Would communism work if he came to power?
>>17965331>"Intellectual">Gets outsmarted by a thug
Communism would have been eradicated in the 30's.
Like Stalin's except gay and judaicized.
Why are Copeskyists always looking for an alternative to Mao's formula?
>>17965331How would Sam Hyde make communism work?
>>17965331Communism doesn't answer the question regarding incentives. Why do physically-demanding, societally-essential work without clear incentive?
Communism is only possible in a high trust white society.
>>17965331If Trotsky had succeeded Lenin rather than Stalin, the Soviet Union would not have been able to hold out against the Nazis, and that would have been the end of communism.
>>17965435having sex with underage girls
>>17965535Sorry chud thats capitaliasm.>>17965445Prestige and honor amongst peers.>>17965527Foolish. Trotsky would have left the gateway open for germany, italy, america, and france to convert to enlightened rule.
>>17965527He was literally the only one that recognized the threat Hitler posed before he came to power. Meanwhile Stalin was a huge faggot and told the commies in Germany not to ally with the social democrats since they were "the moderate wing of fascism."
>>17965520>high trust>society>with whitestalk about an oxymoroncommunism is only possible in east asian countries. they are the least individualistic and most family oriented
>>17965331I hope communism works because I sure am tired of it not working
>would jewism worked if the one in charge had not been a jew but a jew on steroid
>>17965331Trotsky had no coherent system of thought, he took whatever position benefited him most at any given time. I am just thankful that Stalin could see right through him and put an ice pick in his head before he could live to do even more damage to communism.
>>17966588So he was Sam Hyde.
>>17966596I mean kind of yeah, in the same way Sam suddenly becomes a "christian" when it is prudent.The official term used to describe Trotsky was an "opportunist", because he took every opportunity to try to garner support for himself even if it stood in contradiction to the party platform, he was always causing controversy and making waves and trying to form factions. Trotsky was an actual megalomaniac, he just failed at actually gaining control of the party, and Lenin and Stalin both agreed that Trotsky could not be permitted to achieve total control over anything because he is not trustworthy, they both joked about this in letters that are now public record. Trotsky really just wanted to lead a cult, and today the cult of Trotsky still unfortunately exists.
>>17965445this is the inhumane part of communism, only subhumans can see the appeal here
>>17965445love for society. most of the works are already automated by turbo robots so you only work when you like to
>>17965331Given all that has happened, Trotsky’s prediction of world revolution seems more and more right to me. Revolution came to China and yet the CPC is unwilling to export it, even to neighbors like Burma. If the capitalists of the West fall, the capitalists of the Persian Gulf would take their place. See what I mean? Until the world is won no place within it is won
>>17965331Perestroika would have happened about 50 years earlier.
>>17965331Communism literally cannot be conceptualized. "Classless society" is like a "square circle"
>>17965445>Communism doesn't answer this question, that Marx did answer but it contradicts all the anti-socialist propaganda I swallowed from blogs written by people who also opine on stuff they never readCommunism didn't originate with Marx, but he was of the belief that history worked in cycles and over-arching narratives, which was the basis his Dialectical Materialism. Ruling classes only emerge after working classes are established, communal clans grow and are then exploited to become serfs. When seen in this paradigm: a permanent revolution against capitalism becomes inevitable because the productive capacity that enables it is itself delivered by capitalist modes of production. Socialism doesn't replace Capitalism: it subsumes it the same way that Capitalism subsumes and co-opts it's own internal dissent, which is how Che Guevara shirts become a thing. Marx believed that the Industrial Revolution was the starting point and Britain was the most likely place to go Communist, and backwards agricultural empires like Russia and China were the worst possible places because it would entail so much exploitation and abuse.
>>17966067Stalin was proven correct in that. Plenty of those Social Democrats allied or collaborated before, during and after the war
>>17966578and where did tipping culture eventually take america to? a world where if you don't give 50 dollars of tip to your deliveryman he spits on your burger and delivers it cold
>>17965331nah, filthy hebe got what he deserved
>>17965331>The workers should own everything, but I should be in charge of it allEvery single system or movement that gets introduced to change everything can be boiled down to some chud saying he should be in charge.So the short answer is no.
Not the brightest, but a lot better than Stalin.
>>17967363yeah but maybe go after the food franchises not the servers who were worried about feeding their kids that night you retard
>>17968093He was extremely smart, what are you talking about?
>>17965435Damn it I was going to make the same joke
>>17965331Meh. The 2 things that plagued socialist countries were the inability to deliver adequate number of goods and a nepotic "vanguard" party.He could've perhaps helped with the latter, but I don't really see him having any grand idea to solve the former. The thing it could've changed is that communist parties might've been more indenpendent which could've made them more appealing to voters.>>17965445>Why do physically-demanding, societally-essential work without clear incentive?With money ? Did you think people in communist countries didn't get paid for their work ?
>>17965331No.Fundamental misunderstanding of who humans are.In order for it to work youd need to change humans to fit your model.Its cheaper to make more sophisticated models that fit the world.Also, classing it as biological problem belies the issue. There are mathematical principles of stability at play. I believe communism would inevitably collapse without adjustments.Marx was a genius. His suggestions were...best guesses.
>>17965331Communism is a vague utopian idea of government, which is why those motivated by it create socialist governments as a kind of half way point until they figure it out.I think Trotsky's more decentralized and communal ideas are probably more sustainable than Stalinist/state capitalism. The industrial capacity would likely be worse though for the same reason, I doubt they would've survived World War II with Trotsky at the helm.
What even is Trotskyism. Like how does it actually differ from Marxist-Leninism?
>>17968707Trotskyism is the predecessor to gay race communism, i.e., "progressivism" as we see in the American Democratic Party today
There are three main "Trotskyisms" (there is far more; Trotskyist Internationals are meme due to their numbers):>Incoherent ideas of Trotsky himself that range from his opinion on World Revolution (that, supposedly, has to be total before anything socialist can be created) to rejection of so-called "bureaucracy" (which makes it impossible to manage planned economy). Practice had proven most of them wrong (including his ideas on fall of Soviet Union; IRL the opposite process happened).>Rabidly anti-Soviet pseudo-communist ideology that came to existence after WW2 in US and US-aligned nations. It got called "Trotskyism" as an attempt to legitimize itself as a socialist movement. Doesn't have any other defining characteristics, and can easily mesh with any populist ideas as long as anti-Soviet core is maintained.>Pseudo-communist political movement within Soviet Union that opposed and sabotaged transition to centrally planned economy. It was primarily supported by managerial strata (so-called "red directorate") that wanted to abolish democratic control over economy, and acquire full (private) control over enterprises that they were managing.Movement was suppressed in 1930s, but got revived as "anti-authoritarianism" under Khrushchev (destalinization purges, splintering of GosPlan, privatization of agrotech), and won during Perestroika of Gorbachev (privatization of Soviet economy)Now why do people despise Trots. Because most Trots aren't even left. Most Boomer Republican/Tory Conservative intellectual figures came out of Trotskyism, the entire Neoconservative movement came out of Trotskyism. As a result, Trots (and their idiot Anarkiddie pets) spend most of their time attacking legitimate socialistm movements rather than being useful to anyone (other than capitalists).Additionally, Trots are known for employing dishonest tactics (ex. entryism), and trying to inoculate general public against socialist ideas by framing some nonsense as "real socialism".
>>17965331I'm so glad this gigakike got icepicked. Absolutely deserved it
