Explain why you view your tendency as the best/most rational

Because my tendency seeks to destroy all division within the revolutionary working class.

I am a Trot. To me" Trotskyism" represents the continuing development of revolutionary Marxism. This includes the theory of Permanent revolution and the Theory of Combined and Uneven Development. These ideas were mentioned or were implicit in the thought of Marx and were further developed by Trotsky, Lenin, and many others.

Those in the Trotskyist tradition, such as Ted Grant, have offered the best explanation of Third World Left Bonapartist regimes such as Syria, Libya, etc.

I support a vanguard party, leading a people's war to gain power and then using the aggrivation of class warfare to purge the enemies of the working class and supporting the permant revolution around the world. So I consider myself a Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyist-Stalinist-Maoist or MLTSM for short

Historically proven method to achieve things. Sure, it hasnt won every time, and most of the success brought on by it have been rolled back drastically and groups adhering to it in name tend to do so, in name only. But, i feel it is quite a useful method. To treat the party as a weapon of sorts to wage class war with and all of that.

I am hoping this is deliberate irony :laugh:

With respect, I do not see how Ted Grant is "in the Trotskyist tradition." He walked out of the international movement a long time ago, and the characteristic stance of his tendency, everlasting, permanent entrism, with zero exit strategy, is foreign to Trotskyism, which, concerning entrism, counsels, "Get in, recruit everyone you can, then get out." I have not found any place where Trotsky indicates that revolutionaries should spend their entire careers building the imperialist, pro-war, pro-banning orders British Labour Party of Blair and Brown, which is Grant's proudest achievement.

As far as Bonapartism is concerned, the Grantists deny that Chávez is a Bonapartist, which is surely incorrect. Chávez' entire politics is mediating between classes, and, after what?, nearly a decade and a half in power, Chávez' "Bolivarian revolution" has left the Venezuelan bourgeois state entirely unscathed, which makes Chávez not a revolutionary at all, but merely a typical caudillo, and a very successful Bonapartist, since, in a period of mass activism, the workers and their allies have, under Chávez' leadership, not overthrown bourgeois rule.

Because this is where the action's at. Also I take internationalism seriously so that kind of drew me to trotskyism, and the CWI specifically.

I'd say somewhere in the vicinity of Marxism-Leninism and strictly Orthodox Trotskyism.

You're a bit late, Impossibilists started getting elected into parliament over a century ago
http://www.worldsocialism.org/canada...n.politics.htm