NationStates Jolt Archive

Suppose that after Lenin's death, Leon Trotsky spoke up at the Twelfth Party Congress and gained power of Soviet Russia rather than Joseph Stalin. What do you think would be different in the world today? Would the USSR still exist? Would it be a police state as Lenin began and Stalin truely executed, or would Trotsky's Menshevik tendencies result in a nicer, more people-friendly USSR? Could the USSR and the US have coexisted peacefully?

Yay Trotsky?

Let's get this straight first: Lenin did not start what Stalin carried out.
Lenin was in the process of democratising the CCCP when he died. If Lenin had lived another 10 years, the CCCP we all came to know and love would have been a lot different.
That said, with Trotsky taking power as opposed to Stalin, again, things would have been better. Stalin believed in an isolationist model of Socialism - Socialism in one state - which went against what Marx and Lenin had said. A Trotsky led CCCP probably would have been more open to the west after WWII, and probably could have avoided the worst of the Cold War. But maybe not, since Eisenhower was pretty much the one who kicked off the Cold War by refusing to enter negotiations with Stalin which Churchill had been pushing him to do.

Stop! I am Trotsky!

If Trotsky has won then both the USSR and the world would be a better place.

Let's get this straight first: Lenin did not start what Stalin carried out.
Lenin was in the process of democratising the CCCP when he died. If Lenin had lived another 10 years, the CCCP we all came to know and love would have been a lot different.


Cheka. Lenin pulled off what I'd consider a perfect commune, then he started a police state.

Let's face it, if it hadn't been for Stalinism and the drive to industrialize so brutally under him, Germany would have crushed the USSR in the 40s.

Stalin was a very bad man, and his waying of doing things was possibly worse than Hitler's, but if we had had a kinder, gentler USSR in the twenties and thirties, then I doubt it would have been able to fight a modern war at all in the 40s.

Cheka. Lenin pulled off what I'd consider a perfect commune, then he started a police state.

If the Soviet Union didn't turn into a police state it would have collapsed in the first few years of its existence. In fact, after the Revolution Russia was invaded by 14 Imperialists nations, all of whom supported wanna be kings and the like who wanted power for themselves

If the Soviet Union didn't turn into a police state it would have collapsed in the first few years of its existence. In fact, after the Revolution Russia was invaded by 14 Imperialists nations, all of whom supported wanna be kings and the like who wanted power for themselves


I thought it was three that actually invaded.

The rest just had voluteers go to help the white Russians.

In any event, Lenin and Trotsky were still alive after all that was concluded.

Suppose that after Lenin's death, Leon Trotsky spoke up at the Twelfth Party Congress and gained power of Soviet Russia rather than Joseph Stalin. What do you think would be different in the world today? Would the USSR still exist? Would it be a police state as Lenin began and Stalin truely executed, or would Trotsky's Menshevik tendencies result in a nicer, more people-friendly USSR? Could the USSR and the US have coexisted peacefully?

Trotsky would have been a prick who would be bent on insighting communist revolutions worldwide and thereby imposing his will on the rest of the world. Hopefully this would result in a war against the soviet union and after defeating the atheist bastards the allies would put the true christian Russians back in power and they would send all the commie bastards to siberian concentration camps...and there you have it a perfect ending :cool:

Trotsky would have been a prick who would be bent on insighting communist revolutions worldwide and thereby imposing his will on the rest of the world. Hopefully this would result in a war against the soviet union and after defeating the atheist bastards the allies would put the true christian Russians back in power and they would send all the commie bastards to siberian concentration camps...and there you have it a perfect ending :cool:

Right WIng America = fanatical bigot

Right WIng America = fanatical bigot
You think? With a name like that?

IF trotsky had become chairman than WW2 might have been prevented. Under stalin's influence the German communists refused to forge a united front with the Social Democratic Party and allowed Hitler to rise to power without firing a shot. If trotsky had been at the helm of the world communist movement, hitler would not have risen to power without a fight.

Although internationally the split between Stalin and Trotsky had greater repercussions, domestically Stalin's greatest threat probably came from Nikolai Bukharin on the right.

Bukharin, who ironically enough was eventually arrested for Trotskist activities, was a proponent of social justice, looking to the peasants for Russia's salvation and opposing Stalin's forced collectivization. Trotsky believed the peasants were decades (or longer) away from embracing communist ideals and looked to a proletariat revolution that never materialized. In fact Trotsky initially supported Stalin, who he thought was less of a threat than Bukharin.

Had Trotsky won out in his struggle against Stalin I think the country would have eventually degenerated into civil war. Trotsky would have focused on inciting European revolution, while Bukharin and the right would have continued to build support among Russia's peasants.

Although Trotsky had made the revolution possible through the creation of the Red Army, I think internal fighting, combined with foreign intrigue, would have eventually spelled doom for a Trotsky government.

Stalin was the ultimate master of the triangulation strategy. First he eliminated opposition on the left by enlisting the support of Bukharin (as well as Alexei Rykov, who was Lenin's successor as chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, and Mikhail Tomsky, who was the leader of the Soviet trade-unions) in getting rid of Trotsky, as well as Grigorii Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev. He then turned on the right and wiped out Bukharin and his allies, condemning them in a series of show trials.

Stalin, ultimately, was less of a true communist, and more a modern Russian Tsar.

IF trotsky had become chairman than WW2 might have been prevented. Under stalin's influence the German communists refused to forge a united front with the Social Democratic Party and allowed Hitler to rise to power without firing a shot. If trotsky had been at the helm of the world communist movement, hitler would not have risen to power without a fight.

I'd like to think that would have stopped him, but Hitler has shown that he was more than capable of winning fights.

Lenin was in the process of democratising the CCCP when he died. If Lenin had lived another 10 years, the CCCP we all came to know and love would have been a lot different.

Let's face it, if it hadn't been for Stalinism and the drive to industrialize so brutally under him, Germany would have crushed the USSR in the 40s.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with both these points. The latter first:

While it is true that Stalin led Russia into forced industrialization through a series of 5-year plans, he also nearly destroyed the Soviet military. Between 1937 and 1938 Stalin wiped out 36,000 Red Army officers, including 90% of the general officers and 80% of the colonels. During the first four months of the German-Soviet war the Red Army lost over 2 million soldiers, largely due to its lack of preparation and cowed, ineffective leadership, resulting from the purge.

In fact, Stalin's purges and brutality nearly caused the Soviet Union to lose the war, but faced with a choice between Nazi brutality and Communist brutality, Russians chose to defend the Motherland. Had the Germans come as liberators there is a good chance that the results would have been different.

I also disagree with Myrth's point that Lenin would have been a more benevolent leader. Certainly it is difficult to surpass Stalin, who remains the 20th century's "greatest" mass murderer. However, under Lenin's leadership (1917-1924) over 4 million Russians were killed through terror, concentration camps, and forced famine. Someone else has already mentioned that the Soviet secret police got its start under Lenin.

I'm assuming the democratization referred to is Lenin's New Economic Policy (NEP), which was a small nod toward capitalism only because the peasants and workers, as well as sailors at the Kronstadt naval base, were rebelling against the new communist government. Lenin was forced into concessions that probably would not have lasted once he consolidated power.

In hindsight it always appears that history has unfolded as it should. I believe the Soviet Union defeated Germany in spite of Stalin, not because of him and that brutality and violence are inherent in a soviet-style communist system.

If Trotsky beat out Stalin socialism might have worked, w/o Stalin's nasty little purges. . .

but then again who knows?

A more interesting question is:

how would history have unfolded differently if Alexander Kerensky's provisional government had made peace with Germany and prevented the second revolution of 1917?

A more interesting question is:

how would history have unfolded differently if Alexander Kerensky's provisional government had made peace with Germany and prevented the second revolution of 1917?

Kerensky's government would be nice. However he still wanted Russia to participate in the first world war and that was his biggest mistake. The Russian people had gone through hell and werent prepared to continue the massacre machine that WWI was...

Kerensky's government would be nice. However he still wanted Russia to participate in the first world war and that was his biggest mistake. The Russian people had gone through hell and werent prepared to continue the massacre machine that WWI was...

You do realise that Kerensky was a Social Revolutionary don't you. But wait...that would mean he was...oh no...A SOCIALIST!!!

Under a Trotsky with supreme power the USSR would have fallen over and collapsed, because he was too idedological for the USSR at the time. But if say a Trotsky was in power instead of a Kruschev, who knows?
Plus I really like Trotsky, but he was a prick. Let us not forget the Kronstadt uprisising, where the most steadfast revolutionaries of 1917 wanted a better, socialist world,and Trotsky ordered 60,000 CHEKA and Red Army members to slaughter them.

You do realise that Kerensky was a Social Revolutionary don't you. But wait...that would mean he was...oh no...A SOCIALIST!!!

Under a Trotsky with supreme power the USSR would have fallen over and collapsed, because he was too idedological for the USSR at the time. But if say a Trotsky was in power instead of a Kruschev, who knows?
Plus I really like Trotsky, but he was a prick. Let us not forget the Kronstadt uprisising, where the most steadfast revolutionaries of 1917 wanted a better, socialist world,and Trotsky ordered 60,000 CHEKA and Red Army members to slaughter them.

Even though I HATE Trotsky I still have to admit he would be a much better military leader then Stalin(in fact Stalin was a horrible military commander) afterall he did take a large group of untrained peasents and aging wwI veterans and turned them into a large disiplined Red Army(which under his guidence reigned supreme in the Russian Civil War) in fact Stalin was the main reason why the Red Army was so weakened(officer purges) so Trotsky would have put up a much better fight.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with both these points. The latter first:

While it is true that Stalin led Russia into forced industrialization through a series of 5-year plans, he also nearly destroyed the Soviet military. Between 1937 and 1938 Stalin wiped out 36,000 Red Army officers, including 90% of the general officers and 80% of the colonels. During the first four months of the German-Soviet war the Red Army lost over 2 million soldiers, largely due to its lack of preparation and cowed, ineffective leadership, resulting from the purge.

In fact, Stalin's purges and brutality nearly caused the Soviet Union to lose the war, but faced with a choice between Nazi brutality and Communist brutality, Russians chose to defend the Motherland. Had the Germans come as liberators there is a good chance that the results would have been different.



I agree that the purges hurt the USSR, but WWII was a war of logistics. Trotsky would never have developed the industrial base and infra-structure of the USSR to the point where effective lasting opposition to Germany would have been possible. Indeed, even with Stalin's programs the USSR still required massive logistics support from the western allies.

Had it not been for the ruthless development of industry, the USSR would have had nothing to fight with. The would have been as ineffective as Poland. (Which had a professional non-purged officer corp). Stalin gave the USSR the modern weapons the were ultimately needed to fight.

I agree that the purges hurt the USSR, but WWII was a war of logistics. Trotsky would never have developed the industrial base and infra-structure of the USSR to the point where effective lasting opposition to Germany would have been possible. Indeed, even with Stalin's programs the USSR still required massive logistics support from the western allies.

Had it not been for the ruthless development of industry, the USSR would have had nothing to fight with. The would have been as ineffective as Poland. (Which had a professional non-purged officer corp). Stalin gave the USSR the modern weapons the were ultimately needed to fight.

That is blatantly untrue! Stalin infact ripped off Trotsky's economic program-- It was trotsky who first proposed the 5-year plan, it was trotsky who first proposed to collectivize Russia's farms, while Stalin and Bukarin were off talking about how the agricultural sector would be the backbone of the economy.

However after Stalin made his turn to the left, he twisted Trostky's economic program and forced the farmers into collective farms instead of offering them incentives to do so voluntarily as Trotsky proposed, which angered many farmers causing them to destroy their crops and kill their livestock which led to widespread famine. Under Trotsky industrialization would have gone much smoother and with less death than under the mad direction of stalin.

Furthermore Trotsky, the hero of the Russian Civil War would have been an infinitely better leader of the Soviet Union durring WW2. Stalin did nothing for days after being attacked by Hitler moronically refusing to believe that hitler had broken his pact. His purging of many of his best officers undobutably cost the Soviets millions of lives as well. Stalin did win the second world war but only at a cost of 20+ million lives and the near complete destruction, which meant they had to rebuilt much of the state from scratch.