Soviet Union and Nazi Germany the same?

[Blanquist]

Trotsky said that if the Soviet Union didn't have nationalized property relations it would be identical to Nazi Germany?

Then what does that make a regime like China's current Stalinism, which has the political framework of Stalinism but with openly capitalist property relations?

I wouldn't think China today is like Nazi Germany, they don't have a cult of the leader and nowhere near as much repression. I would say North Korea resembles Nazi Germany but is a much poorer country without the capacity for imperial expansion.

Was Trotsky simply wrong? Or does the formula simply not work for other countries in today's world?

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Trotsky was simply wrong.
And so are you when you compare todays China with the Soviet-Union under Stalin.

[scarletghoul]

He was either wrong or just being an opportunist (remember much of his work was shaped by the anger at being kicked out of power by the other bolsheviks, and should be read as a campaign of political polemics rather than theoretical analysis)

[Robespierres Neck]

Was Trotsky simply wrong?

Yes. It's an absurd comment, but very popular here in the US.


Then what does that make a regime like China's current Stalinism

What?

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Also thinking that China is, or has ever been "stalinist" is completely absurd.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Trotsky was being a troll and so are you.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Trotsky was being a troll and so are you.

I'd like to confirm this.

[Aurora]

Source please.

Also it's wrong, if the USSR didn't have fully nationalized property relations like during the NEP it would still be a workers state. What matters is the character of the state not how much property is nationalized.

[Bronco]

Where did he say this?

[Comrade Samuel]

I don't belive I've ever read about Trotsky saying anything like that but if you can give me a link to somewhere that can confirm that that would be great. First of all china and north korea arent "stalininst" (Marx-Leninist) whatsoever and they are barely similar to Nazi Germany at least not anymore than most other countries are. If you or somebody else can confirm the legitimacy of the quote I would have to say he was dead wrong because the Soviet Union never resembled Nazi Germany (at least not to the extent that most western propaganda would like us to belive) and while north Korea and china are just your average oppressive capitalist countries they too are not very similar either. Matter of fact Nazi Germany (and the other fascist regimes toppled in WWII) really where a one-time phenomena that havent seen the light of day since.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

He was either wrong or just being an opportunist (remember much of his work was shaped by the anger at being kicked out of power by the other bolsheviks, and should be read as a campaign of political polemics rather than theoretical analysis)

Refrain from starting tendency wars with flame bait, thanks.

[Sir Comradical]

Show me the original Trotsky quote so I can show you how to read it.

[Blanquist]

Source please.


Where did he say this?


I don't belive I've ever read about Trotsky saying anything like that but if you can give me a link to somewhere that can confirm that that would be great.


Show me the original Trotsky quote so I can show you how to read it.





The USSR minus the social structure founded by the October Revolution would be a fascist regime.

"ABC's of dialectics" 1939. Under "The Nature of the USSR"
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/12/abc.htm

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

The USSR minus the social structure founded by the October Revolution would be a fascist regime.


This makes absolutely no sense.

[Blanquist]

This makes absolutely no sense.

Good thing we're in the learning section then :)

[scarletghoul]

Refrain from starting tendency wars with flame bait, thanks.
It was not flame bait but a legitimate observation on the context surrounding the remark in question. If some people find that provocative then oh well, lets hope the flame war doesnt start, but there is nothing at all wrong with debating the historical context of a quote. tbh i think the moderation would be better directed at those who criticise someone for making a thread in learning

[Aurora]

Meanwhile some ultra-lefts have already reached the ultimate absurdity by affirming that it is necessary to sacrifice the social structure of the USSR in order to overthrow the Bonapartist oligarchy! They have no suspicion that the USSR minus the social structure founded by the October Revolution would be a fascist regime.

Right.... way to rip it out of context. Trotsky is talking about the nature of the USSR and this section is a defence of the USSR as a workers state. He's rejecting the absurd characterisations of the USSR as capitalist or bureaucratic collectivist. He's saying to those who call for the overthrow of the social gains of the revolution that to do this would result in Russia becoming fascist.
Which is pretty obvious really, if the USSR was overthrown it would take the most oppressive measures, those used to destroy the workers movement in other countries, namely fascism.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Meanwhile some ultra-lefts have already reached the ultimate absurdity by affirming that it is necessary to sacrifice the social structure of the USSR in order to overthrow the Bonapartist oligarchy! They have no suspicion that the USSR minus the social structure founded by the October Revolution would be a fascist regime.

Right.... way to rip it out of context. Trotsky is talking about the nature of the USSR and this section is a defence of the USSR as a workers state. He's rejecting the absurd characterisations of the USSR as capitalist or bureaucratic collectivist. He's saying to those who call for the overthrow of the social gains of the revolution that to do this would result in Russia becoming fascist.
Which is pretty obvious really, if the USSR was overthrown it would take the most oppressive measures, those used to destroy the workers movement in other countries, namely fascism.

Even more proof that blanquist is a troll.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Right.... way to rip it out of context.

Trolls often do that to create flame wars.

[Blanquist]

How the fuck is it ripped out of context? It is exactly what it sounds like. 'The USSR minus nationalized property relations would be a fascist regime'

It isn't hard to understand.

Is there an ignore option on this site? Getting tired of this shit.

[#FF0000]

No.

[Bostana]

A Fascist regime?

Trotsky sounds like the Liberal Media trying to demonize a Republican Candidate

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

How the fuck is it ripped out of context? It is exactly what it sounds like. 'The USSR minus nationalized property relations would be a fascist regime'

It isn't hard to understand.

Is there an ignore option on this site? Getting tired of this shit.

Really?

[Railyon]

A Fascist regime?

Trotsky sounds like the Liberal Media trying to demonize a Republican Candidate

Ultra-Left?

Trotsky sounds like a Marxist-Leninist trying to demonize everyone to the left of him.

Unless you're a Marxist-Leninist it makes no real sense to defend the USSR around as late as 1939.

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

Also thinking that China is, or has ever been "stalinist" is completely absurd.
Yeah, really crazy, considering how revered Stalin is there -- and how closely they followed the forms of Stalinism -- a nationalist bureaucracy holding power based on planned collectivized economies. Not to mention the lack of any kind of party democracy or open political discussions -- and reactive zig-zags, like the great leap forward or the cultural revolution (similar to the forced collectivization and quick switch from third period ultra-leftism to class collaborationist popular fronts that Stalin engendered). Other than that, not the slightest resemblance! Yup, it's "absurd.":laugh:

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Yeah, really crazy, considering how revered Stalin is there -- and how closely they followed the forms of Stalinism -- a nationalist bureaucracy holding power based on planned collectivized economies. Not to mention the lack of any kind of party democracy or open political discussions -- and reactive zig-zags, like the great leap forward or the cultural revolution (similar to the forced collectivization and quick switch from third period ultra-leftism to class collaborationist popular fronts that Stalin engendered). Other than that, not the slightest resemblance! Yup, it's "absurd.":laugh:

Ok fair enough. It has some resemblance, but I wouldn't go as far as calling it stalinist or Marxist-Leninist.

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

As for the OP -- in the article you cite, Trotsky was discussing the role of dialectics during a fight in the FI with a group in the US SWP that no longer wanted to defend the USSR against imperialism. A major point of the first major document of the Opposition in the SWP, was written by James Burnham -- besides abandoning Soviet Defensism, he also dismissed dialectics.

One interpretation of his point was that if you are so hell bent on the removal of the Stalinist bureaucracy from power that you are willing to allow a counterrevolution, you will be left with a fascist state. But I think what Trotsky was saying was that these so-called "bureacratic states," including the USSR and Fascist Germany, are ruled by different classes and are therefore qualitatively different. And thinking that there was this meaningful category of "bureaucratic collective" states was schematic and impressionistic, because it lacked a deeper dialectical understanding.

[Bostana]

You do realize the Cultural Revolution helped the people of China?

It gave farmers tractors, not oxen. Th people better health and hospital equipment so they could get the care they needed. Gave factories machines to work with instead of putting their very lives on the line. It also helped get the Chinese people cars, traffic lights, computers, printers, etc. etc. These thing were never even expected to even come China's way until the cultural revolution. China was basically living in the middle ages before the cultural revolution.

To say the cultural revolution did nothing but harm is simply stupid

[Mista Commie]

Yeah, really crazy, considering how revered Stalin is there -- and how closely they followed the forms of Stalinism -- a nationalist bureaucracy holding power based on planned collectivized economies.

The fact that China is a bureaucracy has nothing to do with the supposed reverance of Stalin (Which it would be nice for you to provide evidence that modern China reveres him...), it has to do with Deng's revisionism and the resurgence of acceptance of capitalism. I'm not a Stalinist, I'm just stating my opinion on what happened to the PRC.


Not to mention the lack of any kind of party democracy or open political discussions -- and reactive zig-zags, like the great leap forward or the cultural revolution (similar to the forced collectivization and quick switch from third period ultra-leftism to class collaborationist popular fronts that Stalin engendered). Other than that, not the slightest resemblance! Yup, it's "absurd.":laugh:

So the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution are reactive, huh? So collectivization of farms, industrialization of a country primarily focused on farming, and an attempt to root out revisionists who would endanger future China reactionary? Seems legit. :blink:

[gorillafuck]

full paragraph is:


It is not surprising that the theoreticians of the opposition who reject dialectic thought capitulate lamentably before the contradictory nature of the USSR. However the contradiction between the social basis laid down by the revolution, and the character of the caste which arose out of the degeneration of the revolution is not only an irrefutable historical fact but also a motor force. In our struggle for the overthrow of the bureaucracy we base ourselves on this contradiction. Meanwhile some ultra-lefts have already reached the ultimate absurdity by affirming that it is necessary to sacrifice the social structure of the USSR in order to overthrow the Bonapartist oligarchy! They have no suspicion that the USSR minus the social structure founded by the October Revolution would be a fascist regime.I don't see how he said what you're saying he said.

it's funny how people actually pointed out that this is trolling and it still managed to start arguments between stalinists and trotskyists.

[Yuppie Grinder]

I don't like Stalinist USSR any more than I like Nazi Germany but that sounds like an oversimplification.
Comrade Commistar, stop being so fucking insufferable. People saying things that bother you =/= trolling.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

I don't like Stalinist USSR any more than I like Nazi Germany but that sounds like an oversimplification.
Comrade Commistar, stop being so fucking insufferable. People saying things that bother you =/= trolling.

People starting a thousand threads, turning threads into flamewars, quotes out of context=probably trolling

[TheGodlessUtopian]

It was not flame bait but a legitimate observation on the context surrounding the remark in question. If some people find that provocative then oh well, lets hope the flame war doesnt start, but there is nothing at all wrong with debating the historical context of a quote. tbh i think the moderation would be better directed at those who criticise someone for making a thread in learning

You were the first poster to say something which was clearly flame bait and the other members have been attacking the OP for a while, so it was nothing new;I was away from the board when the attacks began anyways so there was nothing I could do about it.In short: if it was legitimate you would have addressed the OP's remark directly instead of meandering off on a strange attack on Trotsky.

I didn't give you a verbal, small graces.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Since I believe the OP's question has been answered I am Closing this thread.