Trotsky was a kind of a massive hypocrite. There's a huge degree of difference between the things Trotsky claimed to believe, and the things he actually did while in power. He criticized the totalitarianism and centralization of power under Stalin, and praised libertarian socialist figures such as Rosa Luxembourg, who famously said "Socialism without democracy is tyranny". However, when Trotsky actually held high positions of power in the RSFSR and USSR, he was more than willing to use extreme authoritarian violence and terror to suppress those he disagreed with. During the Red Terror, Trotsky was one of the leading figures who used the Cheka (Bolshevik secret police) systematically tortured and executed anyone who was even vaguely suspected of being disloyal to the government. Many of those persecuted were themselves devout Marxists and Communists who simply criticized the Bolsheviks for their extreme centralization of power and suppression of other leftists who wanted a more free and open Communists state, such as anarcho-communists and libertarian socialists. There is a large contradiction between the things Trotsky said, and the things he did. While claiming to oppose totalitarianism and dictatorship, he proved himself more than willing to use violence and terror to ruthlessly crush all political dissent when he himself held power.
>>18689692No tip for you, wagie!
>>18689692Trotsky was a seething jewish hypocrite that would have done 90% same things as Stalin. Stalin had no problem stealing many of his plans, to be fair
>>18689692Lenin was a hypocrite too, but then again, this is what happens when Marxism meets reality.
>>18689692>During the Red Terror, TrotskyTrotsky was not against racking up a head count or spilling lakes of blood as long as the goal was what he considered the Right one.Trotsky had very genuine political differences with Stalin and hated the regime he was building, which he saw as a betrayal of Lenins Revolution.Unlike Stalin, who was a narcissist and opportunist, Trotsky was a genuine ideological fanatic with a single-minded commitment to world revolution. His criticisms of Stalin were not hypocritical at all,because he would not have done “the same as Stalin” had he been leader.
>>18690700>His criticisms of Stalin were not hypocritical at all,because he would not have done “the same as Stalin” had he been leader.He would "not have done the same as Stalin" meaning, he would not focus on building up the Soviet Union and he would instead focus on coordination of international insurrection and subversion efforts. This would have left the USSR even more staved of resources as well as the infrastructure needed to produce them. Hence, he would have done far worse than Stalin. Millions more would have died in gulags, famines, and purges. And as far as his international "Permanent Revolution" efforts? God only knows what kind of powder kegs that would've knocked over. Probably would've started WWIII early.
>>18690200Lenin actually wasn't a hypocrite, dude was 100% honest and open about his ideas and disdain for everyone from the getgo. He was always saying "WE GONNA TAKE POWER BY FORCE AND KILL ALL OF YOU, YEAH!" kek
>>18689692Making the mother of all omelets, can't fret over every egg
>>18691089I'm talking about Workers Opposition and how they betrayed one group, that is workers, they were supposed to empower.Or how state was supposed to "wither away" yet it became stronger and totalitarian.
>>18691153This. Lenin was not AS hypocritical as Stalin but he still kept fucking over his own allies.It's funny how Leninists have to downplay him backstabbing the worker run councils by crippling their power and making them subservient. Worker run bodies are supposed to be the backbone of socialism. Without that Marxist socialism is just state capitalism, and not particularly efficient at it. See: post Mao China.And this wasn't a one-off thing either. Just look at what they did to their supposed friends. Martov, the old guard bolsheviks, the Kronstadt Sailors, the left SR's that supported them during the revolution. Discarded because of Lenin's ego, or shut out of the political process in favor of a small clique and killed or exiled when they muttered even a hint of protest.Lenin gave birth to the apparatus that Stalin weaponized. He set the precedent.
>>18691993I would argue it was just not really possible for worker's councils to be an effective way for things to function and State, that is Lenin and co, realized that.It's not that I am defending Lenin or whatever, but to me this is one of those utopian parts of marxism, as the workers saw it, that got pushed aside by actual politics on the ground.
