Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 11:36:43 +0100 (MET) From: rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Rolf Martens) Subject: Re: M-G: BEAT BACK THE COUNTEREVOLUTIONARY SABOTEUR AND FBI Gershom B. wrote, on 15.12: >Lenin yes. Stalin no. It was the tradition of Stalin that led to the >abdication of Germany and other deformed worker's states as sacrificial >lambs to the wolves of capitalism. And it was Stalinism which eventually >carried through the Russian counter-revolution in order that it's parasites >could pass on their wealth to their children. Now *when*, according to reactionary Trotskyism, did that counter- revolution take place? The Trotskyites were always unclear about that. Some of them at least say "in 1989-91". In fact Trotskyism *supported* the *social-imperialist* Soviet Union of the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, saying it was "socialist", "though with bureaucratic deformations". That's very reactionary. Trotskyism attack Stalin's regime for two things: Unjust suppression against the people and bourgeois nationalism in foreign policy. And there *were* such things under Stalin, but they were *not* the main thing *then*. *Later*, however, under Chrushchev and Brezhnev etc, they *did* become the main thing. But *that* - now bourgeois - regime the Trotskyites have always defended, against the Marxists, that is, against the adherents of Mao Zedong. (And I don't mean such swindlers as "MIM" etc). >Revolution in China took >place COUNTER to the wishes of the Soviet governemnt at the time, although >it too ended up with a stalinist clique in power. That's not true. And the last part of that sentence smears the socialism in China under Mao Zedong too. Again, very reactionary. As for "Lenin" - other people have pointed out repeatedly how, before mid-1917, the line of Trotsky was always *contrary* to the (in the main) correct one of Lenin. Rolf M. --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005