Childhood is when you idolize Lenin.
Adulthood is when you realize that Luxemburg and Trotsky was right.
Childhood is when you idolize Lenin.
Adulthood is when you realize that Luxemburg and Trotsky was right.
Other urls found in this thread:
icl-fi.org
marxists.org
twitter.com
I like all three, but probably lean towards Lenin. And Trotsky.
I think all three are okay too. But then I have a pretty shitty grasp of theory/history so.
rule 34 on rosa and lenin fucking
no
Luxemburg > Lenin > Trotsky
This is objective
Why do people obsess over Trotsky aside from him being not-Stalin? I mean that made a lot of sense to rally behind him and then his image throughout the 20s and on, but what about his ideological positions make him relevant today in a post-Cold War world?
Why should I support Mr Invadeindia McGoldstandard?
Luxemburg > Trotsky > Lenin
Literally the only interesting thing about him theory-wise is that he was one of the few theorists who said that the USSR gad the potential to become legitimately socialist or totally capitalist.
As a member of a "trotskyist" party, I don't anyone does. I'm "trotskyist" simply because I'm not a Stalinist, and I think most are the same. Don't get me wrong, I think he was more positive than negative, easily, but I'm not hung up on the guy.
The people that obsessive over him are the stalinists themselves who are stuck in the past anyway.
icl-fi.org
we could have had revolutions worldwide and stalin ruined everything
oh shit copied the wrong link
marxists.org
Maturity is when you take on all the figures of historical communism as each unavoidably determined by their particular circumstances and articulating the universal truth of communism through a completely individual shape, itself crystallizing the whole movement of a moment extending behind them as finite selves.
The concept of internationalism is not unique to Trotsky. Considering some of his other, stranger aspects, like the labor army crap, it's honestly hard to see why people support him.
Why can't more leftist understand this. Das Kapital isn't a fucking bible and Marxism isn't a religion.
I guess it's easier to just dogmatically follow Marx then actually try to apply it to the conditions of today.
They are, but sheesh proles are like 100 times more powerful today economically then they were in Marx's time. I know lots of proles can't even get clean water, but proles in London would die in their late 20's. Capitalism was worse in many ways in the past.
When do you metamorphosize into a neocon liberal?
What a disgusting wretched kike
Luxemburg dindu nuffin wrong.
No, they are even less economically and politically powerful. You mean to say they have more wealth.
Weren't the proles in Marx's day simply destitute? The proles of modern times are universally in severe debt.
Things have arguably gotten worse, except for the stuff that workers' movements secured like the 8 hour work day, end of child labour, higher wages and such. And we'll probably see those gone too, before long.
A* webm thanks for this gomrade
This.
The fact that so many Marxists are still clinging to the Marx critique of 19th century capitalist society despite the formation of things like shareholding is pretty sad.