what do you think of trotsky? do you think he should've took over after lenin in 1924?
Cowbee [he/him, they/them] - 4w
Trotsky was wrong with Permament Revolution. Both Stalin and Sverdlov (had he survived) would have been good options, but had Trotsky taken power and actually implemented Permanent Revolution by attacking the peasantry inmediately, relying on revolution in the west with a larger proletarian base, would have resulted in the death of the socialist project. Trotsky hinged his entire theory on the inability for the peasantry to ally with the proletariat, when the opposite was found to be true Permanent Revolution ceased to have any relevance.
Trotsky's later behavior was that of a wrecker, consistently splitting from the party line, and that resulted in his expulsion. Trotskyist parties since Trotsky have maintained the same tradition, and split like cells undergoing mitosis over and over. This lack of party discipline and frequent splitting is core to the lack of success of Trotskyist orgs, and is also why the generally oppose AES countries.
Trotksy had some good moments. He played a pivotal role in the Russian Civil War, and wrote decent theory outside of the context of Permanent Revolution. However, both Sverdlov and Stalin were more capable revolutionaries with stronger understandings of theory and practice. With Sverdlov dead, Stalin was the logical choice, and that's why he was elected.
15
DylanMc6 [any, any] - 4w
if NOT trotsky (and if NOT stalin), sverdlov would be good. seriously!
2
sexywheat [none/use name] - 4w
Not unlike Jesus, I like the guy himself a hell of a lot more than his supporters.
4
RedSturgeon [she/her] - 4w
I hear him attribute to something negative, like almost all the time, it both discourages looking into his work, meaning I can't really judge him, and I also don't really understand what people mean when they call someone a Trotskyist, besides some vague idea that the person is being a wrecker who wants to split up groups. Are Trotskyists even a real force in play today?
3
sexywheat [none/use name] - 4w
Are Trotskyists even a real force in play today?
Yes and no. Trot groups are very popular among leftist circles in Western countries, especially in the Anglosphere. I attribute this to being able to call themselves communist while at the same time conveniently wash their hands of the perceived crimes of the USSR and other AES projects.
However, I don’t think they an actual “force” in any meaningful sense. They mostly keep to themselves resigned to campus activism and play little to no role in actual class struggle (union organising, community solidarity, activism etc). Some trot groups (especially the IMT) could most accurately be described as cults (source: I was in that cult for many years).
IMO they are more interested in criticising everyone and everything except themselves.
7
DylanMc6 [any, any] - 4w
are you angry about trotskyism being given a bad rep?
1
sexywheat [none/use name] - 4w
Their bad rep wasn’t given it was earned.
6
RedSturgeon [she/her] - 4w
I'm calling them irrelevant (due to lack of accomplishments, that I am aware of), in very polite fashion. Which is the reason why I never felt compelled to learn more about Leon Trotsky himself and don't know what exactly did he do and talk about. Only what other people say about him.
3
Moidialectica [he/him, comrade/them] - 4w
You should also post this in askchapo
3
Tabitha ☢️[she/her] - 4w
in 1924, absofuckinglutly not, shittiest idea imaginable.
in 1937, definitely, Trotsky should have taken over after Stalin for a term or 2.
3
DylanMc6 [any, any] - 4w
if NOT trotsky and if NOT stalin, who do you think would be lenin's successor?
DylanMc6 in main
question
what do you think of trotsky? do you think he should've took over after lenin in 1924?
Trotsky was wrong with Permament Revolution. Both Stalin and Sverdlov (had he survived) would have been good options, but had Trotsky taken power and actually implemented Permanent Revolution by attacking the peasantry inmediately, relying on revolution in the west with a larger proletarian base, would have resulted in the death of the socialist project. Trotsky hinged his entire theory on the inability for the peasantry to ally with the proletariat, when the opposite was found to be true Permanent Revolution ceased to have any relevance.
Trotsky's later behavior was that of a wrecker, consistently splitting from the party line, and that resulted in his expulsion. Trotskyist parties since Trotsky have maintained the same tradition, and split like cells undergoing mitosis over and over. This lack of party discipline and frequent splitting is core to the lack of success of Trotskyist orgs, and is also why the generally oppose AES countries.
Trotksy had some good moments. He played a pivotal role in the Russian Civil War, and wrote decent theory outside of the context of Permanent Revolution. However, both Sverdlov and Stalin were more capable revolutionaries with stronger understandings of theory and practice. With Sverdlov dead, Stalin was the logical choice, and that's why he was elected.
if NOT trotsky (and if NOT stalin), sverdlov would be good. seriously!
Not unlike Jesus, I like the guy himself a hell of a lot more than his supporters.
I hear him attribute to something negative, like almost all the time, it both discourages looking into his work, meaning I can't really judge him, and I also don't really understand what people mean when they call someone a Trotskyist, besides some vague idea that the person is being a wrecker who wants to split up groups. Are Trotskyists even a real force in play today?
Yes and no. Trot groups are very popular among leftist circles in Western countries, especially in the Anglosphere. I attribute this to being able to call themselves communist while at the same time conveniently wash their hands of the perceived crimes of the USSR and other AES projects.
However, I don’t think they an actual “force” in any meaningful sense. They mostly keep to themselves resigned to campus activism and play little to no role in actual class struggle (union organising, community solidarity, activism etc). Some trot groups (especially the IMT) could most accurately be described as cults (source: I was in that cult for many years).
IMO they are more interested in criticising everyone and everything except themselves.
are you angry about trotskyism being given a bad rep?
Their bad rep wasn’t given it was earned.
I'm calling them irrelevant (due to lack of accomplishments, that I am aware of), in very polite fashion. Which is the reason why I never felt compelled to learn more about Leon Trotsky himself and don't know what exactly did he do and talk about. Only what other people say about him.
You should also post this in askchapo
in 1924, absofuckinglutly not, shittiest idea imaginable.
in 1937, definitely, Trotsky should have taken over after Stalin for a term or 2.
if NOT trotsky and if NOT stalin, who do you think would be lenin's successor?
Why not Stalin?