“Why are you always talking about Trotskyists and Trotskyism?”
Stalin and other communist leaders believed in socialism within one nation state (nationalism) versus Trotsky that wanted to abolish all nation states in the name of global communism.
Liberals very similar to Trotskyists wanting to eliminate nation states worldwide in the name of global international liberalism.
Basically like Trotskyists before them liberals want to eliminate all forms of nationalism in the formation of a global government superstructure.
This is why as a modern day Stalinist I view modern day liberals being almost identical to Trotskyists but instead of socialism it is liberal capitalism.
To be honest, I haven’t done a study
of either Stalin, Lenin or Trosky in over 40 years,
I just don’t remember that much about the differences between
them… If I get around it, I may renew my study, but I am,
at the moment, engaged with the connection with/between
science and philosophy…
Stalin was pragmatically one nation, because he felt threatened by capitalist nations after WW1, but he was an absolute globalist. He cut a deal with the Nazis to annex Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, eastern Poland, and parts of Romania and Finland. After Germany was defeated, Stalin installed subservient communist regimes across Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and East Germany, effectively absorbing them into a tightly controlled Soviet bloc. While Trotsky wanted immediate, bottom-up global revolutions, Stalin achieved expansion through top-down military conquest and geopolitical deals, turning “Socialism in One Country” into the headquarters of a massive communist empire. He would have happily taken over the whole world and if you think the EU is bad the USSR was worse.
I understand that your post is ‘on this particular outlook’ but Stalin is really one of the worst leaders and to call oneself a Stalinist is not a great PR move. He was such a nationalist that he killed anywhere from 6 to 20 million Russians and imprisoned 18 to 20 million Russians. With a patriot like that who needs enemies. If nationalism means one loves killing people from one’s own nation he’s second only to Mao as the great nationalist of the 20th century.
I can kinda understand Stalin’s paranoia regarding eastern Europe. Ever since Napoleon Europe has tried invading Russia militarily several times. With Poland even many times before the historical times of Napoleon.
Then of course in World War I and II the hostility towards Russia was palpable where trying to neutralize those nations on the borders of Russia after World War II became a matter of national security because of western espionage and organized intelligence counter-revolutions.
The whole communist killed all these people arguments ignores completely all the people killed in the name of western financial capital. Nobody has the moral highground where those arguments are really quite useless. I think we can all agree that killing in the name of political ideology is tragic no matter who is doing the killing.
And look at American international liberal capitalism trying to take over the entire world today. What is being done today would of made yesterday’s Soviets blush.
But that was practical and meant to be short term. He adhered to Marxist-Leninist ideology, communism was going to fall and in his eyes Russia would be the center of the global government. Any country in the USSR that made independence moves - and it didn’t need to be anything like leaving the USSR or communist to set him off - he came down hard on. There was one central government in Moscow. He was afraid of the US and Western Europe and rightly cautious about expansion, but long term, one world communist government under Moscow was the goal. He didn’t respect other nations, and while he wanted Moscow to be in the center, he was no respecter of Russia.
Man, you gotta let go of the Jimmy was running in the halls also type of argument. We don’t have to be a fan of either. And there were Soviet leaders who didn’t approach Stalin’s mass murdering madness if one feels one has to be an _____________ist.
My guy isn’t a monster because that guy is a monster. Um, no. They’re both monsters.
I would say you misunderstand Stalinism as much as many people do historically.
Nonetheless I believe in national communism where Stalin, Mao, or even Castro I think believed in much the same for their respected nation states.
I am all for an international global proletariat revolution but this must be done by workers themselves within their own nations. The idea that you can just go around destroying national governments everywhere around the world to make that happen forcibly is Trotskyist nonsense which is why Stalin had him politically purged.
There is nothing in Karl Marx’s writings or Friedrich Engels calling for a single one world communist government, that has always been based upon politically conservative absurd paranoias.
Leon Trotsky was the only communist leader calling for that and many other communists despised him for that reason because his ideas were radically insane.
One could argue that all different forms of government has killed and exists now because of some active form of killing others.
But what’s the alternative? Complete anarchism and even more killing in the absence of organized government?
Political killings isn’t unique to Marxism or communism solely. Western capitalist scapegoating Marxists and communists as evil boogeyman is just silly when it is an even worse offender itself by comparison.
2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, when NATO names Ukraine as a potential NATO member
July 16, 1990 Ukraine adopted a declaration of sovereignty, in which it defines itself as a neutral non-aligned nuclear-weapon state.
August 24, 1991. Declaration of independence of Ukraine. Ukraine defines itself as an independent non-aligned nuclear-weapon state, as a non-aligned country.
Referendum in Ukraine December 1, 1991. The population of Ukraine said yes with over 80% participation and over 90% yes for a neutral non-aligned nuclear-weapon-free Ukraine.
1996 Constitution of Ukraine confirms the same principles.
2010 Ukrainian people elected a head of state in 2010 who would continue to lead a neutral Ukraine. This was Yanukovych, who tried to create such a balance between East and West
2012 the parliamentary elections in Ukraine were again won by forces that had formed a majority in parliament. The main party in the state was those that supported neutrality
January-February 2014, the events on Majdan Square will develop into a situation where externally coordinated demonstrations, externally financed demonstrations with the presence of American and Western European politicians on the square
Present day the chief and head of nato is giving flowery speeches on how absolutely wonderful it is that we can cause casualties to russia, because fck ukrainian lives if they can be used to inflict any kind of loss on russia.
on and on we go
NATO is not a neutral participant in this
The EU is without a doubt full of shit.
Absolutely is.
No question about it.
Fucking globalists wanted this situation so badly they are still working on escalating it.
But NATO was absolutely not a neutral bystander in this.
The fucks at it’s head are itching for ww3 so hard that they are nearly bursting from happiness on EVERY AND ANY interview where they are asked about the ukraine situation.
Its like watching a bunch of psychopaths grinning from ear to ear while biting their own fingers in suspense when they can finally start up a war that will cost the lives of billions.
Feel free to take a look at any interview on the topic with nato high command.
Its not even smiles. Its like they are living the best days of their entire f-ing lives.
NATO is not a state, like the EU is. It is not a desicion maker. Its postulates and declarations are residues of the mix of powers that make it up, mostly leading parties in the US.
You left out what the coordinated demonstrations were about. It was about joining Ukraine to the EU.
Neither is the EU.
Its a Brüssels lead bureocratic bullshit engine nobody has elected.
The exact same shit as NATO.
Are you seriously suggesting that NATO is somehow neutral just because its not a country of its own or something? As if it could not be stocked full to it’s neck with bought off assholes the same way the american law and justice system is stocked by globalist shills thanks to George Soros and many others.
How many bought off Soros money DAs and judges do you currently have? Remind me.
It didnt matter the moment it was clear that they were funded demonstrations.
Are your anti ICE protests valid when you know for a fact that they are being paid for by dems and globalists?
