>>2766879Reasonable take.
>>2766856>Is the Trotskyist take right?More or less but the funny part is that the Trotskyists and anti-revisionist MLs ultimately have the same take on the fate of the USSR. They agree that it ultimately degenerated from a worker's state into one dominated by an undemocratic, complacent, and corrupt bureaucracy. They just disagree over who was in charge when this happened and laid its foundations. Trotskyists accuse Stalin and MLs accuse Khruschev. I think it's a moot point for two reasons. First, Khruschev couldn't have done what he did without the foundation built by Stalin, both in terms of the ultimate source of the bureaucracy itself (a social strata that would necessarily have taken shape during the Stalin years) and the repressive apparatus used to cement their power. Second, despite this issue the USSR still remained the most vigorous and steadfast defender of progressive forces globally until the genuine counter revolution took place under Gorbachev. So I think trying to pin everything on Khruschev is silly, he was neither the sole architect of the problems plaguing the USSR nor was he in power when they came to ultimate fruition.