Against Trotskyism: A Reading Guide

[Rodrigo]

By The Marxist-Leninist (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/), and some additions by me and other people

“The entire edifice of Leninism at the present time is built on lies and falsification and bears within itself the poisonous elements of its own decay” – Leon Trotsky, letter to Chkheidze, 1913.

The question of Trotsky (http://www.marxists.org/archive/olgin/1935/trotskyism/02.htm) is not merely a historical question. Firstly and most importantly it is a question of political line. There are significant political reasons that Trotskyism has failed to ever lead a successful revolution. It is a fact that Trotsky, on the one hand, and Lenin and Stalin on the other, put forward two very different and opposing lines on almost every major question for the international communist movement. Rejected by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and by the Soviet people as well, Trotsky then turned bitterly to the organization of counter-revolution, both within the Soviet Union and internationally.
To help clearify these important points for the international communist movement, The Marxist-Leninist has put together this reading guide. It has been incorporated into the Marxist-Leninist Study Guide (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/study-guide/) as well. The main texts here are (1) M.J. Olgin’s outstanding study of Trotskyism which deals well with the political differences between Bolshevism and Trotskyism, (2) an article by Nadezhda Krupskaya (the wife of Lenin) on Trotsky’s distortions of the history of the October Revolution, and (3) an eyewitness account by Harry Haywood, the great African American Communist leader, of Trotsky’s ideological defeat by Stalin. Many supplementary texts are provided as well. For more on the contributions of Stalin to the ICM, see Long Live the Universal Contributions of Comrade Joseph Stalin (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2009/12/20/long-live-the-universal-contributions-of-comrade-joseph-stalin/).
http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/trotskyism.jpg?w=215&h=300 (http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/trotskyism.jpg)



“It is the duty of the Party to bury Trotskyism as an ideological trend.” – Joseph Stalin
Beginning and Essential readings


Trotskyism: Counter-Revolution in Disguise (http://www.marxists.org/archive/olgin/1935/trotskyism/index.htm) by M. J. Olgin
The Lessons of October (http://www.marxists.org/archive/krupskaya/works/october.htm) by Nadezhda Krupskaya
Two Tracts On Trotskyism (http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv11n2/trotskyism.htm) by Nadezhda Krupskaya
Trotsky’s Day in Court (http://www.marxists.org/archive/haywood/black-bolshevik/ch06.htm) by Harry Haywood

Supplemental readings



Disruption of Unity Under Cover of Outcries for Unity (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/may/x01.htm) by V. I. Lenin
Once Again on the Trade Unions: The Current Situation and the Mistakes of Trotsky and Bukharin (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/jan/25.htm) by V. I. Lenin
Trotskyism or Leninism? (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1924/11_19.htm) by J. V. Stalin
The October Revolution and the Tactics of the Russian Communists (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1924/12.htm) by J. V. Stalin
Concerning Questions of Leninism (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1926/01/25.htm) by J. V. Stalin
The Trotskyist Opposition Before and Now (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1927/10/23.htm) by J. V. Stalin
The Party and the Opposition (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1927/11/23.htm) by J. V. Stalin
Mastering Bolshevism (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1937/03/03.htm) by J. V. Stalin
On the Final Victory of Socialism in the U.S.S.R. (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/01/18.htm) by J. V. Stalin
Struggle of the Bolsheviks Against Trotskyism and the Anti-Party August Bloc (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/x01/ch04.htm#4._) from the History of the CPSU (Bolsheviks) – Short Course
Defeat of the Trotskyites (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/x01/ch09.htm#4.) from the History of the CPSU (Bolsheviks) – Short Course
The Errors of Trotskyism: A Symposium (http://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/britain/pamphlets/1925/trotskyism/index.htm)
The Case of the Trotskyite-Zinovievite Terrorist Centre: Report of Court Proceedings (http://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/law/1936/moscow-trials/index.htm)
The Case of the Anti-Soviet Block of Rights and Trotskyites (http://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1938/trial/)
The trial of the Bukharinist social-democratic group (http://marxism.halkcephesi.net/Ludo%20Martens/node105.html) by Ludo Martens
The Moscow Trial Was Fair (http://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/britain/pamphlets/1936/moscow-trial-fair.htm) by D.N. Pritt & Pat Sloan
Evidence of Leon Trotsky’s Collaboration with Germany and Japan (http://clogic.eserver.org/2009/Furr.pdf) (.pdf) by Grover Furr
Left in Form, Right in Essence: A Critique of Contemporary Trotskyism (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/critiques/guardian/index.htm) by Carl Davidson (October League)
On Trotskyism: Problems of Theory and History (http://www.marx2mao.com/Other/OT73NB.html) by Kostas Mavrakis
Trotskyism or Leninism? (Preface) (http://www.mltranslations.org/Britain/trotvslenin.htm) by Harpal Brar (CPGB-ML)
Stalin and the Chinese Revolution – Two lines on the Chinese Revolution: the line of the Comintern and Stalin versus the line of the Trotskyist opposition (http://www.lalkar.org/issues/contents/nov2009/chineserev.html) by Harpal Brar
How Trotskyism ‘remembers’ the Spanish Civil War (http://cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=proletarian&subName=display&art=229) a polemic agaainst the Socialist Workers Party (Britain) by the CPGB-ML
Trotsky’s struggle against Fascism, according to one of his latter-day admirers (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/trotsky%e2%80%99s-struggle-against-fascism-according-to-one-of-his-latter-day-admirers/) from Lalkar
Revolution in Colombia: ISO Stands on the Wrong Side (http://frso.org/about/statements/2008/isocolombia.htm) a polemic against the International Socialist Organization by the FRSO
Lessons from the RNC: Mass Mobilization and Militant Actions Advance the Struggle (http://frso.org/about/statements/2008/frso-lessons-from-rnc.htm) a polemic against Socialist Alternative by FRSO

[Tablo]

Seriously?

[Commissar Rykov]

Seriously?
He has a heavy cross to bear. The tendency war must continue at...All. Costs.

[Tablo]

I just don't understand why there should be a guide against Trotskyism. People should just read and come to their own political conclusions, not join a tendency to be told why everyone else is wrong by some batshit crazy party.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Sectarianism is fun! Its what drew me to the left in the first place.

[Le Socialiste]

Thank God you're focusing on the eradication of Trostkyism - after all, how else are we going to liberate the working-class?

[Commissar Rykov]

Thank God you're focusing on the eradication of Trostkyism - after all, how else are we going to liberate the working-class?
I lol'd.

[bricolage]

“It is the duty of the Party to bury Trotskyism as an ideological trend.” – Joseph Stalin
I'm convinced.

[StoneFrog]

Out of all the reading guides you could of come up with...

[Crux]

Trying to out-crazy Grover Furr? The lies, falsifications and degenration of stalinism never fails to amaze. It would be amusing if one forgets the thousands of bolsheviks murdered by Stalin's bureucracy.

[tir1944]

Funny how no one bothered to actually address some of the texts from this Guide...

[Crux]

Funny how no one bothered to actually address some of the texts from this Guide...
Uh lies from the 1930's is fairly unconvincing, I could give you a book list too but nah, fantasists that swallow the lies of the moscow trials are so few and far between it's just not worth it. Hell most stalinists are wise enough not to make such fools of themselfes, in public at least.

[tir1944]

Cool story bro.:cool:
I mean you should really try and at least quote some relevant article or something on the subject...

[Crux]

Cool story bro.:cool:
I mean you should really try and at least quote some relevant article or something on the subject...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/ssf/

[black magick hustla]

still the eternal bogeyman of trotskyism? hey pal you came late to history, trotskyism hasn't been a meaningful force for a while, but so aren't you so w/e

[Crux]

still the eternal bogeyman of trotskyism? hey pal you came late to history, trotskyism hasn't been a meaningful force for a while, but so aren't you so w/e
The mail from the kremlin must have been late.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Cool story bro.:cool:
I mean you should really try and at least quote some relevant article or something on the subject...

I mean you should really try and use this forum's search function. Do you realize how many dozens of threads just like this one there have been? Look up "Hotel Bristol". Why do a few people people feel the need to obsessively slam Trotsky?

[eric922]

Trotsky's been dead for 70 years, I think it is safe to assume the Stalinists don't have to fear him anymore, unless someone finds the Necromonicon and brings him back as Zombie-Trotsky. "Socialism in one graveyard is ridiculous, we need a Permanent Zombie Revolution."

[Sasha]

Why do a few people people feel the need to obsessively slam Trotsky?

its what happens when you confuse politics with religion.
but hey, whatever keeps them busy...

[Aurora]

Not one mention of Hotel Bristol OP? what are you a revisionist or something?

[Rodrigo]

Why do a few people people feel the need to obsessively slam Trotsky?

Maybe because Trotskyist are for absurdities and distortions theoretically and practically, divide every movement they get in, did nothing in socialist countries for the construction of socialism --but instead preferred defamation and convenience with capitalist and fascist propaganda against USSR--, make very simplistic historical analysis trying to prove <ABC> "was a monster and have to be rejected!" and that "there was no socialism at all!" Most Trots deny the armed struggle (and, thus, act in opposition to Marxism), or refuse to join guerrillas because of "Stalinist" members.
That is, Trotskyism is a weapon of the anticommunists acting inside the left.

Oh, and this term "Stalinism" is pure propagandist and was useful to revive anticommunism in the left, since it dictates: everything bad that happened in a "real socialist" country was Stalin's fault, accusing him with the nicknames "dictator", "authoritarian", "bloody", "bureaucratic", etc. That sounds like Bakunin's stupid slander on Marx, not words from the mouth of a real Marxist.

Did you know Trotsky was rehabilitated by Khrushchov's revisionism and that's why there's a lot of Trots today? Before the lies and destructive criticism towards Stalin spread by him, in any place there were just a few selective Trotskyists.

I made this thread because I was reading this blog and got the idea of posting two guides that guy made, one on Trotskyism and other on revisionists like Khrushchov, Togliatti and Tito. It's funny, indeed, to see a lot of "libertarian" and "democratic" communists ranting about my thread, but none read a single work cited in the first post. AND, THEN, YOU STILL WANT TO CRITICIZE THE THREAD! :confused: :thumbdown:

[Crux]

Did you know Trotsky was rehabilitated by Khrushchov's revisionism and that's why there's a lot of Trots today? Before the lies and destructive criticism towards Stalin spread by him, in any place there were just a few selective Trotskyists.

I made this thread because I was reading this blog and got the idea of posting two guides that guy made, one on Trotskyism and other on revisionists like Khrushchov, Togliatti and Tito. It's funny, indeed, to see a lot of "libertarian" and "democratic" communists ranting about my thread, but none read a single work cited in the first post. AND, THEN, YOU STILL WANT TO CRITICIZE THE THREAD! :confused: :thumbdown::laugh:
In fact I have been unfortunate enough to have seen the OP before. And did you know that Kruschov never ever rehabilitated Trotsky and whoever told you that was probably lying about more thing's than that.

As for guerillaism that is another debate (a debate of tactics rather than strategy I'd say) but it does reveal the kind of hardman immaturity many online stalinists espouse. Let me however briefly remind you that Leo Trotsky founded the red army.

[Q]

*plop*

Nevermind, don't feed the troll.

[Rodrigo]

still the eternal bogeyman of trotskyism? hey pal you came late to history, trotskyism hasn't been a meaningful force for a while, but so aren't you so w/e

It's significantly meaningful in the leftist movement here (there's a lot of Trots in the biggest party, the socialdemocrat Worker's Party - PT).

There's something "strange" about it... Trotskyism is just meaningful in countries with no socialist experience and lots of anticommunist propaganda. And the Marxist-Leninist (wrongly depicted by the opposition as "Stalinist", this name which automatically makes you a bloody totalitarian, satanist, cannibal, anti-Christ dictator) forces are the ones organizing the workers on the struggle against capitalism, raising class consciousness. What Trots do? Oh, they're so Marxists, dude! They wait for their parties to be elected on the bourgeois government! Isn't that nice of those true revolutionaries? Oh, yeah, I forgot M-L and M-L-M movements are "Stalinists", thus, we are evil, we are spawns of Satan who are for the "crude and authoritarian" armed struggle, for the "unfair" collectivism and genocide of the population. Why? Because we are "Stalinist"! Like you all did, a Trot does not have the work to argue or study Marxism, just use the "Stalinist arguement" and you will win every debate anywhere!

[PhoenixAsh]

yeeeeh this thread again...


Goddamnit people...everybody knows...

...if you are not an Anarchist you are just too fucking mainstream and no matter how many silly little guides you post...you are just sooooo freaking passe.


http://gothamist.com/assets_c/2010/04/phpZwArZZAM-thumb-105x105-499260.jpg



Tendency Wars III: The exile strikes back

Now showing in threads on Revleft.

[DaringMehring]

:laugh:
In fact I have been unfortunate enough to have seen the OP before. And did you know that Kruschov never ever rehabilitated Trotsky and whoever told you that was probably lying about more thing's than that.

As for guerillaism that is another debate (a debate of tactics rather than strategy I'd say) but it does reveal the kind of hardman immaturity many online stalinists espouse. Let me however briefly remind you that Leo Trotsky founded the red army.

Who gives a shit what Rodrigo the Zombie thinks? He's obviously got zero critical reasoning skills.

I wouldn't even reply.

[o well this is ok I guess]

It's funny how any mention of Orwell by stalinists always includes him being a so-called police spy, but never everything he accused the stalinists of doing.

[Rodrigo]

:laugh:
In fact I have been unfortunate enough to have seen the OP before. And did you know that Kruschov never ever rehabilitated Trotsky and whoever told you that was probably lying about more thing's than that.

As for guerillaism that is another debate (a debate of tactics rather than strategy I'd say) but it does reveal the kind of hardman immaturity many online stalinists espouse. Let me however briefly remind you that Leo Trotsky founded the red army.

I said Khrushshov's revisionism rehabilitated Trotsky, not the own Khrushchov in words. As consequence of the frenetic campaign the direction of CPSU against Stalin, the trotskyists, for a long time "political cadavers", were "resurrected" and made a commotion about the need of "rehabilitate" Trotsky. In November of 1961, when the XXII Congress of the CPSU ended, in a "Letter to the XXII Congress of CPSU and to the Central Committee of the CPUS", the International Secretariat of the so-called IV International wrote that Trotsky declared in 1937 that in the future "a monument would be lifted in honor of the victims of Stalin"; "today", asserts the letter, "this prediction became reality."

Trotsky didn't found the Red Army, he was just one of its organizers, nothing more than that. Along Vorochilov, Dzerzhinski, Frunze, Kuibishev, Budieny, Kirov, Stalin and other Bolsheviks, that the Red Army was created and forged. By Lenin's proposal, a Central Executive Committee of All-Russia marks, at November 27, 1919, the exceptional merits of Stalin in the Civil war and he's decorated with the Order of the Red Banner.

In Lenin's text called The Tasks of the Proletariat In Our Revolution, from September 1917, he says:


"There is only one way to prevent the restoration of the police, and that is to create a people's militia and to fuse it with the army (the standing army to be replaced by the arming of the entire people)." (page 70)

On Lenin's "The Crisis Has Matured" (September 29, 1917):


VI
What, then, is to be done? We must aussprechen was ist, "state the facts", admit the truth that there is a tendency, or an opinion, in our Central Committee and among the leaders of our Party which favours waiting for the Congress of Soviets, and is opposed to taking power immediately, is opposed to an immediate insurrection. That tendency, or opinion, must be overcome.[48] (Page 82)

48 - The reference is to the attitude of Kamenev, Zinoviev, Trotsky and their followers. Kamenev and Zinoviev opposed Lenin's plan for an armed uprising, declaring that the working class of Russia was incapable of carrying out a socialist revolution. They slid down to the Menshevik position of demanding a bourgeois republic. Trotsky insisted on a postponement of the uprising until the Second All-Russia Congress of Soviets, which meant frustrating the insurrection because this gave the Provisional Government a chance to concentrate its forces on the opening day of the Congress and crush the uprising.

[Q]

Can this be moved to chit-chat? Surely this trolling can't be taken as serious political discussion?

[Rodrigo]

Can this be moved to chit-chat? Surely this trolling can't be taken as serious political discussion?

Can you people stop using fail "arguments" like this one and actually read the fucking texts and debate them?

Thanks. ;)

[Q]

Can you people stop using fail "arguments" like this one and actually read the fucking texts and debate them?

Thanks. ;)

Been there, done that. I suggest no one else wastes their time with it.

[black magick hustla]

It's significantly meaningful in the leftist movement here (there's a lot of Trots in the biggest party, the socialdemocrat Worker's Party - PT).

si, ya me se esa.

trotskyists are also "big" in mexico, and many are organized in small entryist factions inside bourgeois social democratic parties like the PRD. who gives a fuck, "many" in this context means nothing because in the grand scheme of politics they are insignificant, not more insignificant than the "marxist-leninist" philosophy students failed attempts to instigate the countryside in irrelevant armed groups. the truth is that the phantom of "trotskyism" is only taken seriously as an "enemy" by irrelevant "anti-revisionist" nerds like yourself.





There's something "strange" about it... Trotskyism is just meaningful in countries with no socialist experience and lots of anticommunist propaganda. And the Marxist-Leninist (wrongly depicted by the opposition as "Stalinist", this name which automatically makes you a bloody totalitarian, satanist, cannibal, anti-Christ dictator) forces are the ones organizing the workers on the struggle against capitalism, raising class consciousness. What Trots do? Oh, they're so Marxists, dude! They wait for their parties to be elected on the bourgeois government! Isn't that nice of those true revolutionaries?
honestly, the trotskyists always had a larger base in the urban working class than the maoists in most countries were maoists operated. maoists never cared about the working class, they always used the peasantry as their base.





Oh, yeah, I forgot M-L and M-L-M movements are "Stalinists", thus, we are evil, we are spawns of Satan who are for the "crude and authoritarian" armed struggle, for the "unfair" collectivism and genocide of the population. Why? Because we are "Stalinist"! Like you all did, a Trot does not have the work to argue or study Marxism, just use the "Stalinist arguement" and you will win every debate anywhere!

you don't have to "win" anything, you guys are insignificant.

[Who?]

I'm high right now am I'm cracking up at this thread. I don't know why there aren't more left-wing comics.

The funny part is I don't even really like Trotsky.

[Commissar Rykov]

I'm high right now am I'm cracking up at this thread. I don't know why there aren't more left-wing comics.

The funny part is I don't even really like Trotsky.
The 5 year plan demands an upswing of shit tendency war threads! We can not fall behind due to Imperialist Sabotage of our Logic Engines!

[Rodrigo]

trotskyists are also "big" in mexico, and many are organized in small entryist factions inside bourgeois social democratic parties like the PRD. who gives a fuck, "many" in this context means nothing because in the grand scheme of politics they are insignificant, not more insignificant than the "marxist-leninist" philosophy students failed attempts to instigate the countryside in irrelevant armed groups.

And there's you trying to deny the revolutionary efforts of Marxist-Leninists, just because after 1961 and 1991 we're lower in number comparing to social-democrats, social-liberals, and so on.


honestly, the trotskyists always had a larger base in the urban working class than the maoists in most countries were maoists operated. maoists never cared about the working class, they always used the peasantry as their base.

Number is one thing. Quality is another, much different. And Trots are more on the academic base than on the working class base. Here most workers are for the social-democrats, so what? The Worker's Party is still a complete shit.


you don't have to "win" anything, you guys are insignificant.

And that's how you argue against Marxism-Leninism! "La la la you're insignificant, I don't care about you la la la" Like a child who close his eyes and cover his ears, showing his tongue to the opponent.

[black magick hustla]

Number is one thing. Quality is another, much different. And Trots are more on the academic base than on the working class base.


i am gonna scram for a sec but i want to reply to this before i go. this is a lie. trotskyists had always made an effort to enter what they consider class organizations, like trade unions. in the U.S., where i lived for a while, the "radical left" that had the largest prescence in trade unions were trotskyists. in the 50s, in bolivia, the miners organizations were basically led by trotskyists. i am not a trotskyist and i think the obsession of winning over people by heading into labor organizations is misguided, but if anything, maoist has always started as people from university going down to the countryside. it is a fundamentally petit bourgeois perspective.

[Astarte]

Maybe because Trotskyist are for absurdities and distortions theoretically and practically, divide every movement they get in, did nothing in socialist countries for the construction of socialism --but instead preferred defamation and convenience with capitalist and fascist propaganda against USSR--, make very simplistic historical analysis trying to prove <ABC> "was a monster and have to be rejected!" and that "there was no socialism at all!" Most Trots deny the armed struggle (and, thus, act in opposition to Marxism), or refuse to join guerrillas because of "Stalinist" members.
That is, Trotskyism is a weapon of the anticommunists acting inside the left.

Oh, and this term "Stalinism" is pure propagandist and was useful to revive anticommunism in the left, since it dictates: everything bad that happened in a "real socialist" country was Stalin's fault, accusing him with the nicknames "dictator", "authoritarian", "bloody", "bureaucratic", etc. That sounds like Bakunin's stupid slander on Marx, not words from the mouth of a real Marxist.

Did you know Trotsky was rehabilitated by Khrushchov's revisionism and that's why there's a lot of Trots today? Before the lies and destructive criticism towards Stalin spread by him, in any place there were just a few selective Trotskyists.

I made this thread because I was reading this blog and got the idea of posting two guides that guy made, one on Trotskyism and other on revisionists like Khrushchov, Togliatti and Tito. It's funny, indeed, to see a lot of "libertarian" and "democratic" communists ranting about my thread, but none read a single work cited in the first post. AND, THEN, YOU STILL WANT TO CRITICIZE THE THREAD! :confused: :thumbdown:

Why isn't "Report of Court Proceedings in the Case of the Anti-Soviet "Bloc of Rights and Trotskyites" on the reading list?
http://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1938/trial/
or

http://art-bin.com/art/omoscowtoc.html

[Le Socialiste]

Maybe because Trotskyist are for absurdities and distortions theoretically and practically,

And Stalinists aren't?


divide every movement they get in,

And Stalinists don't?


did nothing in socialist countries for the construction of socialism

Too easy. :rolleyes:

[RED DAVE]

And Trots are more on the academic base than on the working class base.Speaking with regard to the USA, you're full of shit. The Trotskyist tendency as a whole has slowly gained a toehold in the working class over the past 40 years while the Maoists and Stalinists have accomplished zilch.

I'll match the ISO and Solidarity against the RCP and PL any time. (Or aren't they real Maoists?)

RED DAVE

[Die Neue Zeit]

Speaking with regard to the USA, you're full of shit. The Trotskyist tendency as a whole has slowly gained a toehold in the working class over the past 40 years while the Maoists and Stalinists have accomplished zilch.

I'll match the ISO and Solidarity against the RCP and PL any time. (Or aren't they real Maoists?)

And speaking with regard to the fSU, the "Anti-Revisionists," while gaining ground, are looking in all the wrong places like Hotel Bristol to make further gains against Trotskyist tendencies within the Left Front and such.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Trots are more on the academic base than on the working class base I could never understand the hate many ML's have with anything to do with the academia.

[Per Levy]

Can you people stop using fail "arguments" like this one and actually read the fucking texts and debate them?

Thanks. ;)

you know why everyone is shitting this thread? because it was done before a 1000 times on this site, people are sick of these threads. hell im not even that long here and im sick of those threads. besides you can look up all the "trotzki was an evil git" threads on this side anyway, and there a lot of them.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

By The Marxist-Leninist (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/)

“The entire edifice of Leninism at the present time is built on lies and falsification and bears within itself the poisonous elements of its own decay” – Leon Trotsky, letter to Chkheidze, 1913.

The question of Trotsky (http://www.marxists.org/archive/olgin/1935/trotskyism/02.htm) is not merely a historical question. Firstly and most importantly it is a question of political line. There are significant political reasons that Trotskyism has failed to ever lead a successful revolution. It is a fact that Trotsky, on the one hand, and Lenin and Stalin on the other, put forward two very different and opposing lines on almost every major question for the international communist movement. Rejected by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and by the Soviet people as well, Trotsky then turned bitterly to the organization of counter-revolution, both within the Soviet Union and internationally.
To help clearify these important points for the international communist movement, The Marxist-Leninist has put together this reading guide. It has been incorporated into the Marxist-Leninist Study Guide (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/study-guide/) as well. The main texts here are (1) M.J. Olgin’s outstanding study of Trotskyism which deals well with the political differences between Bolshevism and Trotskyism, (2) an article by Nadezhda Krupskaya (the wife of Lenin) on Trotsky’s distortions of the history of the October Revolution, and (3) an eyewitness account by Harry Haywood, the great African American Communist leader, of Trotsky’s ideological defeat by Stalin. Many supplementary texts are provided as well. For more on the contributions of Stalin to the ICM, see Long Live the Universal Contributions of Comrade Joseph Stalin (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2009/12/20/long-live-the-universal-contributions-of-comrade-joseph-stalin/).
http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/trotskyism.jpg?w=215&h=300 (http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/trotskyism.jpg)



“It is the duty of the Party to bury Trotskyism as an ideological trend.” – Joseph Stalin
Beginning and Essential readings


Trotskyism: Counter-Revolution in Disguise (http://www.marxists.org/archive/olgin/1935/trotskyism/index.htm) by M. J. Olgin
The Lessons of October (http://www.marxists.org/archive/krupskaya/works/october.htm) by Nadezhda Krupskaya
Trotsky’s Day in Court (http://www.marxists.org/archive/haywood/black-bolshevik/ch06.htm) by Harry Haywood

Supplemental readings



Disruption of Unity Under Cover of Outcries for Unity (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/may/x01.htm) by V. I. Lenin
Once Again on the Trade Unions: The Current Situation and the Mistakes of Trotsky and Bukharin (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/jan/25.htm) by V. I. Lenin
Trotskyism or Leninism? (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1924/11_19.htm) by J. V. Stalin
The October Revolution and the Tactics of the Russian Communists (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1924/12.htm) by J. V. Stalin
Concerning Questions of Leninism (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1926/01/25.htm) by J. V. Stalin
The Trotskyist Opposition Before and Now (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1927/10/23.htm) by J. V. Stalin
The Party and the Opposition (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1927/11/23.htm) by J. V. Stalin
Mastering Bolshevism (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1937/03/03.htm) by J. V. Stalin
On the Final Victory of Socialism in the U.S.S.R. (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/01/18.htm) by J. V. Stalin
Struggle of the Bolsheviks Against Trotskyism and the Anti-Party August Bloc (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/x01/ch04.htm#4._) from the History of the CPSU (Bolsheviks) – Short Course
Defeat of the Trotskyites (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/x01/ch09.htm#4.) from the History of the CPSU (Bolsheviks) – Short Course
The Errors of Trotskyism: A Symposium (http://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/britain/pamphlets/1925/trotskyism/index.htm)
The Case of the Trotskyite-Zinovievite Terrorist Centre: Report of Court Proceedings (http://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/law/1936/moscow-trials/index.htm)
The Moscow Trial Was Fair (http://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/britain/pamphlets/1936/moscow-trial-fair.htm) by D.N. Pritt & Pat Sloan
Evidence of Leon Trotsky’s Collaboration with Germany and Japan (http://clogic.eserver.org/2009/Furr.pdf) (.pdf) by Grover Furr
Left in Form, Right in Essence: A Critique of Contemporary Trotskyism (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/critiques/guardian/index.htm) by Carl Davidson (October League)
On Trotskyism: Problems of Theory and History (http://www.marx2mao.com/Other/OT73NB.html) by Kostas Mavrakis
Trotskyism or Leninism? (Preface) (http://www.mltranslations.org/Britain/trotvslenin.htm) by Harpal Brar (CPGB-ML)
Stalin and the Chinese Revolution – Two lines on the Chinese Revolution: the line of the Comintern and Stalin versus the line of the Trotskyist opposition (http://www.lalkar.org/issues/contents/nov2009/chineserev.html) by Harpal Brar
How Trotskyism ‘remembers’ the Spanish Civil War (http://cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=proletarian&subName=display&art=229) a polemic agaainst the Socialist Workers Party (Britain) by the CPGB-ML
Trotsky’s struggle against Fascism, according to one of his latter-day admirers (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/trotsky%e2%80%99s-struggle-against-fascism-according-to-one-of-his-latter-day-admirers/) from Lalkar
Revolution in Colombia: ISO Stands on the Wrong Side (http://frso.org/about/statements/2008/isocolombia.htm) a polemic against the International Socialist Organization by the FRSO
Lessons from the RNC: Mass Mobilization and Militant Actions Advance the Struggle (http://frso.org/about/statements/2008/frso-lessons-from-rnc.htm) a polemic against Socialist Alternative by FRSO


tl;dr past the first of the "essential readings". Is it just me or has anyone else noticed the "anti-revisionists" love to revise things constantly to fit their view?

[Philosopher Jay]

Thank you for publishing Comrade Krupskaya's essay on Trotsky's "Lessons of October." I think the ending is most valuable:


"Comrade Trotsky devoted the whole of his powers to the fight for the Soviet power during the decisive years of the revolution. He held out heroically in his difficult and responsible position. He worked with unexampled energy and accomplished wonders in the interests of the safeguarding of the victory of the revolution. The Party will not forget this.
But the achievements of October have not yet been fully consummated. We must continue to work determinedly for their fulfilment. And here it would be dangerous and disastrous to deviate from the historically tested path of Leninism. And when such a comrade as Trotsky treads, even unconsciously, the path of revision of Leninism, then the Party must make a pronouncement."


It seems that she felt that Trotsky gave too much credit to Lenin's policies for the October victory and not enough credit to the masses. This, she concludes was an unconscious revision of Leninism on Trotsky's part. She praises him highly saying "He worked with unexampled energy and accomplished wonders in the interests of the safeguarding of the victory of the revolution. The Party will not forget this."


I did not know that Lenin's wife was such a fan and supporter of Trotsky. I would not have know it if you had not published this. Thank you.

[#FF0000]

hey let me go call up some of my old co workers from the factory and ask them what they think of trotskyism and marxism leninism and maoism

oh look at that they don't give a shit

[Commissar Rykov]

hey let me go call up some of my old co workers from the factory and ask them what they think of trotskyism and marxism leninism and maoism

oh look at that they don't give a shit
They are obviously reactionary jerks! Who needs workers? Ideologues of the World Unite! You have nothing to lose but your skulls!

[Rooster]

So a born again Marxist is preaching canonical texts of St Paul Stalin again against the sin of deviation from the holy party line?

[Kornilios Sunshine]

I smell tendency wars!

[Rss]

Finally something worthwhile reading in Politics. Thank you, comrade. I suggest posting more in appropriate group boards to avoid trolls in the future.

[Cork Socialist]

Maybe because Trotskyist are for absurdities and distortions theoretically and practically, divide every movement they get in, did nothing in socialist countries for the construction of socialism --but instead preferred defamation and convenience with capitalist and fascist propaganda against USSR--, make very simplistic historical analysis trying to prove <ABC> "was a monster and have to be rejected!" and that "there was no socialism at all!" Most Trots deny the armed struggle (and, thus, act in opposition to Marxism), or refuse to join guerrillas because of "Stalinist" members.
That is, Trotskyism is a weapon of the anticommunists acting inside the left.

Oh, and this term "Stalinism" is pure propagandist and was useful to revive anticommunism in the left, since it dictates: everything bad that happened in a "real socialist" country was Stalin's fault, accusing him with the nicknames "dictator", "authoritarian", "bloody", "bureaucratic", etc. That sounds like Bakunin's stupid slander on Marx, not words from the mouth of a real Marxist.

Did you know Trotsky was rehabilitated by Khrushchov's revisionism and that's why there's a lot of Trots today? Before the lies and destructive criticism towards Stalin spread by him, in any place there were just a few selective Trotskyists.

I made this thread because I was reading this blog and got the idea of posting two guides that guy made, one on Trotskyism and other on revisionists like Khrushchov, Togliatti and Tito. It's funny, indeed, to see a lot of "libertarian" and "democratic" communists ranting about my thread, but none read a single work cited in the first post. AND, THEN, YOU STILL WANT TO CRITICIZE THE THREAD! :confused: :thumbdown:
Trotsky was not rehabilitated by Kruschev :S What your saying there is wrong buddy. Try reading some texts that weren't penned by Lord Stalin and his buddies :D

[Rodrigo]

Thank you for publishing Comrade Krupskaya's essay on Trotsky's "Lessons of October." I think the ending is most valuable:

It seems that she felt that Trotsky gave too much credit to Lenin's policies for the October victory and not enough credit to the masses. This, she concludes was an unconscious revision of Leninism on Trotsky's part. She praises him highly saying "He worked with unexampled energy and accomplished wonders in the interests of the safeguarding of the victory of the revolution. The Party will not forget this."

I did not know that Lenin's wife was such a fan and supporter of Trotsky. I would not have know it if you had not published this. Thank you.

You're welcome. There's another text of Krupskaya on Trotsky, written at 1936:

http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv11n2/trotskyism.htm

Good reading! ;)



Trotsky was not rehabilitated by Kruschev :S What your saying there is wrong buddy. Try reading some texts that weren't penned by Lord Stalin and his buddies

Read post #28.

[Rodrigo]

Why isn't "Report of Court Proceedings in the Case of the Anti-Soviet "Bloc of Rights and Trotskyites" on the reading list?

Thanks! I'll add it, and also another one about Bukharin.

There's a text by D.N. Pritt and Pat Sloan on the subject, but doesn't cite Bukharin.

In Portuguese (Portugal): http://www.hist-socialismo.com/docs/PrittSloan.pdf

[Lenina Rosenweg]

An epistle from wise old Uncle Leon;




Uncle Leon

IN ADDITION TO being Lenin’s wife which – by the way, was not accidental – Krupskaya was an outstanding personality in her devotion to the cause, her energy and her purity of character. She was unquestionably a woman of intelligence. It is not astonishing, however, that while remaining side by side with Lenin, her political thinking did not receive an independent development. On far too many occasions, she had had the opportunity to convince herself of his correctness, and she became accustomed to trust her great companion and leader. After Lenin’s death Krupskaya’s life took an extremely tragic turn. It was as if she were paying for the happiness that had fallen to her lot.
Lenin’s illness and death – and this again was not accidental – coincided with the breaking point of the revolution, and the beginning of Thermidor. Krupskaya became confused. Her revolutionary instinct came into conflict with her spirit of discipline. She made an attempt to oppose the Stalinist clique, and in 1926 found herself for a brief interval in the ranks of the Opposition. Frightened by the prospect of split, she broke away. Having lost confidence in herself, she completely lost her bearings, and the ruling clique did everything in their power to break her morally. On the surface she was treated with respect, or rather with semi-honors. But with the apparatus itself she was systematically discredited, blackened and subjected to indignities, while in the ranks of the YCL the most absurd and gross scandal was being spread about her.
Stalin always lived in fear of a protest on her part. She knew far too much. She knew the history of the party. She knew the place that Stalin occupied in this history. All of the latter day historiography which assigned to Stalin a place alongside of Lenin could not but appear revolting and insulting to her. Stalin feared Krupskaya just as he feared Gorky. Krupskaya was surrounded by an iron ring of the GPU Her old friends disappeared one by one; those who delayed in dying were murdered either openly or secretly. Every step she took was supervised. Her articles appeared in the press only after interminable, insufferable and degrading negotiations between the censors and the author. She was forced to adopt emendations in her text, either to exalt Stalin or to rehabilitate the GPU. It is obvious that a whole number of vilest insertions of this type was made against Krupskaya’s will, and even without her knowledge. What recourse was there for the unfortunate crushed woman? Completely isolated, a heavy stone weighing upon her heart, uncertain what to do, in the toils of sickness, she dragged on her burdensome existence.
To all appearances, Stalin has lost the inclination to stage sensational trials which have already succeeded in exposing him before the whole world as the dirtiest, the most criminal and most repulsive figure in history. Nevertheless, it is by no means excluded that some sort of new trial will be staged, wherein new defendants will relate how Kremlin physicians under the leadership of Yagoda and Beria took measures to expedite Krupskaya’s demise.
But with or without the aid of physicians, the regime that Stalin had created for her undoubtedly cut short her life.
Nothing can be further from our mind than to blame Nadezhda Konstantinovna for not having been resolute enough to break openly with the bureaucracy. Political minds, far more independent than hers, vacillated, tried to play hide and seek with history – and perished. Krupskaya was to the highest degree endowed with a feeling of responsibility. Personally she was courageous enough. What she lacked was mental courage. With profound sorrow we bid farewell to the loyal companion of Lenin, to an irreproachable revolutionist and one of the most tragic figures in revolutionary history.
March 4, 1939
L.T.

[Rodrigo]

Finally something worthwhile reading in Politics. Thank you, comrade. I suggest posting more in appropriate group boards to avoid trolls in the future.

Indeed. :D I thank you, comrade.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Capitalism is facing its worst crisis since the 1930s. What we need are discussions of worker's tactics and stategies, economics, and geopolitics. Threads that rehash what is frankly ridiculous slander are tiresome and not the least bit productive. If you want to make a case for ML tactics versus Trotskyist tactics in today's world, fine, I'm all ears. You don't have to like Trotsky or his followers if you don't want but what is the point of rehashing 70 year old historic disputes?.

These "hard as steel" Trot bashers are not activists themselves but mostly middle class kids who've read too much of the wrong literature and have way too much time on their hands.

BTW, Noone takes Grover Furr the least bit seriously. Mike Ely, a Maoist, very ably showed how absurd he is on this forum a few months back.

[Who?]

Speaking with regard to the USA, you're full of shit. The Trotskyist tendency as a whole has slowly gained a toehold in the working class over the past 40 years while the Maoists and Stalinists have accomplished zilch.

I'll match the ISO and Solidarity against the RCP and PL any time. (Or aren't they real Maoists?)

RED DAVE

It's a shame Solidarity is about as Trotskyist as the PLP is Maoist (maybe even less). The ISO and the RCP are both almost completely irrelevant. But, back when things mattered in the 60's and 70's Maoists had way more of a presence and were way more involved with the American working class. Before the rise of the New Left obviously the Marxist-Leninists of the CPUSA had the largest presence. American Trotskyism has always been irrelevant, just like Trotskyism in general pretty much anywhere, ever.

Attack theory all you want, there are flaws in Maoist and Marxist-Leninist theory after all. But don't play the significance game.

The most active modern groups seem to be the Marcyites by the way. Not that they matter anymore than the rest of the alphabet soup.


I could never understand the hate many ML's have with anything to do with the academia.

See:


i am gonna scram for a sec but i want to reply to this before i go. this is a lie. trotskyists had always made an effort to enter what they consider class organizations, like trade unions. in the U.S., where i lived for a while, the "radical left" that had the largest prescence in trade unions were trotskyists. in the 50s, in bolivia, the miners organizations were basically led by trotskyists. i am not a trotskyist and i think the obsession of winning over people by heading into labor organizations is misguided, but if anything, maoist has always started as people from university going down to the countryside. it is a fundamentally petit bourgeois perspective.

It's a typical left-wing insult to accuse other ideological trends of being too "academic" and as a result being alienated from the working class. I've heard people refer to the Shining Path as petit-bourgeois because Gonzalo used to be a professor, without going any further, that was their only argument (because they really don't know shit about the Shining Path). It's a poor tactic but it's hardly restricted to Marxist-Leninists.

[Art Vandelay]

Capitalism is facing its worst crisis since the 1930s. What we need are discussions of worker's tactics and stategies, economics, and geopolitics. Threads that rehash what is frankly ridiculous slander are tiresome and not the least bit productive. If you want to make a case for ML tactics versus Trotskyist tactics in today's world, fine, I'm all ears. You don't have to like Trotsky or his followers if you don't want but what is the point of rehashing 70 year old historic disputes?.

These "hard as steel" Trot bashers are not activists themselves but mostly middle class kids who've read too much of the wrong literature and have way too much time on their hands.

BTW, Noone takes Grover Furr the least bit seriously. Mike Ely, a Maoist, very ably showed how absurd he is on this forum a few months back.

If you cannot understand this then there is nothing left to be said. At a time when the lot of the working class is getting worse and worse supposed revolutionaries can do nothing but rehash ancient and frankly, at this day in age irrelevant and useless, arguments. It is a sad sad time for the left, perhaps even more sad than I thought.

I have not been on this site that long but am already so sick of the tendency wars, they manage to permeate almost every thread. I cannot even imagine how the long time members deal with it after having seen it so many times.

By the way to all the Stalinist out there and yes I am calling you a Stalinist and not a M-L you slandered Trotsky in the politburo, exiled him from the USSR, murdered his followers the world over, then jammed an ICE PICK INTO HIS SKULL. You won! Happy now? Or do you still feel the need to make fun of him on the internet and call in "counter-revolutionary?" Sorry but grow up, get a fucking life and do something productive for the working class.

[thesadmafioso]

Trotsky's been dead for 70 years, I think it is safe to assume the Stalinists don't have to fear him anymore, unless someone finds the Necromonicon and brings him back as Zombie-Trotsky. "Socialism in one graveyard is ridiculous, we need a Permanent Zombie Revolution."

Well, way to let the cat out of the bag.

Another wonderful anarcho-trotskyist plot spoiled...

[Rodrigo]

I could never understand the hate many ML's have with anything to do with the academia.

I don't hate academia, but academicism.

[Commissar Rykov]

I don't hate academia, but academicism.
ac·a·dem·i·cism (http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/abreve.gifkhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gif-dhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ebreve.gifmhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gif-shttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gifzhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gifm) also a·cad·e·mism (http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gif-khttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/abreve.gifdhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gif-mhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gifzhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gifm)n. Traditional formalism, especially when reflected in art.

A Picasso man?

[RedTrackWorker]

Funny how no one bothered to actually address some of the texts from this Guide...



Capitalism is facing its worst crisis since the 1930s. What we need are discussions of worker's tactics and stategies, economics, and geopolitics. [snip] If you want to make a case for ML tactics versus Trotskyist tactics in today's world, fine, I'm all ears. You don't have to like Trotsky or his followers if you don't want but what is the point of rehashing 70 year old historic disputes?

As annoying as the original post is, I agree with tir1944 versus Lenina Rosenweg here (though I sympathize with the reaction against this worn-out bullshit), which is that it would have been better if people had addressed the content of the post, because my problem with it is not that it's "rehashing 70 year old...disputes" but that the way it's presented does not clarify anything as it's a collection of out-of-context articles from Lenin and outright lies and amalgams from Stalinists. As annoying as it is, some posters like Rodrigo may not have been shown sources and arguments that explain that and part of this forum should be pointing them to such. There should probably also be some way to avoid repeating the same articles every time by having them stickied or some other means of referring people to certain threads.

A couple of sources would be the Dewey Commission (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/dewey/) and the journal Revolutionary History for primary documents from stuff like the Spanish Civil War. On China, Harold Isaacs's wonderful book Tragedy of the Chinese Revolution would be great to read for someone looking to understand these things.

Again, I would love it if someone would post a serious collection of articles critiquing Trotskyism...however "old" the issues were. The problem is that that is not what we have here.

[Per Levy]

BTW, Noone takes Grover Furr the least bit seriously. Mike Ely, a Maoist, very ably showed how absurd he is on this forum a few months back.

here is the link to the thread: http://www.revleft.com/vb/mike-ely-grover-t157009/index.html?t=157009

that thread is actually a good read for once. at least it is a better read then this anti-trotzky reading guide.

[RED DAVE]

Sigh.


It's a shame Solidarity is about as Trotskyist as the PLP is Maoist (maybe even less).I think you need to justify an attack like that.


The ISO and the RCP are both almost completely irrelevant.The ISO and Solidarity are slowly building a presence in the working class. The RCP is ... wearing Avakian t-shirts.


But, back when things mattered in the 60's and 70's Maoists had way more of a presence and were way more involved with the American working class.Simply not true. I was "industrialized" into the working class, as the IS (the ancestor group of the ISO and Solidarity) called it, in the late 60s, and the Maoist presence was nil. They were too busy fighting it out with the Weathermen inside SDS. In addition, to the extent that they had a presence, they were as sectarian as hell. I can tell you stories. And please don't credit the various Black groups such as DRUM, etc., as Maoist. There was Maoist iflucence, yes, but they were not Maoist. By the 70s, when the working class was beginning to mobilize en masse in the USA, the Maoists as a tendency were gone.


Before the rise of the New Left obviously the Marxist-Leninists of the CPUSA had the largest presence.This is true; however, this presence had been sliding since the 1940s and by 1960 was virtually nonexistent. There were lots of ex-CPers around, and some of them played a good role in some arenas, but the Party itself had shot its bolt. And to call it Marxist-Leninist past, say, 1936, or earlier, is a joke.


American Trotskyism has always been irrelevant, just like Trotskyism in general pretty much anywhere, ever.Yeah, yeah. Tell that to opposition groups in the Teamsters, Auto, Teachers, etc.

Let me say that I'm not crazy about the role that Solidarity and the ISO have played in recent years. There is much to criticize, but compared to other tendencies inside the working class, their work has been significant.

RED DAVE

[CommieTroll]

I mean you should really try and use this forum's search function. Do you realize how many dozens of threads just like this one there have been? Look up "Hotel Bristol". Why do a few people people feel the need to obsessively slam Trotsky?

Why do people here need to continuously slam Stalin? But hey, as you said, sectarianism is fun:laugh:

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Poor little rich kid sitting behind his computer circle jerking by himself because he's decided to be 'hip' and 'rebellious' by supporting old Uncle Joe in the ceaseless task to eradicate the counter-revolutionary, Japanese-German imperialist spy-saboteur-wrecker Trotsky, from this earth. Nevermind he's been dead for 70 years, what we need is to form a new labour batallion to temper any working class enthusiasim for this reactionary ideology of the devil.

Nevermind that millions of people are out of work, the world economy is going to pot and many people in places like Haiti, Somalia etc. don't (i'm being literal here...) have two grains of rice to rub together. Yeah, nevermind that, let's focus on this idiocy.

Hopefully the OP will get bored when his parents buy him a new Apple Mac and he discovers something even more 'hip', like Ed Hardy clothing and Che Guevara posters.:rolleyes:

[The Man]

trotskyism hasn't been a meaningful force for a while

And it never will be. So I don't know why people are posting guides to eradicate an extremely small ideological group.

[CommieTroll]

Poor little rich kid sitting behind his computer circle jerking by himself because he's decided to be 'hip' and 'rebellious' by supporting old Uncle Joe in the ceaseless task to eradicate the counter-revolutionary, Japanese-German imperialist spy-saboteur-wrecker Trotsky, from this earth. Nevermind he's been dead for 70 years, what we need is to form a new labour batallion to temper any working class enthusiasim for this reactionary ideology of the devil.

Nevermind that millions of people are out of work, the world economy is going to pot and many people in places like Haiti, Somalia etc. don't (i'm being literal here...) have two grains of rice to rub together. Yeah, nevermind that, let's focus on this idiocy.

Hopefully the OP will get bored when his parents buy him a new Apple Mac and he discovers something even more 'hip', like Ed Hardy clothing and Che Guevara posters.:rolleyes:

I never knew that you could tell that much about a person from their RevLeft posts, you're basically throwing insults that halt any potential for serious debate but I don't see much going on. Tendency wars :wub:

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Personally I believe this thread belongs in the trash can though, ironically, given the sectarian nature of the left, perhaps 'Politics' is the best sub-forum for this type of thread.:lol:

It's not a tendency war that i'm part of because i'm neither a M-L nor a trot.

[Who?]

I think you need to justify an attack like that.





Solidarity describes itself as "a democratic, revolutionary socialist, feminist, anti-racist organization."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(U.S.)#cite_note-1) It comes out of the Trotskyist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyist) tradition but has departed from many aspects of traditional Leninism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leninist) and Trotskyism. It is more loosely organized than most "democratic centralist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_centralist)" groups, and it does not see itself as the vanguard of the working class (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguardism) or the nucleus of a vanguard.




The ISO and Solidarity are slowly building a presence in the working class. The RCP is ... wearing Avakian t-shirts.


Solidarity isn't a Trotskyist organization.
Please, elaborate on whatever the ISO is doing, I'd like to know. I just see them sitting around campus pretending to be revolutionaries.



Simply not true. I was "industrialized" into the working class, as the IS (the ancestor group of the ISO and Solidarity) called it, in the late 60s, and the Maoist presence was nil. They were too busy fighting it out with the Weathermen inside SDS. In addition, to the extent that they had a presence, they were as sectarian as hell. I can tell you stories. And please don't credit the various Black groups such as DRUM, etc., as Maoist. There was Maoist iflucence, yes, but they were not Maoist. By the 70s, when the working class was beginning to mobilize en masse in the USA, the Maoists as a tendency were gone.


I guess you're just going to disregard pretty much the entire NCM. I'd consider DRUM to be Maoist if you're throwing Solidarity in with the Trots. Hell, honestly, I'd even consider Weatherman to be Maoist.





Let me say that I'm not crazy about the role that Solidarity and the ISO have played in recent years. There is much to criticize, but compared to other tendencies inside the working class, their work has been significant.



Really? More significant than the work PSL is doing with ANSWER?

[goldentony111]

great article

[ProletarianResurrection]

BTW, Noone takes Grover Furr the least bit seriously. Mike Ely, a Maoist, very ably showed how absurd he is on this forum a few months back.

Mike Ely who cheer leaded all the way the betrayal of the UCPN-M a Maoist? He seems also to forget that you could easily make the same hysterical attacks on Mao using similar sources to the ones he uses to make hysterical attacks on Stalin.

[ThePintsizeslasher]

Maybe the revolutionary left could get somewhere if it didn't spend half it's time defending and glorifying long dead mostly white men. As someone else said, a comparison of Trot vs M-L organizing strategies could be useful, but really, this is simply ridiculous, trying to vindicate and demonize men who most working class people couldn't give a damn about.

I would like to say also, that this veneration of certain men is a bit off-putting. And the tendency for most state socialists to name their movements after men repels me.

All I can say of the merits of Trots is that the World Socialist Web Site provides good class analysis and reporting from worker struggles, and the SEP are doing some great work with their Coalition Against Utility Shut-offs.

Leftists need to focus more on actions, cause I can tell you after working 40+ hours a week in addition attending 12 hours of classes a week, I'm in no mood to analyze lengthy, dry documents that purport to show the criminality and dishonesty of long dead men and take sides in a silly little fight. Most working class people would never bother picking up any socialist literature. We're facing the greatest crisis of capitalism since the Depression and the ruling classes are fresh out of ideas-the working class needs to stand up, united, for a socialist struggle, not squabble about which revolutionary leader they wish they could fellate.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Maybe the revolutionary left could get somewhere if it didn't spend half it's time defending and glorifying long dead mostly white men. As someone else said, a comparison of Trot vs M-L organizing strategies could be useful, but really, this is simply ridiculous, trying to vindicate and demonize men who most working class people couldn't give a damn about.

I would like to say also, that this veneration of certain men is a bit off-putting. And the tendency for most state socialists to name their movements after men repels me.

All I can say of the merits of Trots is that the World Socialist Web Site provides good class analysis and reporting from worker struggles, and the SEP are doing some great work with their Coalition Against Utility Shut-offs.

Leftists need to focus more on actions, cause I can tell you after working 40+ hours a week in addition attending 12 hours of classes a week, I'm in no mood to analyze lengthy, dry documents that purport to show the criminality and dishonesty of long dead men and take sides in a silly little fight. Most working class people would never bother picking up any socialist literature. We're facing the greatest crisis of capitalism since the Depression and the ruling classes are fresh out of ideas-the working class needs to stand up, united, for a socialist struggle, not squabble about which revolutionary leader they wish they could fellate.

I couldn't agree more, and in trying to elucidate such a point, you can see that my above post descended into the mire with anger and rage.

Having said that, you should be conscious not to sully Stalin and Trotsky because they were white men. There's nothing wrong with the white man. You should beat them down because they both followed awful political lines.

[Magón]

Got to love the thinking of the 30s and 40s, even in the 21st Century.

[RedTrackWorker]

While the sorry state of the left may make the past few comments understandable to some degree, I would say to the posters that "activity" is not enough, that cliche "class consciousness" is needed--the workers come to power not by accident and not as a battering ram but as thinking and fighting men and women who have to understand society in order to change it.

Insofar as these debates are about personalities, I agree with you, but I think that certain "personalities" have summarized and contributed more than others to clarifying the ideas the workers' movement needs to come to power. I do agree it is unfortunate that those names have become symbols for a movement--like Marxist or Trotskyist. But if you want organizational unity of the class in action, you have to ask yourself: how can we get that? I agree with that old dead guy Trotsky who said: "Our thesis is that the unity of the working class can be realized only on a revolutionary basis."

[ComradeGrant]

This is why people hate us. Seriously, no one cares about Trotsky or Stalin anymore.

[Binh]

I found this from the link to one of the Krupskaya texts posted at the beginning of the thread:

"Comrade Trotsky devoted the whole of his powers to the fight for the Soviet power during the decisive years of the revolution. He held out heroically in his difficult and responsible position. He worked with unexampled energy and accomplished wonders in the interests of the safeguarding of the victory of the revolution. The Party will not forget this." http://www.marxists.org/archive/krupskaya/works/october.htm

So this is the official line now against Trotsky? Wow, what a criminal counter-revolutionary he was!! :laugh:

[TheGodlessUtopian]

This is why people hate us. Seriously, no one cares about Trotsky or Stalin anymore.

Agreed,but it is more due to the propaganda.I think most people have no idea who either figures are.

Can everyone at least agree that Stalinism is as about as relevant as Trostskyism? (and/or vise versa) My mind is racing with what could be accomplished if the left united as socialists and actually fought the capitalists instead of each other.

[RedTrackWorker]

Can everyone at least agree that Stalinism is as about as relevant as Trostskyism? (and/or vise versa) My mind is racing with what could be accomplished if the left united as socialists and actually fought the capitalists instead of each other.

Again, how are we going to unite as socialists? I think that it can only be a unity based on an understanding of society--a science, a theory--class consciousness. Not just "if we all get together it'll be alright" (which if that were possible, I would have a very hard time understanding how we're not all in a socialist society already). For that process, I do not think the tradition of Stalinism is as relevant as that of Trotskyism.

[Agent Equality]

It makes me giggle to watch these MLs bickering back and forth about which cult of personality is bestest

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Again, how are we going to unite as socialists? I think that it can only be a unity based on an understanding of society--a science, a theory--class consciousness. Not just "if we all get together it'll be alright" (which if that were possible, I would have a very hard time understanding how we're not all in a socialist society already). For that process, I do not think the tradition of Stalinism is as relevant as that of Trotskyism.

My idea of uniting is simply doing away with these personality cults.Without these figures there wouldn't be much reason for the left to be devided;instead of dozens of different Trot and Stalinist parties there would be only one united party.Now...I am pretty sure this is an impossible vision but it is good to dream.

[Homo Songun]

Again, how are we going to unite as socialists? I think that it can only be a unity based on an understanding of society--a science, a theory--class consciousness. Not just "if we all get together it'll be alright" (which if that were possible, I would have a very hard time understanding how we're not all in a socialist society already). For that process, I do not think the tradition of Stalinism is as relevant as that of Trotskyism.

I presume you meant that Trotskyism's relevance to socialist unity is only in terms of it being a negative example. :lol:

[thefinalmarch]

Why do people here need to continuously slam Stalin? But hey, as you said, sectarianism is fun:laugh:
Why? Because Stalin was an anti-worker piece of shit, and so are you - except in your case, you are irrelevant and utterly insignificant in the grand political scheme of things.

Sectarianism is definitely fun when Stalinists are on the receiving end.

[Dogs On Acid]

Can't we all just get along...

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

My idea of uniting is simply doing away with these personality cults.Without these figures there wouldn't be much reason for the left to be devided;instead of dozens of different Trot and Stalinist parties there would be only one united party.Now...I am pretty sure this is an impossible vision but it is good to dream.

There is more to Socialism than Trotsky and Stalin and their respective 'isms'.:thumbup1:

And why dream of one party? It would never be united and would either fail as such if it tried to be a mass party, or if it tried to be a Vanguard would fall into the same Leninist traps of the past, with the same sectarianism resulting.

[Iron Felix]

Do you honestly think so lowly of members of this forum to post such ridiculous propoganda?

[Rodrigo]

I found this from the link to one of the Krupskaya texts posted at the beginning of the thread:

"Comrade Trotsky devoted the whole of his powers to the fight for the Soviet power during the decisive years of the revolution. He held out heroically in his difficult and responsible position. He worked with unexampled energy and accomplished wonders in the interests of the safeguarding of the victory of the revolution. The Party will not forget this." http://www.marxists.org/archive/krupskaya/works/october.htm

So this is the official line now against Trotsky? Wow, what a criminal counter-revolutionary he was!! :laugh:

What about reading the rest now, including another of Krupskaya also in the beginning of the thread? ;)

[TheGodlessUtopian]

There is more to Socialism than Trotsky and Stalin and their respective 'isms'.:thumbup1:

And why dream of one party? It would never be united and would either fail as such if it tried to be a mass party, or if it tried to be a Vanguard would fall into the same Leninist traps of the past, with the same sectarianism resulting.

Well,I don't have any problems with Leninist style parties,but I am thinking that the left wouldn't so much as be united within a "party" but rather an organizational group which coordinates protests,strikes,fundraisers,leftist publications and everything else which is needed to help bring about revolution.So in short,kinda like a giant organizing "party."

[RED DAVE]

Well,I don't have any problems with Leninist style parties,but I am thinking that the left wouldn't so much as be united within a "party" but rather an organizational group which coordinates protests,strikes,fundraisers,leftist publications and everything else which is needed to help bring about revolution.So in short,kinda like a giant organizing "party."This will never happen. The differences between the tendencies are real, especially between, broadly, the Maoist/Stalinists and, broadly, the Trotskyists and anarchists. I think that there are possibilities between Trots and labor anarchists for cooperation, but given the history and current practices of the Maoist/Stalinists, frankly I doubt it.

Hey, I'm willing to work with anyone. But I have extensive experience with all tendencies, and I've been stabbed in the back many times.

RED DAVE

[TheGodlessUtopian]

This will never happen. The differences between the tendencies are real, especially between, broadly, the Maoist/Stalinists and, broadly, the Trotskyists and anarchists. I think that there are possibilities between Trots and labor anarchists for cooperation, but given the history and current practices of the Maoist/Stalinists, frankly I doubt it.

Hey, I'm willing to work with anyone. But I have extensive experience with all tendencies, and I've been stabbed in the back many times.

RED DAVE

Yes,unfortunately I am aware that this will probably never happen.As I said a little bit ago,"it's good to dream." If only though.:cool:

[vyborg]

please someone explains to this poor guys that the XX congress of the CP of the USSR is over. thank you

[Homo Songun]

I think that there are possibilities between Trots and labor anarchists for cooperation
I'd be way leery of of Trots if I was an Anarchist, and I'm not just talking about Kronstadt. On the other hand, "Bombard the Headquarters"...

[RED DAVE]

I'd be way leery of of Trots...Of course you would.

Would you care to explain why?

RED DAVE

[DaringMehring]

Of course you would.

Would you care to explain why?

RED DAVE

Why do you want him to explain why? Why do you even post in Rodrigo the Zombie's thread of Stalinist slanders?

You and I both are or have been active with actual workers. In that time, how many Shmuel Katz or Rodrigo's have you encountered? For me, zero. I've encountered several Trotskyists, and anarchists, though. The Zombie Stalinists are not relevant whatsoever to the workers movement in the USA. Their thoughts on Trotsky are even more irrelevant.

So why do you care how they create fantasies based on 30s-era falsifications?

[JoeySteel]

You and I both are or have been active with actual workers. In that time, how many Shmuel Katz or Rodrigo's have you encountered? For me, zero. I've encountered several Trotskyists, and anarchists, though. The Zombie Stalinists are not relevant whatsoever to the workers movement in the USA. Their thoughts on Trotsky are even more irrelevant.


This is still anecdote. I could say truthfully that in every workplace I've ever been involved in organizing, I have only known one Trotskyist, and I have nothing but praise for him as a comrade. I did meet in every workplace though at least one or two lurking MLs, Zizek fans, supporters of the Iraqi resistance or supporters of the Chinese Communist Party. That isn't causing me to make any sweeping generalizations.

Most Trotskyists I know are concentrated in union bureaucracies or political party bureaucracies. Lot of decent folks though.

[DaringMehring]

This is still anecdote. I could say truthfully that in every workplace I've ever been involved in organizing, I have only known one Trotskyist, and I have nothing but praise for him as a comrade. I did meet in every workplace though at least one or two lurking MLs, Zizek fans, supporters of the Iraqi resistance or supporters of the Chinese Communist Party. That isn't causing me to make any sweeping generalizations.

Most Trotskyists I know are concentrated in union bureaucracies or political party bureaucracies. Lot of decent folks though.

I've met plenty of MLs outside of the workplace --- by going to their meetings in fact. And, many of them were friendly and I would consider comrades in a loose sense. BUT -- there was also an old guy who randomly talked about killing Trotskyists. Basically in his fantasy, I would be executed.

That guy is the counterpart of Rodrigo. I can work with, and am even friends with a few of the former category of ML, but the latter category, well let's just say I find it sad that the sane MLs tolerate them.

I generally follow the politics of Trotsky, but I would never support the blanket murder of Stalinists, including the Rodrigos.

If they wanna go organize the peasants to fight the government and make alliances with the national bourgeoisie and do whatever they do, fine. They'll fuck up and discredit themselves and destroy their own movement. Or maybe they'll succeed and miraculously reach socialism and then I'll be happy as would anyone. Either way, I'll stick with doing what I do with the workers. The garbage about killing each other or "purging the workers movement of blah blah" is a red herring.

[JoeySteel]

I've met plenty of MLs outside of the workplace --- by going to their meetings in fact. And, many of them were friendly and I would consider comrades in a loose sense. BUT -- there was also an old guy who randomly talked about killing Trotskyists. Basically in his fantasy, I would be executed.

That guy is the counterpart of Rodrigo. I can work with, and am even friends with a few of the former category of ML, but the latter category, well let's just say I find it sad that the sane MLs tolerate them.

I generally follow the politics of Trotsky, but I would never support the blanket murder of Stalinists, including the Rodrigos.

If they wanna go organize the peasants to fight the government and make alliances with the national bourgeoisie and do whatever they do, fine. They'll fuck up and discredit themselves and destroy their own movement. Or maybe they'll succeed and miraculously reach socialism and then I'll be happy as would anyone. Either way, I'll stick with doing what I do with the workers. The garbage about killing each other or "purging the workers movement of blah blah" is a red herring.

Uhh... OK. Not sure where you could find any peasants. Cool story though.

[Le Socialiste]

Why. Is. This. Thread. Still. Alive.

[Rodrigo]

please someone explains to this poor guys that the XX congress of the CP of the USSR is over. thank you

That's the plan of revisionists: making Marxist-Leninists think "there's no revisionism anymore". Many communist parties who were linked to Moscow adhered to modern revisionist ideas and stances (e.g. pacific coexistence, market socialism, the denial of planned economy, conciliation with Yugoslavia and/or the defense of counter-revolutionary Hungary, Poland and Czechoslovakia) without any critique, instead there was an ignorant and destructive critique of Stalin based on the XX Congress' lies and that meant, deeper and indirectly, the destruction of revolutionary communism.

The so-called "far" left parties are now composed of what seems to be a "radical" faction inside social-democracy, that is, reformists using communist imagery and having a communist-like speech, but with no revolutionary activity. The price for getting inside bourgeois politics game and thinking Marxism-Leninism -- Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin -- was already "overcome", it's "archaic" or "irrelevant to the working class", that armed struggle is "too violent" and "genocidal" and things like that.

Kruschev's and Breznev's revisionism have been the greatest treason of Marxism-Leninism, and the main cause of the division and weakening of the international communist movement. Kruschev's report to the Twentieth Congress in 1956, his secret Report on Stalin that same year and his Report at the 22nd Congress, in 1962, give a complete example of the revisionist, bourgeois line in the International Communist Movement. All the foundations of progressive degeneration that was to lead, between 1985 and 1990, to the open restoration of capitalism, were formulated in these fundamental documents.

[Rodrigo]

That guy is the counterpart of Rodrigo. I can work with, and am even friends with a few of the former category of ML, but the latter category, well let's just say I find it sad that the sane MLs tolerate them.
etc

Don't be an asshole trying to inferiorize me with this shallow comparison. I never advocated execution of Trotskyists. You're saying big BS because you have no good argument (like any other Trot, indeed).

[DaringMehring]

Don't be an asshole trying to inferiorize me with this shallow comparison. I never advocated execution of Trotskyists. You're saying big BS because you have no good argument (like any other Trot, indeed).

You missed the point of that post completely.

The point is, I don't give a shit what you and your ML buddies are doing. Your movement is a colossal fuck up and you can keep blundering around for the next thousand years for all I care.

If you want to waste your time polemicising against Trotskyists because you're too stupid to see through the Stalin school of falsfication, fine. As long you you don't come after me with an ice pick like your predecessors, it doesn't matter to me.

[PhoenixAsh]

I like this...it is way better than Jersey Shore or [insert country name here] Lacks Talent.

It is kind of sad though...

If you think about it...no matter if you are a ML, a trot or an anarchist...you only really matter if you help organise, help create class consciousness and show up in demos, at strikes, rallies and protests.

[RED DAVE]

I like this...it is way better than Jersey Shore or [insert country name here] Lacks Talent.Where is Snooki now that we need her?


It is kind of sad though...It is.


If you think about it...no matter if you are a ML, a trot or an anarchist...you only really matter if you help organise, help create class consciousness and show up in demos, at strikes, rallies and protests.This is so. As the class struggle heats up, the fools, assholes, cowards and traitor will expose themselves.

Meanwhile, I hear Snooki got a new tat.

http://static.poponthepop.com/images/gallery/nicole-snooki-polizzi-tattoo-photo.jpg

RED DAVE

[Smyg]

This is all hilarious.

[tir1944]

What a disgrace.

[blake 3:17]

The Harry Haywood piece is worth reading.

[Comrade Trotsky]

lolancestorworship.

Might as well strip off naked and dance around a fire :laugh:

[Obs]

I wanted to write a big post about how Marxism-Leninism isn't synonymous with this kind of sectarian idiocy, but I couldn't be bothered. Here's a picture of a duck:

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcStygsM8d6l80_GRKXhnGIetTfPdzqgT 7vZJKVLJCBgPipnPHKERQ