kurt wrote:Is it possible for you to post without sounding like a Trotskybot? It seems like you're unable to post without making the most cliche sectarian attacks imaginable.
And when you don't have a good response to what a poster says you just say "Well you're just not a real Marxist!" Just because you don't know much about 20th century Marxism other than what Trotsky said about a few things doesn't make you a superior or "more correct" Marxist, I'm sorry to tell you.
Funny for you to accuse others of "cheap meaningless jibes" considering this post is nothing more than an irrelevant off topic sectarian rant.
Two questions. Do you consider yourself a supporter of Stalinism? You do to me. That makes you a Stalinist.
Do you consider Stalinism to be Marxism?
If so, how do you explain the following
1. Marxism says socialism has to be international, Stalin said the opposite. This is crucial ABC stuff.
2. Marxism is about the workers in power, Stalin wanted the revolutions outside Russia to be capitalist. In Russia the workers were not in power either, the bureucracy was.
3. Stalin killed all the Bolsheviks.
4. Socialism has to be democratic. No Stalinist country was.
5. All the Stalinist countries have collapsed now, to capitalism, more or less, as Trotsky predicted. If they were socialist, as you claim, how come it was so rubbish it failed? Do you consider a failed state to be a shining example of socialism to inspire the masses?
Do you say to American workers, ' we want America to be like the old USSR, you know, the crappy dictatorship which sold out to capitalism in the end'. Is that you best offer?
It is pathetic beyond belief.
"in reality it was the Communists above all others who prevented revolution in Spain" George Orwell
Economic Left/Right: -10.0 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.31