TL;DR I saw this one edit about Trotsky and, TBH, it hits all the right notes with me. Being very individualistic and such but not liking the Right, this edit and this quote hits me hard.
How accurate is it?
Am I just deranged?
IDK, just fuck my shit up fam.
>>2761972"Just declare war on the world lmao"
Easiest way to get more proles killed and yourself couped if you ever stagnate
>>2761979Call me a chud but it kinda seems like Total War was always the only answer to the forces arrayed against us.
Again: I don't see what about that makes him, "bad."
If you want a redpill on trotsky you should read his writings and read a little about the history of the rsdlp in general. Most of this material should be on marxists.org. Also, try to avoid sectarian shitflinging and buzzwords. Take his opinions with a grain of salt. Noj Rants on youtube has just released a video on one of his arguments with Lenin, seems like a good enough place to start.
>>2761979more proles have died since WW2 solely from capitalist exploitation dumbass
Trotsky is an interesting character. Unfortunately and ironically he gets more "great man'd" than almost any other communist figure. Many still hold on to the idea that he was somehow Lenin's guy or that he was betrayed by dastardly Stalin and he would have deffo saved the Soviet Union if he'd been "in charge", despite being really annoying and universally disliked by all those who interacted with him, besides his wife as he ate her pussy out real good.
The idea to do a Napoleon and declare war on the rest of europe and the world is imo ridiculous hubris on his part.
>>2761995And? It was never possible to navally invade the united states, cope
>>2761985>thing that never happened was inevitable?
>>2762003and? it was possible to isolate the US and watch it collapse
>>2762028How was that possible?
>>2761972The point of Trotskyism was that the working class is weak and incapable of socialist construction without securing help from the working class of at least Germany. Not only was this wrong in the Soviet Union, the most industrial country to exist in human history - People's Republic of China - had to work from an even worse position in terms of class struggle. They were always wrong and those who chose not to recognize that ended up being useful idiots to the united states and other imperialists, some even personally ended up being leaders of imperialism. Stalin's line objectively proved to be correct: Soviet Union built up an industry STRONGER than Germany's without any help and kept control over the peasant class.
>>2762033flood evrope with 9/0 support aa inf, paradrop the uk, research better subs for convoy raiding, duh
>>2761972>it hits all the right notes with me.thats the problem with trotskyism is all vibes and aurafarming
>>2761985You don’t see that’s unrealiatic?
Just look into
· his history of vacillation between whatever political current he thought would garner him the most personal clout at any given time (first menshevism, until the October revolution (oops), then bolshevism, until whatever line secured the continuation of his particular job was pivoted from (oops), then what let him to rub shoulders with imperialist social fascists (*icepick*)
· his attempts at predicting the future
- (in particular what would happen to the USSR after the party center's 5YP…
- then what would happen to the USSR directly following WW2…)
The only things positive about the guy was from the period of which we took direct orders and executed the line of the party under Lenin's leadership (thus, something he is not the respectable, notable, source of).
Trotskyism then is this incoherent mess of political positions and views (crypto-anarchist ultraleftism v adventurist-vanguardist anti-parliamentarism v social fascism with revolutionary pretension) exactly because of this vacuous "base".
>>2761992is nojrants even communist? guy seems straight up anti-communist judging from the comments under his videos
>>2762083also i remember a thread about him some while back, is it gone?
I think hes based purely because he still makes stalinoids seethe even a 100 years after his death.
>>2762088>stalinoidsyup, into the woodchipper you go. either answer my question or fuck off
>>2762089>yup, into the woodchipper you goMake me fucking pussy ass bitch.
>>2762083I don't know but I don't really care, his videos are pretty high quality. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't like the bolsheviks judging by some of his comments.
>>2762091>Make me fucking pussy ass bitch.Kek, who hurt you fucktard? Seethe
>>2762100Thats what i thought bitch
>>2762112
go away spammer
>>2762145
suck my girlcock. it makes zero difference to me whether the person behind a dogshit post is a bot or a retard
>>2762083bait or retardation, call it
>>2762145
Your post is literally AI fuck off clanker.
>>2761972Quote is real (source is Terrorism and Communism) but it's not an accurate meme. Trotsky opposed the war in Poland on the grounds that they wouldn't be received as liberators but as conquerors. Don't be stupid doing ideology shopping because you saw a cool meme online.
He would be cool as a crazy weed uncle that shows up to your famalies place every xmas and then gets high on meth and starts ranting about killing all the porkies but you shouldnt put him in control of the dinner roast or he will try to cook roasts for every single house on the bloc at the same time.
>>2762266Well he wasnt wrong and the ussr ended up losing the war anyways
>>2762316I wouldn't call it a defeat
Lenin - based
Trotsky - mega based
Stalin - cringe
Mao - mega cringe
>>2762476Yeah the soviets intended to and actually wanted to lose land
>>2762536Poland launched an unprovoked invasion of the Soviets and failed miserably, or do people only remember the Warsaw part?
>>2762586Yeah and the soviets launched an offensive against poland and failed miserably and ended up having to cede land that was under their control before the war started.
Why do ml's live in in an alternate fantasy land when it comes to the history of the soviet union?
>>2762586>but they lost first :)And what did they lose exactly compared with the other loss ?
>>2762630>Yeah and the soviets launched an offensive against poland and failed miserably and ended up having to cede land that was under their control before the war started.What did he say that was wrong?
>>2762618It wasn't under their control cause there was continuous fighting and Polish forces had been taking over territory since achieving independence and dismissing Russo-Polish border talks.
Lenin's words:
>Despite this difficult situation, peace was signed on terms less advantageous to Poland than the earlier ones. The earlier frontier lay 50 versts to the east, whereas it is now 50 versts to the west. Thus, though we signed a peace at a time favourable only to the enemy, when our troops were on the retreat and Wrangel was building up his offensive, we signed a peace treaty on more favourable terms.>We have won. Anyone who examines the map will see that we have won, that we have emerged from this war with more territory than we had before it started>>2762630Renouncing the restoration of the 1772 borders and any chance of realizing those imperial ambitions and the Międzymorze. The chance of "destroying bolshevism". Having to break relations with the Ukrainian National Republic, having to recognize the Ukrainian and Belarusian Soviet Republics (with the failure to gain Kiev and Minsk, the biggest strategic targets for their interests besides Vilnius), having to shut down anti-soviet paramilitaries and insurgents in Poland, and so on.
>Of all his missteps, the most shocking was arguably his contacts with U.S. officials in Mexico, the focus of this writing, specifically his decision to pass on sensitive information about communists and alleged Comintern agents to the U.S. State Department in order to increase his prospects of obtaining a U.S. visa. Trotsky passed on information to U.S. consular official Robert G. McGregor, including details about individuals suspected of Soviet affiliation. Chase (1995, 31) writes:
<Trotsky told McGregor in considerable detail of the allegations and evidence he had compiled while preparing “The Comintern and the GPU,” although he made no mention of that essay. He gave to McGregor the names of Mexican publications, political and labor leaders, and government officials allegedly associated with the PCM. He charged that one of the Comintern’s leading agents, Carlos Contreras (the alias for Vittorio Vidali), served on the PCM’s Directing Committee. He also spoke of the efforts of Narciso Bassols, the former Mexican Ambassador to France, whom he claimed was a Soviet agent, to get Trotsky deported from Mexico. Five days later, Charles Cornell, one of Trotsky’s secretaries, visited the Consulate and gave to George Shaw, a member of the consular staff, a “strictly confidential memo” from Trotsky which discussed the activities in Mexico of Enrique Martinez Riqui, purportedly a GPU agent in Latin America who allegedly “planned and directed” the 1940 purge the PCM. Riqui allegedly operated out of New York and “has direct contact with Moscow … McGregor’s memorandum is dated July 13, 1940 and is attached to George P. Shaw to Secretary of State, July 15, 1940, National Archives RG 84. Upon receipt, the State Department transmitted McGregor’s memo to the FBI.
>Related to this was Trotsky’s intent, after receiving an invitation in October of 1939, to speak before the resolutely anti-communist, proto-McCarthyist body, the “Special Committee on Un-American Activities,” chaired by Martin Dies, to discuss “the history of Stalinism.” This never transpired, as the opportunity was revoked, but Trotsky’s openness to working with American authorities and a quintessentially anti-labour and anti-communist body invites a number of questions that many historians and writers have ignored, downplayed, or hand-waved away. Trotsky’s choices in these matters were part of a broader pattern of decision-making, tracing back to the Revolution, that produced a form of tunnel vision, in which Trotsky, compelled by his own unyielding self-assuredness, and often to the irritation of his allies, justified his political missteps as politically necessary in the fight against enemies, even when such maneuvers deteriorated his political standing among his base of support.https://thestalinera.substack.com/p/trotskys-american-dream >>2761972stalin was a shite military strategist, he only beat the nazis because of the sheer numbers of disposable "comrades" in his army
>>2771114He was shit but the soviets essentially won because they just had better production and management they could bring to bear, not because muh meat waves. On the other hand nazis lost despite having a competent military and control of all of Europe, now that's retarded
>>2771128the nazis lost entirely after operation barbarossa, where the scum hitler betrayed his peace treaty with stalin. europe would have been ruled by fascists and communists if the retard didnt try to do what napoleon failed to do. its funny when people talk about "fair fight" this and that, when it was hitler who first broke the rules and paid the price.
>>2771131Fascists never fight fair. The whole ideology is bereft of anything resembling honor.
Unique IPs: 28