Trotsky was basically the forgotten revolutionary. He had almost nothing to do with the USSR after the revolution. I'd like to see proof that Trotsky "crushed" the sailors. Trotsky believed in a democratic USSR so I find that hard to believe.
Results 1 to 20 of 20
In this article I hope to dispel some of the myths that surround Russia’s great revolutionary leader, Vladimir Lenin. Lenin is revered by communists and socialists worldwide for his role in leading a small band of revolutionaries in defeating what can only be described as a most horrid, autocratic regime. In doing this, he replaced one horrid autocratic regime with another – the Soviet Union communist party.
Lenin, Trotsky and the rest of the leaders of the Russian revolution claimed to be speaking on behalf of the urban workers – who were, despite popular myth, a tiny proportion of the population – but once the Russian revolution was finally won with the crushing of the Civil War, Lenin and Trotsky moved to end the powers of individual workers. Lenin’s famous speech, “Peace, bread and Land! All power to the Soviets!” would now seem to have been in vain. The Soviets, of course, were the workers councils. Under the ideal Libertarian communist system, all power would go to the workers but in reality this did not happen. In reality, the power went to an administrative elite in the form of the Politburo. Even after the Russian revolution the Bolsheviks lost the election in the Constituent assembly! The communist claims to democracy were never fulfilled.
While the Civil War was in progress between 1918 and 1921, Lenin established a communist dictatorship. All opposition were banned, with dissenters imprisoned, exiled or shot. In March 1921, Lenin banned all factions within the Communist party. He had also abolished freedom of the press and set up the Cheka (Who terrorized the population)
In March 1921, sailors from a naval base called Kronstadt (Near modern day St. Petersburg) revolted against the communist party and Lenin’s policy of War communism. These sailors played a major role in the October revolution of 1917. They were now very critical of Lenin’s autocratic regime. What did Lenin and Trotsky do? They crushed the revolt of these patriots, essentially murdering the fathers of the October revolution, the actual revolution that displaced the Tsar. Their demands were not unreasonable; They demanded new elections to the Soviets, freedom of Speech for Other Political parties, freedom for trade unions (Which really should have been a number one ideal for the communist party) the end of food requisitions and the right of peasants to hold land. Trotsky is quoted as saying that he wanted the rebels to be ‘Shot down like partridges’. Hundreds of prisoners were killed in Trotsky’s subsequent massacre.
After the massacre, Lenin realized the injustice he had done and said about the Kronstadt rising that it, ‘illuminated reality like a flash of lightning’
That seems to be the story of the Russian revolution. With every massacre came a revelation.
Leninists like to believe that Lenin was a great revolutionary. In my eyes little separate him and Stalin.
Trotsky was basically the forgotten revolutionary. He had almost nothing to do with the USSR after the revolution. I'd like to see proof that Trotsky "crushed" the sailors. Trotsky believed in a democratic USSR so I find that hard to believe.
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
You call that an article?
Neo-Maoist rants: http://marcelthemaoist.blogspot.com The Commie Geek: http://mistax1337.blogspot.com
ya one of the most biased articles Ive read in a long while
Dude I've said it before and I'll say it again: you are seriously a confused-ass Trotskyist.
Trotsky was the head of the Bolshevik Red Army and Lenin's "right hand man". He is not "the forgotten revolutionary", he was integral to everything that made Leninism and the USSR. You can try to dispute that the sailors were "counter revolutionaries" but you certainly can't dispute that Trotsky was responsible for their massacre.
Seriously man please study a little history before just latching onto some ideologue somebody told you didn't have blood on his hands.
So prove to me that he was responsible for killing the sailors. All I'm asking for is a link. If you can prove to me that he actually did, then I will reasses my position. I find it very hard to believe that Trotsky would do something like that as he was the only one who advocated democratic rights in the USSR. You can claim that every revolutionary has blood on his hands. Che with La Cabaña for instance, but most of the time the person has little to nothing to do with the act.
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
The thing is that you're trying to seperate Trotsky from Lenin, which is historically impossible. Trotsky was directly responsible for the implementation of Bolshevik dictatorship in Russia.
You can read the rest of that article HERE.
There is also a big thread about Kronstadt HERE. While plenty of people take Leninist positions and lots of bullshit gets said by both sides in the debate, what nobody contests is that Trotsky was directly responsible.
Thanks for the link Nachie. I get the feeling that the leader was a fascist who was from an area where the majority on strike were anti-semitist and anti-bolshevik. Also that they were told to surreder and that they didn't. It seems to me that this was the impression that Trotsky was under when he gave the order. Let me say that it was a horrible mistake. However, I think that Trotsky realized that he made an error while in exile. I'm not defending him as I know he probably did not know as much as we do know now.
However I do think Lenin and Trotsky had completely different visions for the USSR. Calling them one in the same is completely unfair.
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
Fuck, Trotsky was completely behind Kronstadt. I said it before, I'll say it again: Fuck Kronstadt!
Contrary to popular belief perpetuated by neo-Trots, Trotsky was just as "brutal" as anyone else enforcing the dictatorship of the proletariat... Trotsky was the one that issued the order after the winter palace was ceased (and many soliders and workers went on a drunken binge after libeating the Czar's wine cellar) that anyone outside after 11 PM curfiew would be subsequently SHOT!
Harsh? Yeah, but it had to be done.
AND TROTSKY WAS RIGHT, AND YOU CAN QUOTE ME -- A FUCKING STALINIST -- ON THAT!
Neo-Maoist rants: http://marcelthemaoist.blogspot.com The Commie Geek: http://mistax1337.blogspot.com
That's prepostrous. Trotskyism and Stalinism are completely opposite. One advocates internationalism, the other advocates nationalism. One advocates democracy, the other doesn't. One is built around the people, the other is built on them. They share nothing simialer. What Trotsky did was wrong yes, but considering the intel given to him which stated that they were fascists, it was what evryone thought had to be done.
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
Wow, you are real stupid. I said nothing about Trotsky being like Stalin. Simply that he was right on these two occasions (The Curfiew and Kronstadt).
"Stalinism" is not nationalism. Stop reading neo-Trot bullshit.
Trotsky gave no shit about "democracy" unless it served his interests. Stop reading the same lies.
Trotsky never built around people, he was petty-bourgeois. Stalin organized among the rank and file. This is a historical fact that even Trotskyites can't dispute.
Leo and Joe shared some similiarites in politics. To say they share nothing similiar is like saying all humans are 100% different. It's an abstract and objective view.
Again, Trotsky was RIGHT on Kronstadt. Quote me anytime.
Neo-Maoist rants: http://marcelthemaoist.blogspot.com The Commie Geek: http://mistax1337.blogspot.com
This is 100% in reverse of all recorded history and all Trotskyist ideology, which is why I think you are a confused "Trot" and will benefit from a reinvestigation of your beliefs.
Trotsky was responsible, and took credit, for ending the Kronstadt counter-revolutionary coup; but the nature of that "uprising" was totally different from how contemporary anarchists represent it.
The Kronstadt mutineers were a collection of petty bourgeois social democrats, White Guard officers, and Black Hundredist anti-semetic fascists. They had no support from the workers, the Petrograd workers never helped them, they were simply an isolated group of reactionary soldiers who adopted certain propagandistic phrases to appeal to the revolutionary workers, like 'soviets without communists', although their intention was to abolish the soviets.
It is absolutely beyond me why contemporary Anarchists would want to identify with these people, except that they actually believed in their propaganda when the Russian workers of the time did not (although, in fairness, the Russian founder of Anarchism Mikhail Bakunin was also a White Guard officer and a rabid anti-semite).
In any case, theres no reason to make Trotsky's Red Army attack on the White Guard at Kronstadt any different than Trotsky's attack on the White Guard everywhere else in Russia.
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/russia/kr...ky_hue_cry.html
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Which is why you called him "A fucking stalinist" in your last post.
Yes it is. They adopted the idea of 'Socialism in One nation' in 1929 I think
I wouldn't write an entire book about something unless I truly believed in it. It would be a bullshit waste of time. Nevertheless Trots today are pro-democracy.
So what. Being petty-beorgious means nothing. No one can decide what class he/she is from. Stalin was a murdering pig who scared communism for ever.
Well let's just say that in terms of communist ideaologies, trotskyism and stalinism are opposites.
sure their not 100% different but that doesn't mean they aren't almost completely different.
Well maybe, but they had completely different ways of going about it. Trotsky once recallled that in a conversation he and lenin were having, lenin wanted keep the USSR under a dictatorship.
I've been looking at all the communist ideologies and the one I'm closest to is Trotskyism. Trotskyism is the one that seems to disagree with the idea of a dictatorship because of what Stalin and also support democratic rights but has structure.
I've just been looking at Luxemburgism. It seems like I agree with most of it but I don't know how the revolution would be run and how society would be run.
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
Trotskyism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc. are all branches on the same rotting Leninist tree.
None of them are "better" than the others, none of them are "more democratic" than the others, they're all fucked.
Perhaps but then what's the alternative? Anarcho-Communism? I agree with most of it but I don't think it's realistic. It could take thousands of years for a revolution to happen under the anarchist flag and even if it is sucessful, all I see is a corrupt society where crime will run wild. Anarcho-Communism takes humanity for granted to much. It believes that we'll just act good because we just will and if we don't no one will punish us. My views is that we need a completly democratic communist society.
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
That's an extremely simplistic and biased view of what anarchism is. By contrast I only see an extremely corrupt society with "crime running wild" when a parasitic bureaucracy decides to supplant itself for autonomous workers' struggle at the head of the revolution.
Besides, it's not like "anarchism" is the only other choice. Why not autonomist Marxism? I'm not saying one is better than the other but since you're prejudiced against anarchism perhaps a Marxist take on autonomy would use language and approaches that you're more comfortable with. You can read about it HERE and on several threads on this forum.
thanks for the link. Autonomist marxism sounds pretty interesting. I like their views on the working class and the idea of everyone under their own rule. It makes sense to me.
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
Hopefully much more sense than Trotskyism!
the whole problem is that the largest revolutionary left organisations, or at least the most vocal/prominent, in the west which arent stalinist are trotskist. So people are naturally attracted to it, even though they might not agree with what trotskyism actually is.
i know a diehard trot who once said about a number of quotes by trotsky "it sent shivers down my spine", and that he disagreed with the militarization of labor. He concluded that it was probable that it was just that trotsky overreacted.
This more or less sounds like "he did/said some fucked things, but he really was a nice guy, honestly"
which frankly, is bullshit
ο λαός θα πεί την τελευταία λέξη - αυτές οι νύχτες είναι του αλέξη!
Freedom without equality is privilege - Equality without freedom is a barracks
'Engels, my brother from another class,
we haz got to get fucked up on the grog, and then revolt...if the lessons of the Paris Commune has taught as such, the working class cannot lay hold of the ready made bourgeoisie alcohol, they must smash it, and get pissed on cheap methylated spirits.
holler,
marxy.'
- BCBM=AndreasBaader
