Log in

View Full Version : Trotsky vs. Lenin



TheRedRevolutionary
30th September 2008, 04:11
Many of the revisionists like to make it seem as though Trotsky and Lenin had a very close relationship where they worked side by side with each amicably. However, like most revisionist propaganda, the facts say something else. The facts say that the Russian SDLP split into factions, Lenin of course was a Bolshevik while Trotsky sided with the Mensheviks. Trotsky also would come to denounce Lenin in a letter in 1913 to Chkeidze:


Trotsky described Lenin as "a professional exploiter of every kind of backwardness in the Russian working-class movement."

Even in 1913 Trotsky stood against Lenin, against Marxism-Leninism, is there any wonder why Trotsky was so against the Soviet Union after Lenin's death?

There is more however, Lenin in turn denounced Trotsky in no uncertain terms. He understood that the fight between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks was one between revolutionary Marxism and bourgeois liberalism. Remember that at first Trotsky sided with the Mensheviks, then attempted to be a "conciliator" with the liberals. This is how Lenin responded:


"In the very first words of his resolution Trotsky expressed the full spirit of the worst kind of conciliation, 'conciliation' in inverted commas, of a sectarian and philistine conciliation, which deals with 'given persons' and not the given line of policy, the given spirit the given ideological and political content of Party work.


"It is in this that the enormous difference lies between real partyism; which consists in purging the Party of liquidationism and otzovism, and the 'conciliation' of Trotsky and Co., which actually RENDERS THE MOST FAITHFUL SERVICE TO THE LIQUIDATORS AND OTZOVISTS, AND IS THEREFORE AN EVIL THAT IS ALL THE MORE DANGEROUS TO THE PARTY THE MORE CUNNINGLY, ARTFULLY AND RHETORICALLY IT CLOAKS ITSELF WITH PROFESSEDLY PRO-PARTY, PROFESSEDLY ANTI-FACTIONAL DECLAMATIONS." (Notes of a Publicist, Collected Works, Vol. 16, June 1910, p 211 – emphasis added).


In November 1910, accusing Trotsky of following "in the wake of the Mensheviks, taking cover behind particularly; sonorous phrases, " of "putting before the German comrades liberal views with a Marxist coating." of being a master of "resonant but empty phrases, " of failing to understand and ignoring the "economic content of the Russian revolution, " and thereby depriving himself "of the possibility of understanding the historical meaning of the inner-Party struggle in Russia," Lenin goes on to state:
"The struggle between Bolshevism and Menshevism is... a struggle over the question whether to support the liberals or to overthrow the hegemony of the liberals over the peasantry. Therefore to attribute [as did Trotsky] our splits to the influence of the intelligentsia, to the immaturity of the proletariat, etc, is a childishly naive repetition of liberal fairy-tales."

Adding: "Trotsky distorts Bolshevism, because he has never been able to form any definite views on the role of the proletariat in the Russian bourgeois revolution."


Countering Trotsky's lies and falsifications in the German Social-Democratic press and accusing Trotsky of following a policy of "advertisement" of "shamelessness in belittling the Party and exalting himself before the Germans, " Lenin concludes:


"Therefore, when Trotsky tells the German comrades that he represents the 'general Party tendency" I am obliged to declare that Trotsky represents only his own faction and enjoys a certain amount of confidence exclusively among the otzovists and the liquidators." (The Historical Meaning of the Inner-Party Struggle in Russia, Collected Works, Vol. 16 pp. 374-392).

TheRedRevolutionary
30th September 2008, 04:14
"putting before the German comrades liberal views with a Marxist coating." Liberal views with Marxist coating! Those are Lenin's words! Could there by any better way of describing the views of Trotsky?

OI OI OI
30th September 2008, 04:16
Why is it always that Stalinists use quotes from 1910 while they don't bother with quotes from 1917 and on?

I m really curious:lol:


Another crappy post by mister Soviet-nostalgic here.

TheRedRevolutionary
30th September 2008, 04:18
As usual the Trot-goat has no argument, nothing to counter the extensive quotes from Lenin or Trotsky or the fact that Trotsky was a liberal Menshevik.

Trystan
30th September 2008, 04:26
Stalinists are like creationists. Both live in a fantasy land. Both select information and evidence and construct it in misleading ways. Ugh . . .

Random Precision
30th September 2008, 04:28
You people never fucking stop, do you? I guess it's not enough that Lenin said there was "no better Bolshevik" than Trotsky shortly before the revolution, during the Civil War gave him blank pieces of paper to endorse all his orders as the head of the Red Army, and sought to have Trotsky succeed him in the Sovnarkom in 1923.

All these things happened during and after the revolution, when it fucking mattered.

JimmyJazz
30th September 2008, 04:31
Stalinists are like creationists.

They certainly flood message boards with agenda-driven spam in a similar fashion.

Well, at least one of them does.

OI OI OI
30th September 2008, 04:47
As usual the Trot-goat has no argument, nothing to counter the extensive quotes from Lenin or Trotsky or the fact that Trotsky was a liberal Menshevik.

Well as I stated those quotes are from 1910 and you did not talk about quotes from after the revolution.

RP added on my argument.

and you call me a trot-goat as a counter argument.
It is upon the judgement of the observer to see who is right and who is wrong,,

you are certainly a troll or an idiot.

Q
30th September 2008, 06:12
Why is it always that Stalinists use quotes from 1910 while they don't bother with quotes from 1917 and on?

I m really curious:lol:


Another crappy post by mister Soviet-nostalgic here.

Nail on the head. I wonder who said again "There has been no better Bolshevik than comrade Trotsky."? Oh yeah, that would be Lenin after 1917 when Trotsky and Lenin put aside their differences and joined forces.

Then again, where was comrade Stalin in all this? Oh right, he was to play no significant role in the revolution after he lost the struggle against Lenin over the question of supporting the Mensheviks!

Stalinists :rolleyes:

TheRedRevolutionary
30th September 2008, 22:37
Well as I stated those quotes are from 1910 and you did not talk about quotes from after the revolution.


I am talking about the disagreements between Lenin v Trotsky, why must I limit myself to the small time period between 1917 - 1924? Trotsky was a political figure of many years why shouldn't I go back and find where he consistently stood in the titanic struggles between the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks? To ally with Lenin just before or during revolution when the Bolsheviks have clearly gianed the upper hand reeks of opportunistism.

The fact is that when the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks split , Stalin stood with the Bolsheviks from Day 1 (this is undeniable fact) while Trotsky first sided with the Mensheviks and then trying to play the role of 'concilator' going back and forth between the 2 camps. Classic reformist.
Classic opportunist.

The fact is also during these fights Lenin and Trotsky would engage in some huge arguments and disagreements with one another with Trotsky at times denouncing Lenin and vice versa.



In a surprise development, Trotsky and most of the Iskra editors supported Martov and the Mensheviks while Plekhanov supported Lenin and the Bolsheviks. Trotsky later justified his action in what Deutscher describes as an astonishing (bourgeois) prediction of future events; the Party would substitute itself for the proletariat, the Party Central Committee would substitute itself for the Party, and, ultimately, one man would become the embodiment of the Central Committee


So Trotsky sides with the Mensheviks and then gives a liberal critique of Leninism that one could find in the New York Times or Washington Post.

The failure of Trotskyism can be also be found in the million different tiny sects located only in the wealthy countries; these sects typically are made up of middle class "intellectuals" with no impact and no connection with the working class.

TheRedRevolutionary
30th September 2008, 22:45
Oh yeah, that would be Lenin after 1917 when Trotsky and Lenin put aside their differences and joined forces.

key word there.



Then again, where was comrade Stalin in all this? Oh right, he was to play no significant role in the revolution after he lost the struggle against Lenin over the question of supporting the Mensheviks!


Really?

In the wake of the February Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_Revolution) of 1917 (the first phase of the Russian Revolution of 1917 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution_of_1917)), Stalin was released from exile. On March 25 he returned to Petrograd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Petersburg) (Saint Petersburg) and, together with Lev Kamenev (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Kamenev) and Matvei Muranov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matvei_Muranov), ousted Vyacheslav Molotov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyacheslav_Molotov) and Alexander Shlyapnikov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Shlyapnikov) as editors of Pravda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda), the official Bolshevik newspaper, while Lenin and much of the Bolshevik leadership were still in exile

At this April 1917 Party conference, Stalin was elected to the Bolshevik Central Committee with the third highest total votes in the party.

Loyalist troops raided Pravda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda) and surrounded the Bolshevik headquarters. Stalin helped Lenin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin) evade capture and, to avoid a bloodbath, ordered the besieged Bolsheviks to surrender.

Stalin was chosen to be the chief editor of the Party press and a member of the Constituent Assembly, and was re-elected to the Central Committee

In desperation, Kerensky turned to the Petrograd Soviet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrograd_Soviet) for help and released the Bolsheviks, who together raised a small army to defend the capital. In the end, Kerensky convinced Kornilov's army to stand down and disband without violence. However, the Bolsheviks were now free, rearmed and swelling with new recruits and under Stalin's firm control, whilst Kerensky had few troops loyal to him in the capital

Whilst he worked to restore his presses, he missed a Central Committee meeting where assignments for the coup were being issued. Stalin instead spent the afternoon briefing Bolshevik delegates and passing communications to and from Lenin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin), who was in hiding


Early the next day, Stalin went to the Smolny Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smolny_Institute) from where he, Lenin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin)and the rest of the Central Committee coordinated the coup

Dang, and all this just from the revolutionary time period, not even going back before then when Stalin was busy organizing and preparing the revolution in Russia while Trotsky was still dancing between Bolshevism (Marxist) and Menshevism (Liberalism)

Nice try Trot, please come back again.


Oh yea and here's one more for you:



Stalin challenged many of the decisions of Trotsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotsky), who at this time was Chairman of the Revolutionary-Military Council of the Republic . He ordered the killings of many former Tsarist officers in the Red Army; Trotsky, in disagreement with the Central Committee, had hired them for their expertise, but Stalin distrusted them.


Trotsky - Liberal, reformist, Menshevik, non-Marxist.

Holden Caulfield
30th September 2008, 23:31
thread closed as it is a flame bait,

and i have heard the come back 'trot-goat' before....