/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Because he was a spy of Germany and Japan.
<inb4 that's heckin crazy
>Among the more current Russian-language books which Lyushkov acquired in the Kanda book district of Tokyo were a number of Trotskyite items. One Japanese intelligence officer remembered that Lyushkov said he was a Trotskyite himself Lyushkov's interpreter also told this writer that he felt the Russian seemed personally to be a Trotskyite. Lyushkov's view was that Trotskyite ideology was required to convert the Russian people and cause them to lose respect for Stalinism. Lyushkov did not say that the Stalinist regime would fall, but insisted it had to be overthrown.
Lyushkov literally defected to the USSR and openly stated that his great ambition was to use Japan as a tool to rid the Soviet Union of Stalin and pave the way for Trotsky.
>Wasn't he even endorsed by Lenin to be his successor?
No.
>I feel like even major revisionists like Tito and Gorbachev don't get as much hate as Trotsky.
Tito and Gorbachev's attacks on Marxism-Leninism are fundamentally Trotskyist in nature.

Off-topic, but what works of Trotsky would you recommend reading?

I don't hate trotsky though.

>>2685611
> According to one story
GEE… I WONDER WHO COULD BE BEHIND THIS POST

>>2685535
Stalin worked with Israel tho

ML's have no other thoughts or ideology other than sucking off the corpse of stalin and his rotten decrepit cock.

>>2685520
Their god figure hated him so they must too without reason.

>>2685642
Hey now, they also love Deng Xiaoping too

He was a martyr and died for the truth.
Unlike the cannibal Stalin, who died in his own excrement and went to hell.

>>2685520
I hated Trotsky before I was an ML because of Trotskyites. It’s a Big Man cult even more than Stalin’s cult of personality. A complete refusal to examine the actual situation in the USSR and why it developed as it did, and a desperate adherence to ludicrous ideas like Trotsky being a follower of Lenin.

Modern Trotskyites, like the Maoist Red Guards of the 1960s, have some weird opposition to the notion of the Big Bang. They just really hate it for some reason.

>>2685701
They might be right though per recent observations from the James Webb telescope.

He lost therefore he is bad, Stalin won therefore he is good. That is the amount of thought MLs put into this.
That being said, to quote one Trotskyist I met, "If it went other way around, we might had been all Stalinists now".

>>2685611
>Trotsky is Mr. Pink
wtf I love Trotsky now
>>2685831
Trotskyism is just weirdos perpetuating the sour grapes of a dead man

I have plenty of critiques about each of the local trot orgs, but none of those issues are unique to them being trots. The local M-Ls and 'non-aligned' projects, on the other hand, are all splitting like wildfire.

>>2685601
3PBP.

>>2685611
Trotsky was obviously right on this one.

>>2685691
You must have met shit Trotskyites then, because Trotskyist literature recommended by my local parties fly in the face of these claims.
e.g. https://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/works/1975/lenin1/index.htm

>>2685611
>one incident where waiters spilled hot soup on him
You may not like it, you may even cry out in pain, but this is what grassroots worker agitation looks like.

I don't.

>>2685520
>Why do MLs hate Trotsky so much? What takes did he have that makes MLs absolutely despise him?
its not even his takes its his insufferable narcissism and absolute inability to adhere to democratic centralism with any kind of discipline. he literally could not take people(the majority) disagreeing with him so he decided to wreck instead.

deserved it

"Hate" implies a personal investment in the guy I simply don't have. To be clear I don't care for so-called "dispassionate" historical "analysis", but who Trotsky was and what he did matters less by the day. Some have brought up that he possibly assisted fascists and imperialist forces against the Soviet Union, and this is certainly a black mark against him personally, but this is ultimately inconsequential analyzing the tendency named after him. That tendency as well has largely lost any singular meaning in the modern day, and today the common usage of the term is essentially meaningless and not actually connected to any concrete politic or criticism of one. The main reason for this is that revisionist "Marxism-Leninism" and Trotskyism have both convergently evolved to be essentially identical (hence why WWP and PSL are rarely ever called out for their blatant Trotskyism) and in agreement on the theory of productive forces, centering revolution in Euro-American industry as the main necessity, downplaying national liberation struggle, practicing entryism, and denying that the class struggle continues under socialism within the Communist Party, in particular denying the possibility of a new bourgeoisie emerging within the Party — "Marxism-Leninism" instead converging on Trotskys concept of a "degenerated workers' state." Those Trotskyists who haven't converged with "Marxist-Leninists" in theory and practice have done even worse for themselves and are essentially just social fascists, or just straight-up fascists in the case of the Socialist Workers Party USA.

>>2685953
All this is to say that a robust understanding of the nature of revisionism more generally is a far more meaningful use of your time than prioritizing Trotskyism specifically.

>>2685642
Trvke

>>2685953
>"Hate" implies a personal investment in the guy I simply don't have.
It is wrong to not hate enemies of working peoples.
>To be clear I don't care for so-called "dispassionate" historical "analysis", but who Trotsky was and what he did matters less by the day. Some have brought up that he possibly assisted fascists and imperialist forces against the Soviet Union, and this is certainly a black mark against him personally, but this is ultimately inconsequential analyzing the tendency named after him.
Wrong. After trotksy died, trotskyites in all nations assisted imperialist forces. Mao and Stalin proved this. Trotskyites then attack Communist Parties, trotskyites now attack Communist Parties with abusive slander, calling them fascist.
>That tendency as well has largely lost any singular meaning in the modern day, and today the common usage of the term is essentially meaningless and not actually connected to any concrete politic or criticism of one. The main reason for this is that revisionist "Marxism-Leninism" and Trotskyism have both convergently evolved to be essentially identical (hence why WWP and PSL are rarely ever called out for their blatant Trotskyism) and in agreement on the theory of productive forces, centering revolution in Euro-American industry as the main necessity, downplaying national liberation struggle, practicing entryism, and denying that the class struggle continues under socialism within the Communist Party, in particular denying the possibility of a new bourgeoisie emerging within the Party — "Marxism-Leninism" instead converging on Trotskys concept of a "degenerated workers' state." Those Trotskyists who haven't converged with "Marxist-Leninists" in theory and practice have done even worse for themselves and are essentially just social fascists, or just straight-up fascists in the case of the Socialist Workers Party USA.
Wrong. Trotskyites are among principal enemies of working peoples because trotskyite deviation is mainstream in imperialist nations.

.

One must also remember that Trotsky had always been a Menshevik prior to the revolutions of 1917. This reflects in his utopian view of revolution and subsequent personal sabotage of the Brest-Litovsk treaty. I would say his main historical role was that of an effective organizer and public speaker, that of a principled marxist or "successor" to Lenin being entirely undeserved.
https://www.peacelandbread.org/post/on-the-problem-of-trotskyism

>>2685520
The man himself is not so offensive, he was a decent revolutionary and he led the red army during the civil war. It's only that he had to get all factional on everyone and then when they kicked him out of the party for being an annoying spaz he couldn't take the L and became somewhat of a collaborator with the imperialists. The tendency that this spawned is honestly worse than Trotsky in his own lifetime. The revolutionary international blablablah, have you read our newspaper? Etc

I consider his History of the Russian Revolution an essential read. It's very much like Marx's 18th Brumaire or Engel's history of the peasant wars. I think prople read too much theory and those kinds of works are important because they show how class consciousness is formed, how the classes clash for power and more importantly, who slow these developments are.
They're good reads to pull yourself away from doomerism.

His fans are even more annoying than regular Leninists.

He is also supposed to have ordered the Kronstadt rebels to be "shot like partridges". Ergo, he sucks.

>>2686103
trvthnova. orthodox trots supported the ussr under stalin and khruschev as well as other ml movements so any ml that hates them base their thoughts on the matter entirely on stalinist propaganda

>>2686312
Fuck the Kronstadt rebels tho? Why would you hedge your Trotsky opinion on these losers who just ended up joining the whites anyway?

>>2685611
On a personal level, Trotsky was legitimately an asshole

>>2686487
kek, imagine being there. i'd give 2 of my fingers to see trotsky sperging out at a child

>>2686487
This is just Stalinist propaganda.

>>2686312
>>2686432
Love how Anarchist cry about Trotsky killing them as somehow being unfair.
Like, obviously? They're opposite sides in a fucking war? The Kronstadt rebels and Makhnovites were trying to kill the Bolsheviks just as hard as the Bolsheviks were trying to kill the Anarchists.
Why do anarkiddies think the reds should have just lied down and given up for them?

>>2686637
Trotsky had nothing to do with Kronstadt though he did support it being crushed.

>>2686674
>Trotsky had nothing to do with Kronstadt
Who do you think issued the ultimatum to the rebels? Who ordered the attack?

>>2686256
I second this. Trotsky is a damn good writer in general, but History of the Russian Revolution is on still another level. Trotsky proves that Marxist history doesn't have to be strictly about statistics showing class formation and so on; instead he writes a vivid narrative history that puts the reader right in the middle of historic events, in a way which reminds me of John Reed's Ten Days That Shook the World. Then at the end of each chapter, he pulls out the statistics showing class formation and draws theoretical lessons from what took place. I actually think that the narrative Trotsky spins is very misleading in places (especially the stress he places on Lenin's April Theses being a supposed turning point for the party), but he tells it so damn well that I wholeheartedly recommend the book anyway.
>>2685701
Opposition to the Big Bang theory isn't just a Trotskyist thing, it's just that Alan Woods, permanent founder-leader of the most prominent Trot party today, opposes it on the basis of Engels' explicit philosophical opposition to a god-created finite universe (which in turn goes back to Holbach etc etc). In doing so he's following a long tradition of Marxists that are skeptical of the concept. I haven't studied this specifically, but I'm pretty damn sure that the Soviet academy under Stalin was also opposed to the Big Bang theory.

I fully support Woods speaking out against against cosmological orthodoxy (which is based on a lot less empirical evidence than you'd assume). What I oppose is being required to accept Woods's philosophy as some sort of prerequisite for political unity. Being forced to accept the great leader's views on subjects as distant as cosmology is an absurd example of everything that's wrong with socialist organizations today.

>>2686487
>>2686526
Having read a lot of Trotsky, that is absolutely something I could see him doing.