NationStates Jolt Archive

I hadn't really thought about it since the idea came up in a recent thread...

Trotsky and the Neo-Conservatives in the US are essentially saying the same thing!
It's about world-wide revolution, about exporting one's system and so on.

And then there is the worrying connection between the founders of US Neo-Conservatism and people whom you would call "Trotskyists".

If you want to start research, I'd start with Max Shachtman....a fervent Trotsky-fan who hated Stalin and the Soviet Union so much that he ended up working together with Ronald Reagan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Shachtman

What do you say about that? Particular those of you who would call themselves Troskyists?

I knew of Shachtman before. And I have to say I agree.

Both Ideologies are equally intolerant of opposing ideas, both within and without their "party" apparatus.

It is an understatement to say that I have little respect for the way the local Trot groups do their recruiting - i'll leave it at that. Other points that piss me off are their branding of those on the left that disagree on even minor points, even other Trot groups, as "ultraleft" or "stalinist", (thus dividing the left even further...), encouraging junior members to engage in violent behavior at protests while the senior membership idly sits back and lets them do the dirty work (an example was the break in and occupation of an official's house at my university, where several students got arrested on the assurances that it would be resolved without any conflict with the police - stupid, yes, but the leadership were happy and avoided any trouble, while the action itself got in the media. Those other students are now in prison, I believe.), the fact that they don't teach new members about atrocities such as Kronshtadt (that would damage their personality cult), the arbritary policy decisions made by about three people within the groups and forced on the entire membership (sound familiar?), and last but not least, the fact that all of them have the same rehearsed responses to criticism, and are totally lacking in any individuality.

Sorry Dhomme. That's how it is.

Bumpalicious

What do you say about that? Particular those of you who would call themselves Troskyists?

Fucking wanker. Shit interpretation of trotskyism. Stay orthodox to the end. Never trust the capitalists or their fucking state to get anything done.

snip
Poser!

I knew of Shachtman before. And I have to say I agree.

Both Ideologies are equally intolerant of opposing ideas, both within and without their "party" apparatus.
Look up democratic centralism. Trotsky was frequently afraid of showing factionalism in his life in case any show of disunity destroyed the party. Only when he truly realised the importance of free and internal debate did he become the 'left opposition'


It is an understatement to say that I have little respect for the way the local Trot groups do their recruiting - i'll leave it at that.
How do your trots do it then?

Other points that piss me off are their branding of those on the left that disagree on even minor points, even other Trot groups, as "ultraleft" or "stalinist", (thus dividing the left even further...),
We call people stalinist when they take stalin-esque actions (showing no internal democracy, forming popular fronts,etc *cough SWP cough*)


encouraging junior members to engage in violent behavior at protests while the senior membership idly sits back and lets them do the dirty work (an example was the break in and occupation of an official's house at my university, where several students got arrested on the assurances that it would be resolved without any conflict with the police - stupid, yes, but the leadership were happy and avoided any trouble, while the action itself got in the media. Those other students are now in prison, I believe.)
this one isolated incidence leads you to make such broad assumptions? This is bullshit. Come on a demonstration. All take militant action if neccessary but the older people tend to be less physically fit so dont get as involved often.


the fact that they don't teach new members about atrocities such as Kronshtadt (that would damage their personality cult),
Dont get me started on those fucking anarchist shitstirrers

the arbritary policy decisions made by about three people within the groups and forced on the entire membership (sound familiar?), and last but not least, the fact that all of them have the same rehearsed responses to criticism, and are totally lacking in any individuality.

That's complete bollocks man. You really need to get some actual criticisms instead of just fabricating existing stereotypes of revolutionary parties.

Sorry Dhomme. That's how it is.
said by someone chewed and spat out by some shitty "trot" party like SWP.

Poser!
Well you didn't really follow it up, and I thought that was a really interesting thing.
Everyone loves Trotsky these days, but no one seems to get the connection - and since you didn't wanna make a thread about this, I did.

*poses*

Look up democratic centralism. Trotsky was frequently afraid of showing factionalism in his life in case any show of disunity destroyed the party. Only when he truly realised the importance of free and internal debate did he become the 'left opposition'
I am aware. While it is impossible to tell what Trotsky would have been like had he ascended to power, and thus criticism of him must stall there, my contention is mostly with his followers.

How do your trots do it then?

At first, it's all nice and friendly. They invite you to come to their meetings, and such. They seem alright. Then you'll sign a petition. And then they'll give you a phonecall asking you to come to more meetings. And if you refuse, you're subject to harrassing phonecalls, intimidation in person, etc. (what I was subjected to.) If you actuall join the organisation; rather than being an optional association, you are obligated to do as you are told, and it is your "responsibility" to make the ideology your prime motivation.

We call people stalinist when they take stalin-esque actions (showing no internal democracy, forming popular fronts,etc *cough SWP cough*)

Which is ironic, because the Trot groups here have no internal democracy, and despite their rhetoric about how they are the capitalist enemy, they are more than willing to cooperate with the Australian Labor Party when it suits them.

this one isolated incidence leads you to make such broad assumptions? This is bullshit. Come on a demonstration. All take militant action if neccessary but the older people tend to be less physically fit so dont get as involved often.

I'm talking about the groups here. If yours are different, fine. But from my experience of Trotskyist groups, they all operate into this faction. And by the way - much of the core leadership of these groups aren't much older than the younger members.

Dont get me started on those fucking anarchist shitstirrers

Yeah. Exactly.

That's complete bollocks man. You really need to get some actual criticisms instead of just fabricating existing stereotypes of revolutionary parties.

Not existing stereotypes, that is how local organisations such as Resistance and Socialist Alternative (who may be related to the SWP...hmm, I'll have to research that) operate.

said by someone chewed and spat out by some shitty "trot" party like SWP.

I wasn't chewed or spat out. I wouldn't let them.

i was a troskyist once and look what i am now... we called the socialist workers party democratic party tailists and lackeys of the class traitor trade union bueacratic elites and at least occasionally accused them of capitulating to their shachtmanite leanings... as for moving from the far left to the far right remember mussolini was originally a syndicalist.

I am aware. While it is impossible to tell what Trotsky would have been like had he ascended to power, and thus criticism of him must stall there, my contention is mostly with his followers.
He woulda been sexcellent.



At first, it's all nice and friendly. They invite you to come to their meetings, and such. They seem alright. Then you'll sign a petition. And then they'll give you a phonecall asking you to come to more meetings. And if you refuse, you're subject to harrassing phonecalls, intimidation in person, etc. (what I was subjected to.) If you actuall join the organisation; rather than being an optional association, you are obligated to do as you are told, and it is your "responsibility" to make the ideology your prime motivation.

Im sorry youve had some bad experiences with trot groups but this doesnt happen in every single organisation. For example, in our local branch, one guy left because he became an anarchist. We still hang out with him, talk with him, etc, because he's a nice guy and a friend. We dont harass or abuse him.


Which is ironic, because the Trot groups here have no internal democracy, and despite their rhetoric about how they are the capitalist enemy, they are more than willing to cooperate with the Australian Labor Party when it suits them.

Popular frontism, plain and simple. Shouldnt be done if you actually follow trotskyism


I'm talking about the groups here. If yours are different, fine. But from my experience of Trotskyist groups, they all operate into this faction. And by the way - much of the core leadership of these groups aren't much older than the younger members.

I dont understand where your criticism comes from then. I said the older members wont be physical as often because they cant handle it as well as the young 'uns. Do you really think 60 year olds would be up for fighting fash/police? Im not referring to the leadership exclusively at all, just the older members


Yeah. Exactly.

Im sorry, but take up arms against the workers state and what do you expect to happen?


Not existing stereotypes, that is how local organisations such as Resistance and Socialist Alternative (who may be related to the SWP...hmm, I'll have to research that) operate.
Bunch of Cliffites. That explains that.


I wasn't chewed or spat out. I wouldn't let them.
You just sound like a bitter person basing their opinions on a couple of "trotskyist" groups.

i was chewed up and spat out... okay i quit cuz they were cramping my college partying style with their newspaper sales and their internal educations ect ect...

Im sorry youve had some bad experiences with trot groups but this doesnt happen in every single organisation. For example, in our local branch, one guy left because he became an anarchist. We still hang out with him, talk with him, etc, because he's a nice guy and a friend. We dont harass or abuse him.

Cool.


Popular frontism, plain and simple. Shouldnt be done if you actually follow trotskyism

Or any real form of communism. ;)

I dont understand where your criticism comes from then. I said the older members wont be physical as often because they cant handle it as well as the young 'uns. Do you really think 60 year olds would be up for fighting fash/police? Im not referring to the leadership exclusively at all, just the older members

Well, I understand that, but there are perfectly physically capable people in their 20's that are "leaders", who are somehow less expendable than the junior members, so they stand around watching underlings execute their meticulous (and dangerous) plans, all the while reassuring them that they won't get in trouble. That is incredibly wrong. I've got nothing against direct action when it's warranted, but their method of doing so stinks.

Im sorry, but take up arms against the workers state and what do you expect to happen?

In the context of things, their demands were perfectly reasonable. Taken from wikipedia (meh, I have it in a book, but it's the easiest way to find this stuff online)-

1. Immediate new elections to the Soviets. The present Soviets no longer express the wishes of the workers and peasants. The new elections should be by secret ballot, and should be preceded by free electoral propaganda.
2. Freedom of speech and of the press for workers and peasants, for the Anarchists, and for the Left Socialist parties.
3. The right of assembly, and freedom for trade union and peasant organisations.
4. The organisation, at the latest on 10th March 1921, of a Conference of non-Party workers, solders and sailors of Petrograd, Kronstadt and the Petrograd District.
5. The liberation of all political prisoners of the Socialist parties, and of all imprisoned workers and peasants, soldiers and sailors belonging to working class and peasant organisations.
6. The election of a commission to look into the dossiers of all those detained in prisons and concentration camps.
7. The abolition of all political sections in the armed forces. No political party should have privileges for the propagation of its ideas, or receive State subsidies to this end. In the place of the political sections various cultural groups should be set up, deriving resources from the State.
8. The immediate abolition of the militia detachments set up between towns and countryside.
9. The equalisation of rations for all workers, except those engaged in dangerous or unhealthy jobs.
10. The abolition of Party combat detachments in all military groups. The abolition of Party guards in factories and enterprises. If guards are required, they should be nominated, taking into account the views of the workers.
11. The granting to the peasants of freedom of action on their own soil, and of the right to own cattle, provided they look after them themselves and do not employ hired labour.
12. We request that all military units and officer trainee groups associate themselves with this resolution.
13. We demand that the Press give proper publicity to this resolution.
14. We demand the institution of mobile workers' control groups.
15. We demand that handicraft production be authorised provided it does not utilise wage labour.

Bunch of Cliffites. That explains that.

You just sound like a bitter person basing their opinions on a couple of "trotskyist" groups.

Well, i'm afraid that these are the only major ones in my area, so you can excuse my opinion on the basis is that they are all I have been - and will be - exposed to.

At first, it's all nice and friendly. They invite you to come to their meetings, and such. They seem alright. Then you'll sign a petition. And then they'll give you a phonecall asking you to come to more meetings. And if you refuse, you're subject to harrassing phonecalls, intimidation in person, etc. (what I was subjected to.) If you actuall join the organisation; rather than being an optional association, you are obligated to do as you are told, and it is your "responsibility" to make the ideology your prime motivation.

Are we talking about Trotskyists here, or Scientologists? The more I hear your description (I've never met a Trotskyist in the US), the more it sounds like a bullshit cult.

Are we talking about Trotskyists here, or Scientologists? The more I hear your description (I've never met a Trotskyist in the US), the more it sounds like a bullshit cult.

A lot of it is, actually.

:D

Are we talking about Trotskyists here, or Scientologists? The more I hear your description (I've never met a Trotskyist in the US), the more it sounds like a bullshit cult.
if you ever went to an antiwar protest you probably did and didn't know it, the socialist workers party and the workers world party are both real deep in the antiwar popular front.

Or any real form of communism. ;)

Trotskyism is the only real form of communism [/secterianism]


Well, I understand that, but there are perfectly physically capable people in their 20's that are "leaders", who are somehow less expendable than the junior members, so they stand around watching underlings execute their meticulous (and dangerous) plans, all the while reassuring them that they won't get in trouble. That is incredibly wrong. I've got nothing against direct action when it's warranted, but their method of doing so stinks.

I've never seen that happen, though. Hate to keep using examples from our group but there were several members from our national council kicking down the security fence at gleneagles with the rest of the 'underlings'.


In the context of things, their demands were perfectly reasonable

And yet they still were taking up arms against the state. I'm sorry, but after a brutal and bloody civil war can you understand why the bolsheviks were paranoid about another uprising against the workers' state?





Well, i'm afraid that these are the only major ones in my area, so you can excuse my opinion on the basis is that they are all I have been - and will be - exposed to.
Where do you live btw? Is it australia?

If so-
http://www.onesolutionrevolution.org/