HoChiMilo
6th December 2008, 07:28
A lot has been said about the neocon's similarity to the Trotskyist. Some background:
If we were to look at Leon Trotsky's ideas of world/permanent revolution - we can find comparisons to Bush's policies. First, they took the "domino theory" and applied it to their twisted version of a capitalist democracy. It is said that the idea of the pre-emptive strike was inspired by Trotsky. Finally, many contemporary neocons were actually former Trotskyists back in the sixties.
The idea is this - It's the late 1930's and Leon Trotsky is in control of the Soviet Union following Lenin's death. Josef Stalin is a mere footnote in history. He is handling a dispute between the soviet union and a bourgeois democratic country.
First - Trotsky believes country x is sending spies into the Soviet Union.
(As bush suspected Al Qaeda was being harbored by Iraq)
Second - Trotsky learns country x may be hiding v2 rockets purchased from Nazi germany.
(somewhere close to Saddam's alleged WMD's)
and Third - He wishes to bring communism to country x.
(As bush was making the middle east "safe for democracy")
well, I personally believe both the ideas of socialism and democracy need to always come from the people imprisoned in their national borders. the people need to be ready for it. you can't force either ideology by direct military occupation.
I don't believe, however, that rules out sending non-conventional revolutionary elements (guerillas) to help aid the said citizens to overthrow their national governments. But i don't make the rules - that's why we're here, to help further our ideological developments through brainstorming.
Not surprisingly, I think the way bush handled the war was barbaric and a painfully and reluctantly masochistic tactical blunder. LT was pretty serious about ending imperialism. By comparing and contrasting, do you think trotsky would have occupied country x in a similar way? do you think he would have supported direct armed occupation? basically, how far do you think he would cross the divide between revolutionary international solidarity and foreign imperialist occupation?
i hope this wasn't a pointless question. I'm new, be nice!
If we were to look at Leon Trotsky's ideas of world/permanent revolution - we can find comparisons to Bush's policies. First, they took the "domino theory" and applied it to their twisted version of a capitalist democracy. It is said that the idea of the pre-emptive strike was inspired by Trotsky. Finally, many contemporary neocons were actually former Trotskyists back in the sixties.
The idea is this - It's the late 1930's and Leon Trotsky is in control of the Soviet Union following Lenin's death. Josef Stalin is a mere footnote in history. He is handling a dispute between the soviet union and a bourgeois democratic country.
First - Trotsky believes country x is sending spies into the Soviet Union.
(As bush suspected Al Qaeda was being harbored by Iraq)
Second - Trotsky learns country x may be hiding v2 rockets purchased from Nazi germany.
(somewhere close to Saddam's alleged WMD's)
and Third - He wishes to bring communism to country x.
(As bush was making the middle east "safe for democracy")
well, I personally believe both the ideas of socialism and democracy need to always come from the people imprisoned in their national borders. the people need to be ready for it. you can't force either ideology by direct military occupation.
I don't believe, however, that rules out sending non-conventional revolutionary elements (guerillas) to help aid the said citizens to overthrow their national governments. But i don't make the rules - that's why we're here, to help further our ideological developments through brainstorming.
Not surprisingly, I think the way bush handled the war was barbaric and a painfully and reluctantly masochistic tactical blunder. LT was pretty serious about ending imperialism. By comparing and contrasting, do you think trotsky would have occupied country x in a similar way? do you think he would have supported direct armed occupation? basically, how far do you think he would cross the divide between revolutionary international solidarity and foreign imperialist occupation?
i hope this wasn't a pointless question. I'm new, be nice!