This was the most evil man in history and if you know history, you know why

Who is this intense Jewish butch?

So since we are talking about Trotsky, is the claim that the man who icepicked him was pretending to be his twink bf true or did the guy who told me this uses too much acid?

I don't remember reading that anywhere, i just remember a part of Trotsky telling his guards to not kill the guy right after he got attacked "because he has a story to tell", nothing homo

fanfiction

You guys ever read Trotsky's last words?

This is so sad, can we make Trotsky the new leader of the USSR?

Trotsky also would have probably been even worse than Stalin from s moralfag perspective because rather than help colonized nations rebel and organize their own defensive capacities locally in a mutual manner and then establish trade relations with said countries Trotsky would have just started using the red army to steamroll through every single area where the US or UK had literally any involvement which would have both led to an economic collapse and an alied invasion that would have destroyed the ussr decades earlier than what we got

I also thought Trot was a homo (or at least bisexual) because of his book "My Life"

Thank you. I forgot to mention that he was highly irrational, and some people around him thought he had some sort of a mental disease.

Attached: show trials.jpg (425x299 131.35 KB, 29.21K)

NONONO THIS ISN'T TRUE SHUT UP SHUT UP STALIN GOOD

Also you're aware of the fact that Stalin tried to resign 4 times and actively discouraged the personality cult forming around him right? Also shit like this isn't unique to stalin, people tend to romanticize the image of someone when they feel like they've gotten them through a hard time. Americans used to feel this way about FDR and still do about Reagan and the Bush family. It's not like Stalin decided one day to make everything in the ussr about him and then just shot everyone who wouldn't kiss his ass

my post:
Yet you still post anti-stalinist pictures showing me things I already know. Well, I always knew Trots don't have any reading comprehension.

could i get a source on that

lmgtfy.com/?q=stalin disliked the personality cult

Stalin Resigning (sorry for WordPress but I'm lazy at right now and this article has sources)
socialistmlmusings.wordpress.com/2017/02/23/stalins-four-attempts-at-resignation/

Cult of personality
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin's_cult_of_personality
To be fair to you it's unclear whether he ever completely rejected the cult but it is clear that he spoke on numerous occasions discouraging the worship of individuals and so on. I don't think its really to crazy to say he might have made his peace with it out of the necessity to respond in an efficient way to the Nazis invading but that doesn't mean if you insulted or criticized Stalin you automatically were gulagged.

Stalin's paranoia (which did exist) was more about the infiltration of the party in general rather than anyone trying to challenge his personal authority

He did indeed "try to resign" multiple times. Every time was intended as a staged power play to try and humiliate his opponents with an outcry of support. Similar to how Julius Caesar "refused" Rome's crown multiple times.

I primarily view the personality cult as a structural product of the ruling Party bureaucracy (PDF related), hence at first I viewed Stalin's comments downplaying his rising personality cult as genuine. However, the more I read, the more I think he actually was high on his own supply and viewed himself as the "colossus of thought". Take this quote from his own autobiography:

Thus writes the "humble" Stalin about himself.

...

Forgot PDF:

Attached: picard day.jpg (970x545, 373.82K)

You don't become one of the world's most powerful men without being a skilled political operative. Stalin was clever in the game of politics, and it's amusing how his biggest supporters often also are the ones who underestimate him again and again.

I am alluding that the conflict between Stalin and Trotsky is similar to that of Augustus and Anthony in that they had no political differences between each other, but could not share power due to sudden death of the leader and lack of political institutions of the new regime.

Although, there are more similarities too. Augustus is loyal, pragmatic, down to earth. Mark Anthony is ambitious, unconventional, adventurous.

I am so sick of this stupid shitflinging, especially since neither Stalin or Trotsky are blameless or wholly bad. Trots refuse to acknowledge that it was extremely irresponsible to the point of insanity for Trotsky, as an old respected Bolshevik, to start talking openly about overthrowing the government of the USSR at such a fragile time, and then go on to start a fucking 4th Internationale with himself at the head. The denial of this seems to be out of some need for Trotsky to be an entirely uncritically heroic figure who represents all of the potential of the Soviet revolution without any of the messy realities, which is funny because they have that in common with Stalinists who just choose to not believe there were any messy realities, or that the ones that happened were saved by the firm hand of Daddy Stalin. Stalinists do this really obnoxious thing where whenever they hear criticisms from the left they just respond as if the criticism was coming from the right. "What the fuck was up with the show trials, do you really believe that Stalin and Lenin were the only two out of the dozens of original, committed Bolsheviks that werent secretly fascist spies and provocateurs?" is met with "lmao ok liberal yeah that's right Stalin personally killed 10 gorillion kulaks"

Maybe we should stop trying to understand our history with Avatars of Revolution instead of material analysis.

Attached: 1554750749787.jpg (540x403, 14.9K)

One of the worst deals in the history of dealmaking.

Why was younger Trotsky such a femboy?

because he is a deluded retard just like all femboys and traps

Are you sure about that?

Attached: brezhnevhide.png (920x574, 458.33K)

lol poor Trotsky, he gets no respect

Attached: Trotsky.png (502x695, 444.28K)

Trotsky has been vindicated over and over. Permanent revolution has been vindicated, ie, that only the working class is the revolutionary force in society and that socialism MUST be international in scope. Read Revolution Betrayed, his analysis of the Soviet Union either having a workers revolution from within or reverting to capitalism has been vindicated, his analysis of fascism is the most accurate to this date, and unlike Stalin his legacy lives on. The WSWS, the SEP, and the ICFI will be the vanguard of the final socialist revolution as they are the only Marxist party around with an international setup. Trotsky will win.

Lol at calling yourself a Marxist and calling someone "evil" at the same time

Aaand… It's literally the only worthwhile piece of Trotsly's legacy, apart from his contribution to the October revolution itself. Even then, most of its' worth comes from Trotsky having both insider's knowledge and having no ties to the institution, rather than some sort of analytical genius.

mark antony was an extremely capable lieutenant but a poor politician

Pure utopianism.
I don't think it is true. Everyone knew that fascism bad. Eventually, Stalin's politics was the brilliant one. Trotsky's autism would result in Angloamerican Porky taking it all past WWII and Soviet Union, most likely, being crushed.

Again, Trotsky's legacy is pretty pitiful.

I'm not against Trotsky per se, I'd even say as much as he is on par with Stalin personally. But Trotskyist cult of personality is cringeworthy, and definitely subpar to that of daddy Stalin.

In what way has permanent revolution been vindicated? Mao's Cultural Revolution is the closest example I can think of and it had serious, even fatal flaws.

Trotskyism and Hoxhaism are virtually the same - they have identical critiques of bureaucracy. The only difference is their opinion of Stalin.

How does it feel to talk out of your ass about things you have no clue about?

Need a meme word filter for this

This is such profound historical illiteracy. International socialist revolution doesn't mean the USSR would take over the world by force, it meant establishment of vanguard parties throughout the world with the goal of elevating workers political consciousness so that they could free themselves. Because Stalinism had always been a bureaucratic reaction to the Workers Revolution, it had no choice but to cut off any proletarian revolutionary movement throughout the world in order to settle deals with the imperialist powers.

Stalinism went through and muderered all true Leninist parties by killing off Trotskyists around the world and destroying the vanguard parties who meant to carry through workers revolutions. Popular frontism led to the betrayals of all anti-colonial movmenets because Stalinism promoted the two-stage theory of revolution which was thoroughly disproven by the Russian Revolution itself! All around the world, with the Stalinist support for the bourgeois nationalists of India, Ghana, Vietnam, Catalonia, Greece, etc, the world revolution was betrayed.

However, now Stalinism is DEAD. It "lives" in the minds of thoroughly reactionary online trolls and deranged middle class youth. Trotskyism is the only revolutionary tendency on this planet which is proven by the constant principled actions of the ICFI, SEP and its news organ the World Socialist Web Site.

Is there any proof for this? By proof I mean a written statement from him, not Stalin's excuses to kill him

Not the best quote I could find on the subject, but Trotsky was indeed pushing for another russian revolution to overthrow the party bureaucracy and bring true workers' democracy back to the USSR. Don't believe the ☭TANKIE☭ show trial bullshit though, he had little to no contacts in the USSR thanks to Stalin's secret police, and he certainly was not a literal agent of Hitler as they eventually claimed.

dropped

Attached: gorvachev.jpg (3126x4000, 5.4M)

Asked Ismail from /marx/:

Yes there are. Initially, Trotsky and his followers opposed all talk of overthrowing the government. They held that the "bureaucracy" could only be combated from within the legal avenues of the party, trade unions, soviets, etc. Ironically, this harmed Trotsky's popularity among workers in the late 20s, a considerable portion of whom initially resented the tight discipline being enacted to make the First Five-Year Plan a reality. They would privately talk to Trotskyists about starting strikes and other unauthorized activities, whereupon the Trots would argue that workers striking against the workers' state was harmful.

When Hitler came to power in 1933, Trotsky declared that the Comintern was dead as a revolutionary international (blaming it for Hitler's rise) and that a Fourth International was necessary. He also wrote the following that same year:

(Source: marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1933/10/sovstate.htm)

From that point on he was regularly asserting that the "bureaucracy" had to be overthrown to save the USSR and prevent the restoration of capitalism. For example, from the founding program of the Fourth International which he wrote:

(Source: marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/tp/tp-text2.htm#ussr)

wtf I love Trotsky now
this is unironically pretty based

Yup exactly. Good posts.

Feels fine cause I'm not really claiming any knowledge I don't have, was the Cultural Revolution in no way comparable to Trotsky's Permanent Revolution?

Not to be too blunt but the Cultural Revolution and the Permanent revolution are in no way comparable. Read it straight from the horse's mouth so to speak; marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1931/tpr/pr-index.htm

In essence the permanent revolution is the theory(proven by the history of the 20th century i might add) is the idea that a socialist revolution has to be led by the working class and no other class(Mao's bloc of 4 classes comes immediately in mind) because the working class is the only class whose material interests lay with the overthrow of capitalism. Second the revolution has to be of an international character because capitalism is an international system. As trotsky said "The completion of the socialist revolution within national limits is unthinkable. One of the basic reasons for the crisis in bourgeois society is the fact that the productive forces created by it can no longer be reconciled with the framework of the national state. From this follows on the one hand, imperialist wars, on the other, the utopia of a bourgeois United States of Europe. The socialist revolution begins on the national arena, it unfolds on the international arena, and is completed on the world arena. Thus, the socialist revolution becomes a permanent revolution in a newer and broader sense of the word; it attains completion, only in the final victory of the new society on our entire planet."

Eh, I thought his writing was OK.
Some of his theory seems kind of shit tho

what does this mean?

It really can't be this simple can it? I mean it makes sense but is there a critique of this anywhere?

Refers to Thermidor reaction against Robespierre. Thermidorian basically means reactionary against the more radical ideas of a revolution, that ultimately leads to its death

No worries that's my bad, thanks for the info. I did presume to know too much about it in my original post.

hey could you give like better citation rather than throwing a book at our face