Permanently Deleted
I just asked what are the differences between ML and Trotskyism on r/communism101 and was permabanned. Didn’t even get one reply. If you’re an emerging anti-capitalist and ask an honest question and get instantly banned for it, it’s certainly gonna do a lot to reinforce any pre-existing negative notions about communism.
Hi
The differences between Trotskyism and ML is a gulf.
I think the most important ones are their incorrect ability to understand imperialism and their absurd left deviation of Permanent Revolution. I am a firm believer that this Permanent Revolution so thoroughly distorts Marxism and is the reason why so many NeoCons are ex-Trotskyites
“At the end of 1903, Trotsky was an ardent Menshevik, i.e., he deserted from the Iskrists to the Economists. He said that ‘between the old Iskra and the new lies a gulf’. In 1904-05, he deserted the Mensheviks and occupied a vacillating position, now co-operating with Martynov (the Economist), now proclaiming his absurdly Left ‘permanent revolution’ theory.”
— V.I. Lenin. Collected Works Vol. 20. Moscow: Progress Publishers. 1977. p. 346.
My favourite reading of the issues of Trotskyism is Left in Essence, Right in Form by Carl Davidson
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/critiques/guardian/index.html
Espresso Stalinist has a good collation on Trotskyism
https://espressostalinist.com/marxism-leninism-versus-revisionism/trotskyism/
Revolutionary Democracy also has a good page on Trotskyism
https://revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/index.htm#Trotskyism
I think the most important ones are their incorrect ability to understand imperialism and their absurd left deviation of Permanent Revolution. I am a firm believer that this Permanent Revolution so thoroughly distorts Marxism and is the reason why so many NeoCons are ex-Trotskyites.
Instead of basing your “critique” of permanent revolution on a meme about a Trot to Neocon pipeline, why not actually say which parts of that theory you disagree with? Why is it an “absurd left deviation?” Because of an out-of-context Lenin quote?
Here’s another quote from Lenin reflecting on the path and class character of then Russian Revolution:
“We solved the problems of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in passing, as a ‘by-product’ of our main and genuinely proletarian - revolutionary, socialist activities. … The Soviet system is one of the most vivid proofs, or manifestations, of how the one revolution develops into the other.”
Achieving the tasks of bourgeois-democratic revolution as a “byproduct” of proletarian struggle is like a main idea of the theory permanent revolution, and, wouldn’t you know it, that’s how the October Revolution actually unfolded.
But no, let’s talk about a trot-to-neocon meme based on like 3 neocons that had fleeting to tenuous connections to Trotskyist groups, and a horseshoe-theory-level analysis of causality.
FIRST REPLY
If somethings a meme it’s only because it’s true. I could dig through pretty much any Trot publication and show you ways that they have ended up on the wrong side of history of imperialist Wars
In fact someone has already done that on Trots in the 21st Century and Libya
https://diplomaticpost.co.uk/index.php/2020/04/14/part-1-on-libya-trotskyism-in-the-21st-century/
and, wouldn’t you know it, that’s how the October Revolution actually unfolded.
No it’s not. You’ve been reading too much trotsky and not enough Lenin. I mean here’s another quote - ten years after Trotsky formalised Permanent Revolution on Lenin mocking it
“To bring clarity into the alignment of classes in the impending revolution is the main task of a revolutionary party. This task is being shirked by the Organising Committee, which within Russia remains a faithful ally to Nashe Dyelo, and abroad utters meaningless “Left” phrases. This task is being wrongly tackled in Nashe Slovo by Trotsky, who is repeating his “original” 1905 theory and refuses to give some thought to the reason why, in the course of ten years, life has been bypassing this “splendid” theory.”
“From the Bolsheviks Trotsky’s original theory has borrowed their call for a decisive proletarian revolutionary struggle and for the conquest of political power by the proletariat, while from the Mensheviks it has borrowed “repudiation” of the peasantry’s role.”
“Trotsky is in fact helping the liberal-labour politicians in Russia, who by “repudiation” of the role of the peasantry understand a refusal to raise up the peasants for the revolution!”
(On the Two Lines in the Revolution – V.I. – Lenin)
But no, let’s talk about a trot-to-neocon meme based on like 3 neocons that had fleeting to tenuous connections to Trotskyist groups
Because I wasn’t planning on writing an essay when I had already supplied Carl Davidsons Left In Form, Right In Essence which is a brilliant and brief refutation of Permanent Revolution but sure I dont mind
Firstly Kotkin explains how Trotsky lied about Socialism in One Country which is brilliant and again quite brief
Followed by Ian Grey illustrating the significance of Stalins Socialism In One Country
At the Fifteenth Party Conference, Trotsky and Zinoviev finally destroyed themselves politically. Trotsky made a lengthy speech and had to ask repeatedly for more time. He was interrupted con stantly by ridicule and laughter. Zinoviev groveled and begged for giveness for his errors. He, too, was heckled and ridiculed. Both had been arrogant in power and now they were humiliated and defeated. It was left to Bukharin to make the final savage attack on them; the delegates, thirsting for blood, applauded loudly.28 The main discussion at the conference was not on the opposi tion, but on Stalin’s new theory of “socialism in one country.” It bore the stamp of his mind and outlook, and it marked the begin ning of the Stalinist era. The Russian revolutionary drive had been losing momentum since the end of the Civil War and the process had accelerated after Lenin’s death. A new policy was needed that would inspire the Russian people to undertake the superhuman task of carrying their country on from the October Revolution towards socialism and communism. That policy was “socialism in one country.” Its emotional appeal was overwhelm ing. It aroused a new fervor in the party, and pride in the revolu tion spread beyond the party ranks. It was a declaration of inde pendence from the West and of faith in the capacity of their country to forge ahead, creating its own future alone and unsup ported. Backward Russia, for so long treated as lagging on the outskirts of Western civilization, would show herself to be ad vanced and at the center of civilization in the coming millennium. Stalin’s major contribution to Russian communist doctrine had its origins in the polemics with Trotsky after the publication of “Lessons of October.” Of the heresies alleged against Trotsky, the most important was the basic theory that the success of the Rus sian Revolution depended on the support of revolutions in the in dustrial West. As a Russian nationalist Stalin instinctively re belled against this assumption of dependence.
Ian Grey, Stalin, P.215
Anyone on Reddit not trying to bring people here is a lib. 😎
r/antiwork has 160k+subs just begging for a Marxist explanation of their worldview
Working on bringing over my 617 twitter followers but I’m guessing a lot of them are already here.
There’s a reason why ML subs with 1/100 of the users are more active than any of those subs. The mods there would rather larp like they’re a vanguard party against Trotskyist style insurgency from Bernie Bros instead of creating a welcoming environment.
The online left is a psy op
Same thing happened to me. I sent them a message when the mute ended and it was because the bot saw that I had posted in Sanders subs.
I did manage to get unbanned with an apology from whoever did it but yeah, nah they should probably take into account that radicalisation is a thing.
Bruh, it’s the Communism sub on reddit. that place literally gets garbage barges worth of stupid shit posted from everyone from the fascists to post-left anarchists. If there’s one place that I think gets a free pass from being a bit overzealous in their purging of possible dipshits across the entire political spectrum, it’d be that sub.
I agree that they need to be stringent to keep the sub up but the last thing I posted in a Sanders sub was like 2 months beforehand and it was about how the breakup of the Soviet Union was a violent coup orchestrated by Goldman Sachs executives. The post I got banned for was a reply on r/communism was about Paul Robeson.
More than a bit overzealous. Plus when I said I was an ML and asked why I was banned, they said it was automated and muted me for another 24 hours.
