Actually building socialism? Nah, let's just wage a world war against the capitalists instead, that'll work

...

Well, do you see the CCCP today? Im really sure the cause of the fall is because ⛏️rotsky was exiled. Communism can never exist along with capitalists countries, the whole world shall turn red

Attached: 1471233484055.jpg (600x600, 43.34K)

Attached: Trotskyist.png (634x250, 27.29K)

Well trots were not supported by any huge revisionist state

Attached: 85d08a5fa8c899f3274c156b1b87362e0a364d8a3e75629ac1773b8172426053.png (2400x3300, 7.68M)

Actually the trots were targeted by everyone so…….

Attached: DJF7197-min-e1445008549761.png (498x651, 79.55K)

Thats because the bad ones always win, we're the true underdog heroes of the leftist movements, the ones whose fight is true and sacred, for the sake of mankind we despise false idols and read beyond the propaganda of capitalists and comunists alike to oppose everything thats isn't virtuous

Attached: TrotskySlayingtheDragon1918.jpg (619x712, 171.34K)

life isnt a fucking Hollywoo film you asshat

That's not really what ⛏️rotsky wanted.

...

Opportunists

It's unfair, because pretty much every form of leftism so far has failed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism

Italy also had the largest and strongest communist party at the time.

The argument was that feudal societies could undergo socialist revolution and transition to socialism directly rather than having to go through some bourgeois revolution first.

People sure love criticizing ⛏️rotsky without reading a word he wrote.

He did not advocate for a 'world war' against capitalism; he said a backward, isolated country cannot build socialism on its own and has to work to foment revolution in the more economically advanced countries.

He was NOT a fascist sympathizer. In fact, his work, Fascism: What It Is and How to Fight It remains the best and most comprehensive Marxist overview of what fascism is and why it's such a massive threat to communist revolution. In that very document he basically begged the Comintern to try harder to prevent the Nazis from coming to power (a plea that fell on deaf ears).

And last, and most importantly, his critique of the Stalinist clique in the USSR was fucking NOT that they were evil and impeding 'pure socialism'. Literally anybody who read ANYTHING ⛏️rotsky EVER wrote would know that he was a hardcore materialist and did not use terms like 'evil' or 'pure socialism'. His critique was rather that the backward and dire material conditions in the USSR made it inevitable that a privileged and repressive political caste would form and that this cast would impede the further development of a truly socialist society. When he first made this critique, his solution was to adopt the orientation of Permanent Revolution rather than Socialism in one Country; when this failed and he and the Left Opposition were crushed, he adopted the view that the Stalinist clique had basically won and the only solution to overcome their anti-progressive orientation was a political revolution (which he distinguished from a social revolution, something that had already happened and remained within the USSR, in contrast to the left communists and anarchists who variously described the USSR as 'state capitalist').

Now please read the people who you critique. I suffered through Mao's Little Red Book and Stalin's Economic Problems in the USSR, you can fucking suffer through The Revolution Betrayed and/or Permanent Revolution.

Yeah, that's why he literally worked with Fascists. Why you think he knew so much hmmmmmmm?

marxism.halkcephesi.net/Grover Furr/Furr tortsky japan.pdf

Kwelin, May 10, 1939

Dear comrades: In the past, in my opinion and that of a good number of comrades, ⛏️rotskyism has seemed a matter of struggle between the trends within the Chinese Communist Party. So they almost were not paying attention. But shortly before the outbreak of the war, more precisely since the end of 1936, and especially during the war, the criminal ⛏️rotskyist propaganda has opened our eyes. Then we started to study the problem. And our study has led us to the following conclusions:

1 – The problem of ⛏️rotskyism is not a struggle between the trends within the Chinese Communist Party. Because between Communists and ⛏️rotskyists there is no tie, absolutely no tie. It is a matter that concerns the whole people: the fight against the country.

2 – The fascist Japanese and foreign fascists know. So, looking to try to create disagreements, to mislead public opinion and undermine the popularity of the Communists, making people believe they are communists and ⛏️rotskyists in the same field.

3 – The Chinese ⛏️rotskyists (like the ⛏️rotskyists in other countries) do not represent a group, much less a political party. They are nothing more then a criminal gang, the hounds of Japanese fascism (and of international fascism).

4 – In all countries, the ⛏️rotskyists gave good nicknames to mask their dirty work of bandits. For example, in Spain, their names are Workers’ Party of Marxist Unification (POUM). Did you know that it is they who are the nests of spies in Madrid, Barcelona and elsewhere in the service of Franco? It is they who organized the famous “fifth column,” agency of the army intelligence of the fascist Italians and Germans. In Japan, they are called Marx-Engels-Lenin League (MEL). The Japanese ⛏️rotskyists attract young people to their league, then reported them to the police. They seek to penetrate the Japanese Communist Party in order to destroy it from within. In my opinion, the French ⛏️rotskyists, now organized around the Proletarian Revolution Group (1) set a goal to sabotage the Popular Front. On this subject, I think you are better informed than I am. In our country of China [referring to Indochina, N. E.], ⛏️rotskyists are grouped into formations like La Lutte, War against the Japanese, Culture and Red Flag.

5 – The ⛏️rotskyists are not only enemies of communism, but also enemies of democracy and progress. They are the most infamous traitors and spies. Maybe you have read the indictments of the processes in the Soviet Union against the ⛏️rotskyists. If you have not read them, I advise you to do so and to read them to your friends. It is a very useful reading. It will help them see the true disgusting face of ⛏️rotskyism and ⛏️rotskyists. Here, allow me to extract some passages relating directly to China. The true repugnant face of ⛏️rotskyism.

Before the court, the ⛏️rotskyist Rakovsky (2) confessed that in 1934 when he was in Tokyo (as representative of the Soviet Red Cross) a high character of the Japanese government had told him: “We have the right to expect from the ⛏️rotskyists a change in strategy. I will not go into details. I only wanted to say that we expect from the ⛏️rotskyists, actions that favor our intervention in the affairs of China.” Responding to the Japanese, Rakovsky said: “I will write to ⛏️rotsky about this.” In December 1935, ⛏️rotsky sent to his supporters in China, instructions that repeatedly emphasized that phrase: “Do not create obstacles to the Japanese invasion of China.” And how have ⛏️rotskyists in China acted? They are in a hurry to know, is it not true? But, beloved comrades, I can not respond more in my next letter. Do not you recommend me to write short letters? Hope to see you soon.

1939: About ⛏️rotskyism (Letter to the Communist Party of Indochina)

Notes

(1) Revolución Proletaria: Newspaper published by a group of French revolutionary syndicalists.

(2) Revolutionary leader in the Balkans before the First World War, Ukrainian Prime Minister from 1919 to 1923, was then Soviet ambassador in Paris and one of the founders of the Left Opposition. Expelled from the CPSU in 1927 continued his work to capitulate in 1934.

Digital edition of Andreu Nin Foundation, August 2005

From Joseph Goebbels’ diaries:
”Our clandestine radio transmitter from eastern Prussia to Russia is creating an enormous sensation. It operates in ⛏️rotsky’s name, and is causing Stalin plenty of trouble”

”Now we work with three clandestine radio stations in Russia: first ⛏️rotskyist, the second separatist, third Russian-nationalists, all criticise Stalinism. They are an example of cunning and subtlety.”

Attached: true face of Trotskyism.png (2736x2000, 2.46M)

MLs are some of the stupidest fucking people I've ever met. I don't care what Ho Chi Minh or Fidel Castro or whoever thought about ⛏️rotsky; they were ideologically opposed to him, OF COURSE they didn't fucking like him.

As regards the last quote, ⛏️rotsky advocated for unconditional support of the USSR during WW2, so this is just Goebbels showing that he had never bothered to read ⛏️rotsky (not that I would expect him to).

Lenin insulted ⛏️rotsky in his letters, telegrams and articles 219 times. How did Lenin call him? “Pustozvon” (“bell”, man who talks much and does nothing), “svin’ya” (pig), “podlec iz podlecov” (scoundrel of scoundlers), “iudushka” (“Judas”/traitor), “politicheskaya prostitutka” (political prostitute) and his most elegant phrase concerning ⛏️rotsky that became Russian proverb – “pizdit kak Trotskiy” – “to lie/bitch/bullshit like fu**ing ⛏️rotsky”.
“Trotsky is very fond of explaining historical events . . in pompous and sonorous phrases, in a manner flattering to ⛏️rotsky” (Lenin, SW #4 194).
Quote: ⛏️rotsky has never yet held a firm opinion on any important question of Marxism. He always contrives to worm his way into the cracks of any given difference of opinion, and desert one side for the other. At the present moment he is in the company of the Bundists and the liquidators. And these gentlemen do not stand on ceremony where the Party is concerned.
(Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 20 p. 448, 1914).
Quote: ⛏️rotsky behaves like a despicable careerist and factionalist of the Ryazanov-and-co type. Either equality on the editorial board, subordination to the central committee and no one’s transfer to Paris except ⛏️rotsky’s (the scoundrel, he wants to ‘fix up’ the whole rascally crew of ‘Pravda’ at our expense!) – or a break with this swindler and an exposure of him in the CO. He pays lip-service to the Party and behaves worse than any other of the factionalists.
(Collected Works, Vol. 34, p. 400).
Quote:
In the very first words of his resolution ⛏️rotsky expressed the full spirit of the worst kind of conciliation, ‘conciliation’ in inverted commas, of a sectarian and philistine conciliation, which deals with ‘given persons’ and not the given line of policy, the given spirit the given ideological and political content of Party work.
It is in this that the enormous difference lies between real partyism; which consists in purging the Party of liquidationism and otzovism, and the ‘conciliation’ of ⛏️rotsky and Co., which actually RENDERS THE MOST FAITHFUL SERVICE TO THE LIQUIDATORS AND OTZOVISTS, AND IS THEREFORE AN EVIL THAT IS ALL THE MORE DANGEROUS TO THE PARTY THE MORE CUNNINGLY, ARTFULLY AND RHETORICALLY IT CLOAKS ITSELF WITH PROFESSEDLY PRO-PARTY, PROFESSEDLY ANTI-FACTIONAL DECLAMATIONS.
(Notes of a Publicist, Collected Works, Vol. 16, June 1910, p 211).
Quote:The struggle between Bolshevism and Menshevism is… a struggle over the question whether to support the liberals or to overthrow the hegemony of the liberals over the peasantry. Therefore to attribute [as did ⛏️rotsky] our splits to the influence of the intelligentsia, to the immaturity of the proletariat, etc, is a childishly naive repetition of liberal fairy-tales.
Trotsky distorts Bolshevism, because he has never been able to form any definite views on the role of the proletariat in the Russian bourgeois revolution.
Therefore, when ⛏️rotsky tells the German comrades that he represents the ‘general Party tendency’ I am obliged to declare that ⛏️rotsky represents only his own faction and enjoys a certain amount of confidence exclusively among the otzovists and the liquidators.
(The Historical Meaning of the Inner-Party Struggle in Russia, Collected Works, Vol. 16 pp. 374-392).
Quote:
It is an adventure in the ideological sense.Trotsky groups all the enemies of Marxism, he unites Potresov and Maximov, who detest the ‘Lenin-Plekhanov’ bloc, as they like to call it. ⛏️rotsky UNITES ALL THOSE TO WHOM IDEOLOGICAL DECAY IS DEAR; ALL WHO ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH THE DEFENCE OF MARXISM, all philistines who do not understand the reasons for the struggle and who do not wish to learn, think and discover the ideological roots of the divergence of views. At this time of confusion, disintegration, and wavering it is easy for ⛏️rotsky to become the ‘hero of the hour’ and gather all the shabby elements around himself. The more openly this attempt is made, the more spectacular will be the defeat.
(Letter to the Russian Collegium of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, Collected Works, Vol. 17, pp. 17-22 – December 1910)

Attached: when_i_see_a_trot.jpg (500x440, 76.69K)

Quote:
It is impossible to argue with ⛏️rotsky on the merits of the issue, because ⛏️rotsky holds no views whatever. We can and should argue with confirmed liquidators and otzovists, but it is no use arguing with a man whose game is to hide the errors of both these trends; in his case the thing to do is to expose him as a diplomat of the smallest calibre.
(Trotsky’s Diplomacy and a Certain Party Platform, Collected Works, Vol. 17 pp. 360362).Quote:Trotsky’s dirty campaign against Pravda is one mass of lies and slander… This intriguer and liquidator goes on lying right and left.
(Collected Works, Vol. 35, pp. 40-41).
Quote:
But the liquidators and ⛏️rotsky,… who tore up their own August bloc, who flouted all the decisions of the Party and dissociated themselves from the ‘underground’ as well as from the organised workers, are the worst splitters. Fortunately, the workers have already realised this, and all class-conscious workers are creating their own real unity against the liquidator disrupters of unity.
(Collected Works, Vol. 20 pp. 158-161).
Quote:
Needless to say, this explanation is highly flattering, to ⛏️rotsky… and to the liquidators… ⛏️rotsky is very fond of using with the learned air of the expert pompous and high-sounding phrases to explain historical phenomena in a way that is flattering to ⛏️rotsky. Since ‘numerous advanced workers’ become ‘active agents’ of apolitical and Party line [Bolshevik Party line] which does not conform to ⛏️rotsky’s line, ⛏️rotsky settles the question unhesitatingly, out of hand these advanced workers are ‘in a state of utter political bewilderment’, whereas he, ⛏️rotsky, is evidently ‘in a state’ of political firmness and clarity, and keeps to the right line!… And this very same ⛏️rotsky, beating his breast, fulminates against factionalism parochialism, and the efforts of the intellectuals to impose their will on the workers!
Reading things like these, one cannot help asking oneself. – is it from a lunatic asylum that such voices come?
(Collected Works, Vol. 20 pp. 327-347).
Quote:
The obliging ⛏️rotsky is more dangerous than an enemy! ⛏️rotsky could produce no proof except ‘private conversations’ (i.e., simply gossip, on which ⛏️rotsky always subsists), classifying the ‘Polish Marxists’ in general as supporters of every article by Rosa Luxemburg…Trotsky has never yet held a firm opinion on any important question of Marxism. He always contrives to worm his way into the cracks of any given difference of opinion, and desert one side for the other. At the present moment he is in the company of the Bundists and the liquidators. And thee gentlemen do not stand on ceremony where the Party is concerned.
(The Right of Nations to Self-Determination, Collected Works, Vol. 20 p. 447-8).
Quote:
What a swine this ⛏️rotsky is – Left, phrases, and a bloc with the Right against the Zimmerwald Left!! He ought to be exposed (by you) if only in a brief letter to Sotsial-Demokrat!
(Collected Works, Vol. 35, p. 285).
Quote:
There is also a letter from Kollontai who… has returned to Norway from America. N. Iv. and Pavlov… had won Novy Mir, she says,… but … ⛏️rotsky arrived, and this scoundrel at once ganged up with the Right wing of Novy Mir against the Left Zimmerwaldists!! That’s it!! That’s ⛏️rotsky for you!! Always true to himself, twists, swindles, poses as a Left, helps the Right, so long as he can…
(Collected Works, Vol. 35, p. 288).

Do you have any ideas of your own or are you just going to continue to post your copypasta quote dumps?

Also, important things to note: There are no dates on any of these, but I imagine all of them were from before ⛏️rotsky became a Bolshevik. Why do I think that? Because the only quote from Lenin I need to post, unlike your ten thousand:

"Trotsky long ago said that unification is impossible. ⛏️rotsky understood this and from that time on there has been no better Bolshevik.”

Secondly, Lenin insulted anyone who he disagreed with. Ever. Often viciously. It was just his personality and it shouldn't be taken as an indication that he actually thought these people were anti-revolutionary.

OMG
is this it
the btfoed russian nationalist is back
Wih the same fucking pasta

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 36.34K)

As much as I like Parenti his apologetics for the failures of 20th century socialism seem to go to far. Of course we can’t expect a revolution to play out exactly how we like it to, and we will have to deviate from our ideal system to deal with non-ideal conditions. However that doesn’t mean you can’t criticize the way in which specific parties or countries handled these conditions. Parenti’s logic here seems to be that the situation wasn’t perfect, therefore that excuses any mistakes 20th century socialism may have made.

Question to trots : How do you feel about all the ex-trots becoming necons

Questions to ☭TANKIE☭s : how do you feel about all the ☭TANKIE☭s becoming putinists

Questions to socdems : how do you feel about all the succdems becoming neolibs

Questions to Maoists : how do you feel about being in a cult

Questions to Communists : Epic style.

Attached: da370f8a5f190519562ebef1a15640bd6cd77a61a19323f2072c38d18014d6ca.jpg (523x452, 149.94K)

Where should I start if I want to get into ⛏️rotsky's work?

Contrary to the memes, Trots becoming Neocons is not a very common phenomenon.

That said, most of the Trots who DID become Neocons subscribed to the (in my opinion) deeply flawed analysis of Tony Cliff and/or Max Shachtman, both of who rejected ⛏️rotsky's analysis of the USSR as a degenerated workers' state. This resulted in a pro-USA foreign policy orientation and it's easy to imagine how that snowballed into Neo-Conservatism from there.

Orthodox Trots don't have this problem because we correctly think that the fall of the USSR did more to damage the communist movement than any other event in history.

Get an icepick

Attached: Follow Your Leader.png (1220x822, 432.75K)

Permanent Revolution. It's relatively short (at least from what I remember, I could be wrong) and it more or less perfectly summarizes the theoretical distinction between ⛏️rotskyism and other leftist currents.

Alternatively, you can start with Fascism: What It is and How to Fight It since even non-Trots more or less universally praise this work and it's very short.

If America Should Go Communist is also an absolutely enthralling read, though it's admittedly probably not the best place to start if you want to get a good grasp of the fundamental Trot ideas.

This isn't strictly true. We just made it up to poke fun at right wing burgers.

You guys know a pickaxe is not an ice pick, right?

I've been wondering about that too, why is it always portrayed as an pickaxe.

You could probably have made this argument without posting a screencap of a Twitter post.

I don't think he's making that point. I've listened to most Parenti talks available on the internet and he often goes out of his way to articulate the problems of Soviet style socialism and he doesn't hesitate to criticize the leadership of Stalin for example. What he does in that article imo is go after a specific kind of "criticism" of actually existing socialist movements. The kind that views all or most socialist revolutions throughout history as Stalinist authoritarian monstrosities, has an idealistic and millenarian vision of "true"/"real"/"pure" socialism, denounces actual socialist movements to gain credibility and respect among liberals, etc. I think it's completely inaccurate to paint Parenti as some ☭TANKIE☭ who can't accept any criticism of "actually existing" socialist states.

Aren't some of the most significant trot orgs still Cliffite?

Yeah, I don't know about other countries, but the US has the ISO.

And it's really a great example of what I mean; they tend to regurgitate a lot of US imperialist propaganda in their paper.

Then the trot/neocon memes aren't really that inaccurate, are they? When the line of the most visible trot org on, for example, Syria is identical to that of John McCain (muh supporting totally not salafist rebels, muh FSA) it shouldn't be surprising that people fucking hate trots and compare you guys to neocons.

No, it's not accurate. The ISO, for all of their faults, is not actively advocating for invasions of foreign countries and regime change. Regime change is a crucial component of neo-conservatism and it is not what the ISO advocate for.

Also, this completely ignores the many Trot organizations that DON'T publish imperialist propaganda, such as the CWI and even the SEP as much as I fucking hate them. Hell, the Spartacists often get mocked for being even more insane about 'anti-imperialism' than the average ML.

Stalin was a good military leader

The distinction between directly supporting US military intervention in Syria, and repeating all the exact same propaganda but "only" supporting salafist jihadist insurgent groups that are funded and supported by western and gulf governments to overthrow the Syrian government, is pretty inconsequential to me.

If one Trot organization's stance on one foreign conflict is enough to convince you that Trots are, as a rule, neocons, then you clearly aren't interested in having a rational conversation on the matter.

You just want to reinforce your preconceived biases that ⛏️rotsky was an evil traitor and so are the people who believe in his ideas today.

All I'm saying is that there is a reason trots have this reputation. Because of their retarded anti-authoritarianism and anti-Stalinism, they have a tendency to fall for state department propaganda and align themselves with neocons, and it's not limited to Syria. Of course it doesn't apply to all trots, there is a difference between different trot orgs, but it does have a basis in reality.

Nope, there was no russian nationalist at all, Eurofag, and the poster who originally compliled these quotes was never BTFOed at all, regardless of your shit opinion. Zig Forums keeps wanking itself over this but hasn't actually debunked a word said, so keep whining!

Questions to Stirnerite morons: How do you feel about all stirnerites being post-modernist nihilists that do nothing and never will do anything, because they follow a man who got BTFOed by Marx and Engels in their works and was such a egotistical bastard that his wife left him for being such a sociopath.

Except that ⛏️rotsky was the only one who recieved this many scathing insults, neither Bukharin, Stalin or anyone else received that much clout.

Sry newfag
I btfoed him(he literally supported putin btw) here
And playing Ismail in a board full of autistic virgin NEETs like leftypol should be in no way supported user…

already a thread about trots

what thread?