Trotsky & Lenin Predicted A Third World War

[Rakhmetov]

... and if capitalist imperialism survives there will be a fourth world war and a fifth ... I see all this with great dread. Will the human species survive?


http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/02/lenin.htm

[scarletghoul]

Countless people have predicted a third world war. Its certainly possible. But we cant be sure, i mean, we made it through the cold war. Just.

[Black Sheep]

Big deal..
Imperialism often escalates to massive conflict and war.

[Bardo]

The world is constantly at war. As to if there will be another war in which global powers are born and others destroyed, its pretty much inevitable in my opinion.

[bailey_187]

prediction was before nukes and MAD so its meaningless.

[Rafiq]

The prophecy is inevitable!

Lenin will arise from the dead with his army of holy reds to stop the army of Bourgeois fallen angels.. err fallen comrades

[Rakhmetov]

prediction was before nukes and MAD so its meaningless.


Do you think the U.S. will herald the day of its decline from superpower to second rate status with indifference? I dread the approach of that day with trembling anxiety.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBMnDLQr7-M

[bailey_187]

Do you think the U.S. will herald the day of its decline from superpower to second rate status with indifference? I dread the approach of that day with trembling anxiety.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBMnDLQr7-M

Do you think the USA will engage in a mutually destructive nuclear war? Its suicide.

[Crimson Commissar]

Do you think the USA will engage in a mutually destructive nuclear war? Its suicide.
They would do anything to protect their own interests. We were dangerously close to nuclear war all throughout the second half of the 20th century, but that didn't stop the mad bloodthirsty american ruling class from seriously considering the option of it.

[Black Sheep]

prediction was before nukes and MAD so its meaningless.
What's MAD?

[ZeroNowhere]

What's MAD?Mutually assured destruction. Nuking a country with nukes to oblivion means that they shall nuke you to oblivion in the meantime. Remember the ending to Dr. Strangelove? Yes, something along those lines.

[mlgb]

What's MAD?

a cold war strategic policy. ,ore or less "we and they will build so many nuclear weapons that if we were to go to war we would all be utterly destroyed"

[TC]

Trotsky and Lenin were wrong, they underestimated the ability of imperialists to work together for their common class interests. Marx was also wrong that the capitalists would self destruct in vicious competition: instead they learned how to restrict their own intra-class competition and cooperate to maximize their collective, long term gains.

We need to analyze their actual behavior as its played out historically and not adhere to dogmatic predictions that proved incorrect. Their strategy responded to workers unrest - similarly our strategy must respond to theirs.

[Pretty Flaco]

Trotsky and Lenin aren't fucking prophets. Why are you topics always so stupid as fuck?

[piet11111]

Capitalists can only work together when the times are good but when the ship is sinking then they scramble to the lifeboats and crush everyone in their path.

[bricolage]

They would do anything to protect their own interests.
And their own interests include being nuked to fuck?

[Rakhmetov]

Trotsky and Lenin were wrong, they underestimated the ability of imperialists to work together for their common class interests. Marx was also wrong that the capitalists would self destruct in vicious competition: instead they learned how to restrict their own intra-class competition and cooperate to maximize their collective, long term gains.

We need to analyze their actual behavior as its played out historically and not adhere to dogmatic predictions that proved incorrect. Their strategy responded to workers unrest - similarly our strategy must respond to theirs.


"A war between the imperialist powers would have saved us even more. If we are obliged to put up with such scoundrels as the capitalist robbers, each of whom is ready to knife us, it is our prime duty to make them turn their knives against each other. When thieves fall out, honest men come into their own." "American can not come to term with Europe, that is a fact proven by history."---Lenin

[bricolage]

Sure, Lenin quotes prove everything.

[Iraultzaile Ezkerreko]

"A war between the imperialist powers would have saved us even more. If we are obliged to put up with such scoundrels as the capitalist robbers, each of whom is ready to knife us, it is our prime duty to make them turn their knives against each other. When thieves fall out, honest men come into their own." "American can not come to term with Europe, that is a fact proven by history."---Lenin

"Do not lie with a male as one would with a woman."---Leviticus 18:22

See, I can quote things that have no relevance based upon developments in the time since their utterance as well.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

A lot of people have predicted a lot of things.

[Hit The North]

Trotsky and Lenin were wrong, they underestimated the ability of imperialists to work together for their common class interests. Marx was also wrong that the capitalists would self destruct in vicious competition: instead they learned how to restrict their own intra-class competition and cooperate to maximize their collective, long term gains.


What the imperialists "want" is fairly irrelevant. The point is that they are at the helm of system that they cannot control and that is drawn, by its own inner logic, towards crisis. Europe, just prior to the outbreak of WW1, was strapped in with treaties, alliances and cross-alliances, all designed to maintain a stability that would ensure business could be carried out in the common class interests. This did not prevent the slide into catastrophe.

Of course, in the future, the great imperialists of the USA and China could sign up to whatever mutually satisfactory arrangements they see fit. It will not prevent global capitalism lurching into crisis. And the American and the Chinese states could not stand in some stable common partnership, no matter how much they would like to, any more than a man could stand still in rushing water.

To argue that the capitalists of the world have learned "to work together for their common class interest," is tantamount to suggesting that they have overcome the contradictions of their own system. Now that really would make Marxism wrong.

[Idahoan]

When everyone expects a war, there will be a war. If everyone expects peace, there can either be peace or war. If everyone expects sensability, then there can only be peace.

The problem with trying to predict things is just because you name an event [such as a third world war], you can predict such a generalized thing that it is doomed to happen. However, the individual specifications of it are wholly undecided. A war will happen in the future, to be sure, but whether or not it is world wide is up to the nations who would constitute such a war.

When a nation is idealistic, then it will in all certainty, have war, or massive civil strife. When everyone wants something a certain way, no if ands or buts, then there is no compromise. If a nation is pragmatic, and under the ideals of "when it's broke, fix it," then a nation will in all likelihoods avoid the pitfalls of the past until someone steps up who is an idealist and who ruins progress [sometimes this is doomed to happen and must be guarded against]. Therefore progress must be made to bridge the gap between ideology and sociology. In this work can a third world war be either postponed, or stopped.

[human strike]

I'd just like to say, this thread gave me a good laugh. Keep it up. :laugh:

[vDv]

Menghistu can you prove that you've actually seen first hand Lenin's crystal ball, and if so what magical predictions did it have to bestow upon you?

It'd be really useful if i could have a go too, don't mind the odd bet every now and then ;)

[bailey_187]

i think the last century has shown, world powers dont go to direct war with eachother when they have nukes but fund/support groups or countries to fight on their behalf. Who cares tho? Lenin predicted WW3 before WW2 even happend lol

[Kiev Communard]

I don't think the word "predicted" is appropriate here. It is rather more relevant to say that Lenin saw the possibility thereof, not that it was (or still is) inevitably bound to happen.

[Luís Henrique]

Oh, well. Unless we get rid of capitalism and its necessary consequence, imperialism, we will have more war. The specific form of the incoming war is, at this moment, unknowable. Maybe a direct, nuclear confrontation between superpowers. Maybe a steady increase in proxy wars throughout the third world, slowly sweeping into the first world itself.


Trotsky and Lenin were wrong, they underestimated the ability of imperialists to work together for their common class interests. Marx was also wrong that the capitalists would self destruct in vicious competition: instead they learned how to restrict their own intra-class competition and cooperate to maximize their collective, long term gains.

This is manifestly absurd. As BtB pointed out, it would mean that imperialists were able to put an end to imperialism. As a further consequence, it would mean that capitalists would also be able to put an end to capitalism; history would not be a tragedy, were individuals are drawn to completely unwanted consequences by forces beyond their comprehension, but a moralistic farce, in which evil is a mere misunderstanding that can be overcome by correctly aprehending one's self interests.


We need to analyze their actual behavior as its played out historically and not adhere to dogmatic predictions that proved incorrect.But those aren't "dogmatic predictions". We know what "dogmatic predictions" are. They advance dates, motives, pretexts, and forms, not merely the general content of what is at dispute in the deepest layers of history's movements (ie, in our case, the need to extract and realise surplus value).


Do you think the USA will engage in a mutually destructive nuclear war? Its suicide.

Yes, it would be suicide. Do you deem suicide impossible?

On the other hand...


They would do anything to protect their own interests. We were dangerously close to nuclear war all throughout the second half of the 20th century, but that didn't stop the mad bloodthirsty american ruling class from seriously considering the option of it.

They played chicken games, yes. An all-out nuclear war was never intended, though; if it was, I assure you I wouldn't be writing this sentence, nor would you be reading it.

And...


Do you think the U.S. will herald the day of its decline from superpower to second rate status with indifference? I dread the approach of that day with trembling anxiety.They certainly won't. But, first, this day is still far in the future (yes, we can see the first signs of what may well be the final crisis of American hegemony. But from this to the actual challenging of such hegemony is a great distance). And, second, there are many other things that American imperialism will do to counter such threats, before (before, in the chronological, logical, and interest-wise sences). They will start a forex war (as they already did). They will threaten the world with financial chaos by withdrawing the dollar from its role of international currency. They will actively boycott the industry and agriculture of other countries. They will deal in the internal contradictions of other countries, fostering coups d'Etat and revolutions. And they will, of course, threaten of war, and try to have others giving in to the sheer menace, rather than actually invading or bombing.

So... war is unavoidable. Its future forms are unpredictable, further than realising that there will never be a war like WWI or WWII again. All-out war (as opposed to localised proxy wars) is a last resource, not the first thing to be done, be either by the declining power, or its raising challengers. The occasion for it is not present, for there is, for the moment, no actually serious challenge of American hegemony. And, finally, war needs pretexts and justifications; these are still not built, and they are unlikely to be similar to previous pretexts such as territorial disputes or ideological rifts.

Luís Henrique

[zortaw]

I think a WWIII will be possible, think about the over-religious Arab world

[RNL]

What's MAD?
The Malevolent Agency of Destruction. It's an evil organization headed by the nefarious Dr Claw.

[human strike]

If there is ever a major war between large capitalist powers ever again I will eat my own head. You heard it here first, folks.

The enemy isn't other nation-states anymore, the enemy is the terrorist, he who would defy the global order of capital. Imperialism isn't that order, that order is Empire.

Amirite?

[Rakhmetov]

This quote by Trotsky can apply to Lybia:

The world, however, still remains very heterogeneous. The coercive imperialism of advanced nations is able to exist only because backward nations, oppressed nationalities, colonial and semicolonial countries, remain on our planet. The struggle of the oppressed peoples for national unification and national independence is doubly progressive because, on the one side, this prepares more favorable conditions for their own development, while, on the other side, this deals blows to imperialism. That, in particular, is the reason why, in the struggle between a civilized, imperialist, democratic republic and a backward, barbaric monarchy in a colonial country, the socialists are completely on the side of the oppressed country notwithstanding its monarchy and against the oppressor country notwithstanding its “democracy.”

Leon Trotsky

Lenin on Imperialism

(February 1939)


http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:CHBZFck0LyMJ:www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/02/lenin.htm+lenin+on+imperialism+1939&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

[gestalt]

So it shall be written, so it shall be done.

[agnixie]

Of course, MAD only works if all sides have bounce-the-rubbles levels of nuclear equipment; most of Russia's nukes are seemingly in storage, France seems to be moving away from its "nuke the first country to set foot on national territory on sight" policy and the US has to a limited extent also reduced its strategic nuclear forces.

Which basically means that the cold war deterrent, if it ever really deterred, well it's not so much there anymore. That could change things. Or it might not.

[DrStrangelove]

Nostradamus predicted a lot of bad shit would go down sometime in the vague future. Does that lend credence to any of his claims?