No group description?

The Marxist-Leninists have a description, why don't we? I typed something up recently, feel here to criticize/critique on my description of Trotskyism, as I am new to Trotskyism. It turned out to be a bit long, but it's about as long as the Marxist-Leninist's description.

Trotskyists, "Trots", and "Trotskyites" all uphold the socioeconomic
philosophies, theories, and ideals developed by Lev Davidovich Bronstein, better known as Leon Trotsky, former President of the Petrograd Soviet, and also held the positions of People's Commissar for Army and Navy Affairs, and People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, in Soviet Russia and later the USSR. He considered himself an orthodox Marxist and Bolshevik, and anti-Stalinist. We Trotskyists believe that the Soviet Union under Stalin, was not a dictatorship of the Proletariat, but rather a degenerated workers' state, that being a worker's state betrayed and controlled by a bureaucratic caste. We do not believe in "socialism in one country," and believe that the revolution should be spread the world over and even lead into lands controlled by such ideals like feudalism, before capitalism takes them. Although we may not agree on everything(ie Third Camp and Orthodox Trotskyism), we all are strongly against Stalinism, state capitalism, and bureaucratic collectivism.

Thank you for writing that out. Let me give some comments:

Trotskyists, "Trots", and "Trotskyites"

We never call ourselves "Trotskyite", which is considered derogatory by many. "Trots" is mainly a thing on revleft.

all uphold the socioeconomic philosophies, theories, and ideals developed by Lev Davidovich Bronstein, better known as Leon Trotsky, former President of the Petrograd Soviet, and also held the positions of People's Commissar for Army and Navy Affairs, and People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, in Soviet Russia and later the USSR.

In my opinion this is too much centered on the person of Trotsky. Trotsky never considered himself to be a major school of thought. He just made some additions to Marxist theory, notably: the theory of permanent revolution and the transitional method. Both of which weren't exactly coming from him as a novelty, but he codified them and extended upon existing ideas.

He considered himself an orthodox Marxist and Bolshevik, and anti-Stalinist.

In the post-USSR era, I don't think this is a defining feature of contemporary Trotskyists.

We Trotskyists believe that the Soviet Union under Stalin, was not a dictatorship of the Proletariat, but rather a degenerated workers' state, that being a worker's state betrayed and controlled by a bureaucratic caste.

Be that as it may (and there are Trotskyists that follow a line of "state capitalism" instead), how is this important besides for historical discussions?

We do not believe in "socialism in one country," and believe that the revolution should be spread the world over and even lead into lands controlled by such ideals like feudalism, before capitalism takes them.

Perhaps this needs some theoretical discussion, but how many feudal societies do still exist anno 2009? Ok, we have Nepal, Bhutan and perhaps a few other insignificant countries, but the vast majority has developed a capitalist mode of production now. Of course, the point of the need of international revolution still stands.

Although we may not agree on everything(ie Third Camp and Orthodox Trotskyism), we all are strongly against Stalinism, state capitalism, and bureaucratic collectivism.

In this sum up you introduce new terms, without explaining them, which is bad for any intro text. Also, it touches the somewhat deprecated features of the Trotskyist tradition without making the link to the contemporary context. You'll have to explain "Stalinism" for example in this post-USSR era.

Last but not least: why do we need an intro text?

Thank you for writing that out. Let me give some comments:
We never call ourselves "Trotskyite", which is considered derogatory by many. "Trots" is mainly a thing on revleft.


In my opinion this is too much centered on the person of Trotsky. Trotsky never considered himself to be a major school of thought. He just made some additions to Marxist theory, notably: the theory of permanent revolution and the transitional method. Both of which weren't exactly coming from him as a novelty, but he codified them and extended upon existing ideas.


In the post-USSR era, I don't think this is a defining feature of contemporary Trotskyists.


Be that as it may (and there are Trotskyists that follow a line of "state capitalism" instead), how is this important besides for historical discussions?


Perhaps this needs some theoretical discussion, but how many feudal societies do still exist anno 2009? Ok, we have Nepal, Bhutan and perhaps a few other insignificant countries, but the vast majority has developed a capitalist mode of production now. Of course, the point of the need of international revolution still stands.


In this sum up you introduce new terms, without explaining them, which is bad for any intro text. Also, it touches the somewhat deprecated features of the Trotskyist tradition without making the link to the contemporary context. You'll have to explain "Stalinism" for example in this post-USSR era.

Last but not least: why do we need an intro text?

Thank for posting these things out for me, I took your criticism well. We don't need an intro text per se, and I never said to use mine either(mine was just a suggestion). I say it would be good to have one up to attract new members, also it looks better in my opinion.

And like I pointed out the Marxist-Leninists have a description, as do other Tendency groups. I just thought it would be a good idea.