Permanent revolutipn makes more sense than socialism in one country...

Permanent revolutipn makes more sense than socialism in one country. Only ☭TANKIE☭s would believe that Stalin's theories are somewhat decent. I mean for fucks sake they defend Leninism to death and yet usTrotskyists manage to be closer to Lenin's ideals than Stalinists. Also why do they defend soviet dictatoship so goddamn much?


this thread is now about how caterpillar-browed frida kahlo fucked trotsky and then shit all over his theory following his death

Its over trotskyist, your ideas sound nice on paper but dont work on praxis

You mean Bukharin, which had roots on both Marx and Lenin.
We should not forget that Stalin was never an original thinker but took ideas as he saw appropriated to the situation at hand, while never renouncing Lenin and Marx.
PDF related, a nice book on Stalin's thought. Also an article on this exact topic by the same guy, which I have yet to read since I only found about it now.

Says someone with a Mautist flag. Do you even realize how ironic this is? All your ideology has produced is hyper-exploitative Capitalist nations and extremely fringe and useless terrorist cells who spend more time selling drugs and killing peasants then they spend waging revolution. This board is filled to the brim with worthless LARPers, and Marxism is antithetical to your Blanquist adventurism.

Link please?

Not quite explicitly shitting on him here but for her to sleep with the guy and then align with herself with everyone who isn't Trotsky is to cuck Trotsky on an ideological level.

"Today like never before I am not alone. It has been 25 years that I have been a communist. I know the central origins. I know the ancient roots. I've read the history of my country and almost all the villages there. I know its conflicts of economics and class. I understand clearly the materialist dialectics of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao Zedong. I love them as the pillars of the new communist world. I realized the error of trotsky since he arrived in Mexico. I was never a trotskyite. But in that time, 1940-I was only an ally of Diego. (personally) (political mistake)- But you have to take into account that I've been sick since I was six years old and really very little of my life I've enjoyed health and I was useless to the Party. Now in 1953 after 22 surgeries I feel better and I can from time to time help my Communist Party. Since I'm not a worker, I am an artisan - and allied unconditionally to the communist revolutionary movement."

KAHLO, Frida. El diário de Frida Kahlo: un autorretrato íntimo. Ciudad del México: la vaca independiente, 1995, p. 245.

Trotsky was a cuck anyways.

Honestly, and I seriously mean this, kill yourself if you think Trotskyism is about simultaneous world revolution. The whole point of permanent revolution is that the entire world is not going to overthrow capitalism at once, so the parts that do it first will be in a constant state of revolution until a big enough portion of the world is under worker control to start building socialism.

There is literally NO FUCKING DIFFERENCE!

Please show me one fundamental difference Trotsky's practical approach to Soviet leadership would have.

And provided tremendous benefit to the people.

All your ideology has prodused is… nothing. It really doesn't matter if it existed at all. It really doesn't matter if you follow it or some other meme like Ancap.

Trotsky himself acknowledged that if he had Stalin's position, everything would be mostly the same. His point was that the material conditions of the Soviet Union would necessarily give rise to a bureaucracy, no matter who was at the top. Maybe if Trotsky was in power he would have been more vocal about the problem, but he couldn't have stopped it. Stalin was a natural born bureaucrat so he just rolled with it.

Trotskyism is an extension of Leninism and Trotskyists defend the gains of the October Revolution. Leninism achieved the Russian revolution. And given how shitty the monarchy was, the Soviet Union was historically justified, bureaucracy and all (another thing Trotsky himself said).

I'm sorry, are Mautists ancaps now? How does making China into the America's personal sweatshop help the Chinese proletariat?

I'm not a Trotskyist, and you don't need to be a Trot to see that most "anti-revisionism" is just alternate history fan fiction about how every failed project of the 20th Century Left was actually a success and that we just need to repeat every mistake we made last time, but this time it'll work. You're the exact type of Leftist that Liberals love, because they don't even need to argue with you, your worthless dogmatism speaks for itself. But here's something to consider, Marxism isn't a religion, so no one cares how devoted you are to dead gods like the USSR or China.

This sounds like something a dumb conservative would say to mock Marx's ideas. And Marx and Engels themselves believed revolution in Russia was only possible with a German one to assist it.

fucking brainlets of leftypol, permanent revolution is when russia goes from feudal->socialism without stopping at the bourgeois democracy stage, a revolutionary government overseas the transition to an industrialized nation so that they can skip all the capitalist nonsense.


So "permanent revolution" vs. "socialism in one country" makes literally no fucking difference in reality.

Well… I don't know… Just raising living standards 10s of times over and actually stopping them from being proletariat in a classical sense.
Nah, just Marxist-Leninists doing NEP stuff: managing capitalist economy as good as they can due to lack of conditions of socialism.
Which is why the only thing I care is practical application of theories and ideas and its' objective success. Marxism doesn't have many dogmas, but it has one:

I don't have a beef with Trotsky at all, who is indeed a great personality in Communist movement, just all kinds of useless armchairs and European leftcoms

We cannot know how Trotsky would lead the Soviet Union, but one thing is for sure: he would not lead it fundamentally differently than Stalin, and there is no practical difference between socialism in one country and permanent revolution, merely an ideological one.

how exactly?

Well, I'm glad we at least agree on something. Happy to see an ML who just openly admits to being pro-Capital and not giving a fuck about actually creating a Communist society, it's refreshing.

But if we operated on that logic wouldn't we all have to agree that there's no reason for any contemporary Marxist to be a Trotskyist, Marxist-Leninist, or Maoist? Not a single one of these tendencies led to sustained Socialism, and not one of them came close to creating something even remotely in appearance to what could be called "Communism".

Gonna have to disagree with you on this, Stalin was a gangster, and he operated the state like Tony Soprano would, terror to the bureaucracy and all. I'd say part of what caused the rise of the bureaucracy as parasites of labor was the absence of Stalinist terror, the guy was an egalitarian in this sense.

Socialism in one country means you think you can achieve lower-stage socialism in one country whereas Trotskyists would say you can have a transitional government in one country but not socialism. But I do agree that it is mostly a false dichotomy. Stalinists think Trots think we need total global revolution at once, Trots think Stalinists think we can achieve an island of communism.

Marxism isn't about wishing Communism into reality. It is a system of analysis of society and economy. The reason for a Marxist to be a Trotskyist, Marxist-Leninist, or Maoist is to apply this system in order to create a more efficient and progressive society, and to work in the interest of the people.

Only an anarchiddie would believe that Communist society can be somehow "created", not progressed into.

Right, but most 20th Century theories of praxis were absolute failures. That would be the reason not to be a trot or a maoist, let alone an ML.
I'm sorry, is Communism not "created" once we've gone through a transitional phase? How semantical do you want to get faggot? Clearly we can't write up some blueprint on how to "create" Communism ready made, it's something that achieved through the class struggle itself, but I can tell you what it's not going to look like, a bunch of idealist ultraleft LARPing "anti-revisionists" trying to force the Soviet Model onto advanced Capitalist nation-states.

Not only stalinism isn't an ideology per se
Also trotskysm is so pro-revolution that literally tried to savotage the soviet union with a counte revolution

man trots sure are hilarious

Well said.

USSR should've nuked the whole world once it acquired nukes. Then build the new, communist world upon the wasteland.

I mean, what were they expecting? That the capitalist powers would allow them to exist? That they wouldn't use every opportunity to bring it down? That they wouldn't surround it completely? One would think Soviets would learn their lesson after Nazis invaded. Nope, same old naiveté. World War III was to be the final battle of mankind between the old and the new world. USSR failed in its historical mission. Fuck them, they deserved every single McDonald's restaurant they got. Fuck socialism in one country and fuck anyone who thinks it's a good idea. You still didn't learn anything from the past.