Peoples' War

The workers had as much control of the party as I have control of my country's government.

"Trotsky considers them comrades, and just says they are wrong when it comes to theory and practice."

So Trotsky considers them comrades if they drop all their ideals.

Why can't you have socialism in one contry? I have heard this many times, yet noone explains it to me.

"So, there is a transitory phase in which capitalism is phased out and socialism phased in, provided revolution occurs worldwide."

That, or you can do like the anarchists and begin colectivisation imediatly.

"Material conditions, power of the councils, are all major differences between Lenin and Stalin's Russia. Under Lenin, it was workers power, under Stalin it was party power"

It always was party power.
You think there was nothing wrong with the Bolshevik regime, have you read about this?
Have you actualy read any books about Russia in those years, books that were not written by supporters of the Bolshevik regime?
If you have not, it is the same as seeking information about Stalin's Russia by asking Stalin how it is like.

The Bolsheviks use the same methods of control as the Tsar, they pursued all who did not agree with them, they took advantage of the revolution to get to power, they are an oportunist party.

You say the only parties being supressed were those who sought to stymie revolution, then why did they also go after anarchists who didn't agree with Bolsheviks leadership?

I know there were disgreements within the party, but the fact is, the Bolsheviks begun a dictatorial regime.

"The Bolsheviks in it's early days in power, did not "oppress" they repressed the counter revolution and anything that threatened WORKERS POWER."

Then, I guess anarchists are a threat to workers power.

Your theories that in order to reach socialism you must first to through capitalism are only going to hold you back, not to mention that they seem to have been made by someone who sympatises with capitalism.

Indeed, I am aware that what the Bolsheviks intended to create was a federation of soviets, yet you cannot deny that they took power and created a one party state.

How is the envolvement of anarchists in the soviets relevant to this discussion.

I can garantee you that the Bolshevik state opressed more than the burgeosie, what do you think the checka was for?

The fact that the Bolsheviks did not condone the transition towards the communist society, but instead chose to implement a psuedo-state capitalist system, should be proof enough that the Bolsheviks completely betrayed their ideals.

Since you think I do not understand the diference between Lenin's Russia and Stalin's Russia, will you explain it to me?

First I will have to tell you how I beleive the Bolsheviks doomed the revolution:

After the revolution the Bolsheviks seize power and form a one party state. That one party state then formed an extremely opressive authoritarian regime, which according to marxist ideology is necessary to defeat the counter-revolution.
The Bolsheviks would pursue and execute anyone who did not agree with them.

After the civil war was over, the Bolsheviks were victorious, their victory openned the way to a communist society, but the Bolshevik state never allowed communism to happen.

Is your new username a reference to the Radiohead record? If so, then you have good taste.