What would have happened to the USSR if he had been in charge instead of Stalin? Would it have looked more like modern China?
>>18485438It would have fallen decades sooner. Trotskey was a retard.
I admire Bukharin but I don't think he had the strength of character needed to lead a nation.
>>18485438Bukharin wanted to keep the NEP going, his slogan was ''farmers, enrich yourself''. That means the State doesn't have the resources to fast industrialize (The USSR mainly sold grain and natural resources abroad to finance its fast industrialization and buying of foreign machinery since western countries didn't want to give them loans) as the grain remains entirely in the hands of private farmers that can do what they want with it (so most likely selling it on the free market rather than at a low fixed price to the State), in this scenario there's still a Hitler and a Nazi Germany that wants to invade and destroy the USSR, so when they do it and you've been soft-industrializing at a leisurely pace like what Bukharin advocated you get obliterated
>>18485438Would the ussr have gone to war or not with china if bukharin had power and stalin had not got power is difficult to claim either way
>>18486024>That means the State doesn't have the resources to fast industrialize This is such a poor understanding of the Soviet history. It was the state co-operatives that made industrialization slow in the USSR, and they continued to handicap its growth until its eventual collapse. NEP failed because the Soviets tried to force poor farmers to sell their grain at a loss, which obviously created incentivizes for them to keep it and sell it directly themselves. The Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union was not inevitable, nor the Nazi rise to power. It was influenced by Stalin's disastrous foreign policy decisions like supporting social fascism (which divided the left) and continuing to use the Communist International to subvert countries like Germany and Spain.
More so, Stalinists always get what NEP was wrong. It wasn't "introducing capitalism into the countryside." It was the idea that private farmers could subsidize the creation of a socialist, co-operative sector of the economy. The idea was that co-operatives, in the long run, would out-produce private forms of production and create abundance. Obviously, that did not happen, because anyone who knows anything about co-operatives knows they are notoriously bad at growing and encouraging people to work since profits are split in an egalitarian fashion instead of encouraging saving and investment for upscaling production. It's why banks traditionally don't give them loans and why they often fail. The failure of NEP was the failure of communism, socialism, and Stalin himself later came to admit that the profit motive and private enterprise were necessary.
>>18485873Bait?
>>18485438The soviet union would still be a Capitalist State. It would retain the Commodity-form and by implication has division of labor, exchange, wage-labor and private property.
>>18487583This is a poor understanding of how Bordiga viewed socialism.In Lyons Thesis, he argued that Russia had socialist elements (which it did) like much of its co-operative agriculture. In fact, he was supportive of Bukharin's proposals.
>>18485438Trotskys whole ideology was>invade and conquer all of Europe RIGHT NOWHe was a moron who was infinitely self destructive
>>18486896It's true that forced collectivization lead to poor harvest, but the difference is that now all the grains was in the hands of the State and they could still sell more of it as an export than they could during the NEP
>>18485438He looks too much like he is some actor in a c&c cutscene.
>>18487615Post ww2 Bordiga would disagree though.
>>18487619Maybe he was self destructive but he understood things like momentum, Communism had only one chance and it was with them, they needed to get at least 1 other powerful nation to become Communist like Germany. With Trotsky in charge, his USSR would have intervened when the Spartacists were at their peak to establish a Communist Germany and that works would literally be a utopia where the entire planet is actually a fair and equal place to live in
>>18485438>what would have happened to indonesia if ching chong al-ahmad won instead of ping pong bin royal jelly?Idk It would be slightly different but not that much?
They were called the 'Right Opposition' because they were right.Stalin was a thug.Lenin was an egomaniacal loony troon.Trotsky was an anti-Russian jew.Rykov was educated, Ethnically Russian, and of working class descent.
>>18485438would've gotten conquered by the nazis since trotsky would've spent the 20s and 30s pointlessly trying to kickstart revolutions in western europe rather than knuckle down and build socialism in one country
>>18487615>>18487619>>18487737>>18487787>>18487815Lmao you Americans are so stupid.It’s BUKHARIN not Trotsky
>>18488756You are fighting against bots, not humans. Most posts on 4cha are bots simulating real discussion to push an agenda. Like you just discovered, bots almost always fail when a picture is involved, posting a picture with the words "if you are a bot, you won't address this picture" always tricks the bots
>>18487731Bordiga's "Solution of Bukharin" was written in 1956
>>18485438World communism>>18485873Thats Bukharin.
>>18486896>>18486906What is some good lit that covers this topic?>Stalin himself later came to admit that the profit motive and private enterprise were necessary.This part especially
>>18490048Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution by F. CohenThe Economic Problems Of The USSR by Stalin himself.
