Post AkMjdLMCItkfhGX00e by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #AkGWxorhq1WUebwWdE by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-24T19:43:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Who do you think contributed more to advancing the principles of proletarian revolution and socialism: Joseph Stalin or Leon Trotsky?
(DIR) Post #AkH68rpSej3XQXtdZI by skippy442@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T02:18:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Joseph Smith
(DIR) Post #AkH6RXd5ytECHX1744 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T02:21:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skippy442 Why?
(DIR) Post #AkHVcnelEQEo1mGFai by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T07:03:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom So the person who was a Menshevik and joined the party months before October, played no crucial role in the rev, despite the narrative "his was the right hand", and started saying things about permanent and worldwide rev that's disagrees with Marxism and Leninism was more important than Stalin?Surreal
(DIR) Post #AkHl03TG6APZ33Qb4q by Kahte@masto.bike
2024-07-25T09:56:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom :blobcatheart: :blobcat_heartcat:
(DIR) Post #AkHmHdzneY8bCmbFoG by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T10:10:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Kahte ❤️ :blobcat: :blobcat:❤️
(DIR) Post #AkHoVR2goHYAzeegsa by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T10:35:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal Trotsky's concepts of permanent and worldwide revolution don't appear to be against Marxism-Leninism but appear to be extensions within the broader ML framework. While permanent revolution did represent a departure from the orthodox Marxist view of revolution in less developed countries, the concept wasn't explicitly against Marxism, it only challenge the the stages theory of historical materialism, which posited that societies first go through a bourgeois-democratic...1/4
(DIR) Post #AkHoY1IUzBGW11HZjc by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T10:35:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal ..stage before transitioning to socialism, due to Trotsky analyzing underdeveloped countries with autocratic regimes and concluding from that analysis that the bourgeoisie of those countries were too weak to lead a successful bourgeois-democratic revolution, and that the working class would have to lead the revolution and proceed directly to socialism.Worldwide revolution was in line with the Marxist principle that capitalism is a global system, and socialism would ultimately...2/4
(DIR) Post #AkHoaJLErvpaYdelii by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T10:36:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal ...need to be established on a global scale to fully succeed. Lenin had also stressed the importance of internationalism, though Trotsky put more of a distinct emphasis on the immediate necessity of spreading revolution.Also, Trotsky played a significant role in the Russian Revolution. Trotsky's strategic acumen helped secure key locations in Petrograd, ensuring the success of the Bolshevik uprising. Trotsky also organized and led the Red Army during the Russian Civil War,...3/4
(DIR) Post #AkHobTvuyVx5hFN4t6 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T10:36:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal ...which was essential in securing Bolshevik power against various counter-revolutionary forces. 4/4
(DIR) Post #AkHyUpVBNq8e6bKgpE by skippy442@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T12:27:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom ummm ... why what ...?
(DIR) Post #AkIQ8UlmaAWc9REfyq by duckwhistle@mastodon.org.uk
2024-07-25T17:36:55Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @peterkal Also Stalin was a power hungry sociopath and I'm not convinced he actually believed in socialism as much as he saw it as being an effective tool for disrupting the strongly entrenched feudal / imperial structure of the Russian Empire. His repression of political rivalry & take over of eastern Europe did more harm to the acceptance of socialism than anything good he did.
(DIR) Post #AkIrD3VA5bOfn6rPFY by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T22:40:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal I want to make it clear that I'm not a Trotskyist, and after doing more research on Trotskyism, I've realized that Trotskyism is heavily idealistic, whereas Stalin's approach was more pragmatic and more grounded in the realities faced by the Soviet Union at the time, and as a pragmatist myself I'm starting to agree more with Stalin's approach.
(DIR) Post #AkIrx5QZGFWF5Kf2K8 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T22:48:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@NoctisEqui I'm a pragmatist. I believe in addressing problems with practical solutions based on the current realities, and although my reservations and objections to Stalin still stand, after just now doing more research on Trotsky and Stalin and finding out how Trotsky's approach was more idealistic and how Stalin's approach was more pragmatic, I'm currently more inclined to agree more with Stalin's more pragmatic approach.
(DIR) Post #AkItY7yupPH5ftxAJ6 by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-25T23:06:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Just show the answers, a lot of material to unpack ig!I would do it tomorrow tho 'cause I am headed to sleep. Sorry, and good night comrade (if the time zone is one of sleep ig).
(DIR) Post #AkJuOR3nKjRF3x8asC by fredy_pferdi@social.linux.pizza
2024-07-26T10:50:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @peterkal I'm not a big fan of Stalin and he did some really dumb stuff but it makes me happy to read this from your account. He was pragmatic and that was also his problem but Trotsky was and Trotskyism nowadays is just a disruptor and servers the bourgeoisie in essence. What i don't understand is why you still often repost stuff of the legalists IMT.
(DIR) Post #AkMbHeu69KOSJeXMAa by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T18:00:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom 1) Sorry for the late answer2) I disagree with the idealistic-pragmatic, cause while in this case has a more pro-stalin approach, it still serves the narrative : Trotsky was good but ahh a little too utopian ideas, and Stalin, ok, false things happen, or more practice than theory. And I believe that analysis ain't following on the historic-scientific analysis, of people, and figures as Marxism-Leninism requires(continue in other post, please let me finish so i dont get lost)
(DIR) Post #AkMjb2k0XwpVNhZUlk by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T18:05:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom A ML analysis should consider the history of figures, take no info as granted of not doubt (like the people who say STALIN EVIL, and they call you an idiot or tankie if you even, just, question it), in order to judge. But also the judgement shouldn't be afraid to be truthful. If Stalin was really a dictator as many trots say, he should be condemned and no matter how out of the "established history" it might be, it should be said, louldly.
(DIR) Post #AkMjb3nac7Hyf6FrzU by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T18:10:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Also another parameters, is the ML understanding being inherited, faces ain't the ones to establish the trends but rather the trends to establish the faces. Saying Stalin was evil, tells nothing of value, tells nothing of the material conditions in USSR at the time, no analysis of trends inside the party, tells nothing Marxistically speaking. If evil is the word to express history then that one could be called, lot more but not a Marxist Leninist, a ML is a scientist.
(DIR) Post #AkMjb4bZcHGtA7dmts by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T18:41:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Science knows of no "established", or "evil", or "common known". Science knows logic, proof, and continuous doubt, it requires them for its function, and so does ML.
(DIR) Post #AkMjb4mCyjmJh6cHTc by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T18:46:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom 3)There are many things said about Stalin, from a dictator to a person not as good to see and understand theory, and its logical, people undergo different stages of getting in touch with the ML, and the history proving it right, and so the anti-communist propaganda corresponds with different levels of lies.
(DIR) Post #AkMjb5TSNwNBrEqot6 by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T18:56:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom The pragmatic label, misunderstands ML imo, because it confuses the relationship of theory and practice, theory would be useless, if it was disconnected with practice, and practice would be insufficient if it wasn't following a path that theory illuminates. Saying Stalin, missed a bit on theory makes you wonder what someone means, what history they have learnt, and whats theory for them.Look at the ALTs
(DIR) Post #AkMjb5vogV3fHC7T5k by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:06:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom If you actually search Stalin's works, see its actions, you are gonna realise he had a very close relationship with theory, theory is not something stand alone, or disconnected, its an always changing organism that evolves in the passing of time, in the extend of valuable practice. At what point did Stalin performed poorly ? Now, someone can accuse him of some theoretical mistakes, in the commodity production for instance he did miss a few details, but overall his work was
(DIR) Post #AkMjb6TqdyHQyk2e8W by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:09:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom remarkable, he did defend that markets ain't part of socialism, the laws of political economy as Marx pointed out, you can also judge the 1936 constitution which ended the production centered elections for the local one, to ensure people unity in the upcoming war, which make more blur he class identity of state and and allowed opportunists like Khrushchev, gain ground.
(DIR) Post #AkMjb706i25Ian8PQ0 by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:12:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom But that also bring me to the point that accusing Stalin o everything, a) forgets Stalin didn't have full control on the decisions, democratic centralism was applied, if majority was voting something he didn't like, he would have to follow suit, see for instance the attitude to other communist parties, diff from what stalin had advocated for, or how he tried to retire 5 times, but the Central Committee rejected it.
(DIR) Post #AkMjb7Xmgp1UHEtIuW by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:16:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom other details are for example, the ability people have to recall him but never did, the difference of being Secretery, with Chairman of people's commissar, and so on. Someone can by himself go more in deep like on the literature the election procedures and more that show no real hate from people to Stalin, see for instance the Days And Nights
(DIR) Post #AkMjb7gIBBpQhcs6Ai by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:20:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom b) ignores the material conditions, IMT(RCI) in many of their works accuse Stalin in the same dump way, but to give a marxist note, they start say things like: capitalists got around stalin. I remember I read a piece of them for the WWII and while they accuse stalin for supporting hitler, and the west, say that USSR won the war but the credits only go to the people not to Stalin
(DIR) Post #AkMjb8L3jcREk3weiO by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:24:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Which in the best scenario is idiotic. The reason the soviets won was because of the partisan orgs who worked hand in hand with the Red Army, the sacrifice of all people, but to say that no credits went to stalin, is forgetting the major factor, the central planning, the creation of a huge weapon industry, in a matte of months, Stalin and the government had no role in this ? The army was magicaly not something under the govs control ?
(DIR) Post #AkMjb8W34lEFI95QqO by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:30:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Saying Stalin was no part of this, is saying the government was not one of the people, and in the end that's the true essence of trot, no matter how many nicely flagged ifs, and nice going explanations, they side with the west narrative of history, they support anti-sovietism, they support any win of the capitalists no matter how it ends up being portrait.
(DIR) Post #AkMjb91bBSSwrzqd1M by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:33:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal You asked earlier at what point did Stalin perform poorly. There were some I could find, such as Stalin's initial military strategy against Finland, which ended in disaster. There is also Stalin's purges of the military leadership during the late 1930s, in which many experienced officers were executed or imprisoned, which undermined Soviet military effectiveness at a crucial time. There were his collectivization efforts in the 1920s–30s which, while the goal and motivation to... 1/3
(DIR) Post #AkMjdLMCItkfhGX00e by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:34:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal ...consolidate individual farms into large state-run collectives is one that I agree with, the mismanagement of this policy caused severe disruption to agriculture and rural life, leading to millions of deaths. There were other instances of Stalin performing poorly, such as his handling of The Lend-Lease Program, Operation Barbarossa, or the extremely idiotic and pseudoscientific Lysenkoism movement that Stalin supported and endorsed, but...2/3
(DIR) Post #AkMjgMf7uJ0Oc7pFya by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:34:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal the point is that the flaws of Stalin go beyond mere theoretical mistakes and mistakes in production commodity. 3/3
(DIR) Post #AkMk2UW1OEwNLC7MGW by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:38:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Are you talking about the Moscow Cases ? many in the army where opportunists and removed, but 1st they should have, even Trotsky's own archive proves he had communication with them, while he and they refused so.
(DIR) Post #AkMlBsfH4aC4naUFAe by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:51:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Again, in the collectivization he endorsed an not so aggressive path, in the beginning all the party did was to request kulaks giving the production to the state, but the kulaks (capitalists of the land) either they hid the production or even destroyed it, that along with the droughts caused the famines, collectivization is what made the USSR solve the famine issue. The narrative was built to support the kulaks. Look ALT
(DIR) Post #AkMlq7rxxfpbXSc6qW by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T19:58:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom is there any source you could provide me with Stalin actively supporting it? cause I can only find wikipedia, and trot sites, and neither of them can serve the purpose of reliability
(DIR) Post #AkMmyZN9goZh6nnBFg by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T20:11:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal I have 3 historical sources and accounts that document Stalin's support for Lysenkoism:1. "The Lysenko Affair" by L. A. Mints - This book provides a detailed account of the Lysenko affair, including Stalin's role in supporting Lysenko's theories. Mints discusses how Stalin's endorsement played a crucial role in the promotion of Lysenkoism and its impact on Soviet science.
(DIR) Post #AkMn2h6gsJW0Fs3e88 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T20:12:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal 2. "The Rise and Fall of Trofim Lysenko" by David Joravsky - This work offers an in-depth analysis of the political and scientific ramifications of Lysenkoism. It highlights Stalin's involvement and how Lysenko's theories were promoted and protected by the Soviet leadership.3. "Lysenko and the Origins of Soviet Agricultural Policy" by Peter Kropotkin - Kropotkin's analysis explores how Lysenkoism was integrated into Soviet agricultural policies, reflecting Stalin's support and...
(DIR) Post #AkMn4feFGmqWJGhAMy by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T20:12:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@peterkal ...the broader implications for Soviet science.These sources collectively provide evidence of Stalin's active support for Lysenkoism and its consequences for Soviet science and agriculture.
(DIR) Post #AkMnQAv0CdINNFms3U by peterkal@mastodon.social
2024-07-27T20:16:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom 1) I will look more into the subject but a) weird that I can find nothing in the collected works of Stalin about it, not one speech? Not one message? B) the supreme Soviet of USSR was full scientists and also the USSR was always even the worst days in the pinnacle of science research, it seems rather odd and not feasible to have implement it, but will contact once I go more in depth