a very surface level, the SU didn’t achieve communism in every country and focused on communism in one but at the end of the day it lent support to communist struggles world over in a way no country has ever done.
It’s fall came because its largest natural allies ie fucking China, chose exactly what you’re criticizing the soviet union for: focusing on communism in one country and abandoning any support for the soviet union.
deleted by creator
How can we know that Trotsky would do any better?
Oh right, we can't.
yes, that is my point. we know how the USSR turned out. Unless you think the state of the world is cool and good i am willing to gamble
Gamble on what?
internationalism/Trotsky's ideology over socialism in one state the ussr during that period
Alright, but that didn't happen, so we have no way of knowing if that would have given us a better outcome.
I prefer to relate to actual reality, not some fantasy alternative.
deleted by creator
so why be anti-trot when his ideological perspective was not applied?
I've never claimed to be an anti-trot
Soviet Union literally spend the entire 20s trying to export revolution and the only success was Mongolia. Everything else from Germany to Bulgaria was a massive failure. Socialism in one country was a response to this failures, as the need to build industrial and military strength first became apparent. When USSR was in the position to export revolution, it did (the entire Eastern Europe, support for China, Vietnam, Cuba, African socialists).
deleted by creator
I'm anti-trot in that I have yet to encounter a more brainwormed group of individuals than Trotskyists and I would rather not be around the people who identify as such, but Trotsky himself I actually do respect quite a bit. Can't be overstated how important he was to the Revolution and Civil War, and he did genuinely make good theoretical contributions, like his analysis of Fascism for example. Shame he dedicated the latter part of his life to being a saboteur, but oh well. I know icepick memes are epic funny but I feel like century-old sectarian feuds are irrelevant when the USSR doesn't exist anymore in the first place.
Literally anyone right of demsocs.
Trotsky's takes and proposals were never even remotely popular or supported within the party , even during Lenin. It is a nice what if but this isnt a power struggle where Stalin won while trotsky realisticaly could have too, he never came close to being the leading or popular figure within the party politicaly . That shows that maybe his policies and ideology cant be confined to the "global revolution and international stuff" and included a ton of economic and domestic policies that both that the party didnt support and we have no reason to believe that them being ennacted "if trotsky was the man" would lead to comperable successes in industrial, economic and cultural development and stability
Personally, because so many self described Trotskyist orgs are fucking deranged. Whether it's supporting the US invasion of Libya or claiming metoo has gone too far, it tends to be bad. That being said some old living marxism stuff was hilarious in a Ben Garrison kind of way.
I don't even fully understand what makes all these groups trotskyist, and I would be willing to believe that some trot orgs are actually decent
Nobody likes associating with a loser, and whatever may be said of Leon Trotsky he went out like a bitch. If Stalin was the guy with an ice-pick in his head, 80 years ago, I imagine we'd be seeing a lot of the memes reversed.
Honestly, the fall-out after Lenin's death between two of the leading lights of the first great successful Soviet Revolution fucked the movement hard. And we should look at it as nothing short of a tragedy. People like to shit on the "Great Man of History" theory, but I have to wonder what Russia would look like today if Leon and Joe had patched things up and done a proper Founding Fathers two-step, a la Jefferson and Adams, rather than going at each others' throats.
If I have a choice between going back in time and killing Hitler, and making sure Stalin and Trotsky are friends, I know which one I'm doing.
Panphlets