Re: Maoism, trotskyism, stalinism, the left, how do we get there??

[1942tj]

It is always the synthesis that prevails. Socialism is pretty general :)

[HK379]

Afcourse we have to Fight for piece ...

no piece for the capitalist and fashist exploiters .

[arj4bass]

Stalin had a flair for supporting fascists not only signing pacts with Hitler but having a soft side towards Franco's fascists in the Spanish Civil war .. And what about Lenin's testimonial where he wanted Stalin removed from all posts supposedly you wont say that was framed up by the Nazis or western powers ..???

[RedNickII]

@arj4bass

The situation in Spain was very messy. Nobody except Mexico was helping send arms to the anti-fascists. The Fascists had much better backing, it was a lost cause. It was a strategic political move, a bad one though, but in many ways it needed to be done to stall an attack on the USSR. Go read Lenin's testimonial, he only said Stalin should be removed as General Secretary. And after that, Stalin offered his resignation!! But almost everyone, including Trotsky, voted for him to stay.

[RedNickII]

@arj4bass

Did you even read my last post on Stalin and Hitler from a few days ago?

[RFXCGZZ]

@arj4bass

Yeah... that's why Stalin supported the Republicans during the Spanish civil war, while Britain, France and the US did nothing, and did not stop Nazi sympathizers from helping the Nationalists. It was the British who brought Franco back to Spain from Morocco.

Stalin signed the pact in order to maintain peace. He also liked Hitler more than the Western states, because Hitler did not have an active role against him in the Russian civil war. He did fear him however (Lebensraum).

[westistguttotal]

@arj4bass

Lenin wasn`t an emperor who says "This man is my Crown Prince !" Thats just what the Trotzkiststasie thinks.

[RFXCGZZ]

@arj4bass

The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was signed to keep peace with Hitler. Stalin also preferred Germany to the UK, US, France etc. because Germany was not involved in the Russian civil war against the Red Army.

Stalin was not pro-Nazi or pro-Fascist. In fact he was the leader that destroyed fascism in Europe and Asia.

[arj4bass]

And yes the supposed death toll was revealed after Hitler and the Nazis were terminated so the possibility of Nazis framing them up is ruled out and by the way it was by the innocent worker soviets who had lived on to tell the tale of their "gulag experiences"

[RedNickII]

@arj4bass

No it isn't ruled out. During the Gorbachev era a thousand page document was released saying less had died than previously thought. Who told you that the Nazis didn't frame them? Who "revealed" that, a capitalist?

[arj4bass]

Trotsky was one of the finest revolutionaries and the greatest Marxist alongside Lenin to live..

Stalin was a fagot he killed millions and developed a totalitarian system which was opposed to the idea of Marxism/Communism ..On the other hand Trotsky wished for a Workers Democracy that was the core of Marxism .. .Stalin and Mao two pigs who have ruined the name of us contemporary Marxists

LONG LIVE MARX,ENGELS,LENIN,TROTSKY

down with revisionists STALIN AND MAO

[RedNickII]

You call yourself a revolutionary, yet you use the homophobic word "fagot." You just insulted homosexuals. You aren't a revolutionary, you are a disgrace who repeats bourgeois propaganda, and apparently hates gays. Now shut up and fuck off.

[arj4bass]

OK I take back at saying the 'F' word and I assure you I don't hate homosexuals and it was nothing deliberate towards the homosexual community i respect them as humans and I strongly advocate for their rights plus a history lesson wasn't this fucker Stalin responsible for throwing and suppressing homosexuals who had been given freedom under the Bolshevik party of Lenin and Trotsky...

[RedNickII]

I wouldn't call it the Bolshevik Party of Lenin and Trotsky, as Trotsky wasn't as powerful as you make him out to be. If he was, then it would have been harder to get rid of him. And yes, Stalin did overturn the laws that allowed for homosexual rights. That was wrong, and there is no excuse for it. The only consolation I can offer is that there were very few, if any, better leaders at the time. On a happier note, the Maoist guerrillas at the NPA married two gay cadres and support gay rights.

[arj4bass]

Oh please do not underestimate and ignore the fact that Trotsky wasn't powerful and a hero for the proletariat as Lenin... before 1917 he had a far greater support taking into the fact that he was a non Bolshevik. Plus Lenin knew himself Trotsky's loyalty to Marxism and the Soviet that is why the man was offered the role for preparing the second vanguard of the proletariat the glorious "Red Army" and what about Lenin's testimonial his extolling of Trotsky..??

[RedNickII]

Many Bolshevik officials tried to have Trotsky removed from various fronts because of certain mistakes. I have a video with various quotes where Lenin attacks Trotsky. You should go watch it. It's called "Leon Trotsky: A Biography."

If Trotsky was so supportive of the Soviet Union, then why did he encourage a rebellion within it at a time where it would have opened the country to fascist tanks a lot earlier? Not to mention it would have made Axis invasion easier.

[arj4bass]

and wasn't it Stalin who had signed a non-aggression pact with Hitler ...?? i mean for once signing a pact with capitalists is OK but with fascists!!!!! also Stalin killed more communists mind you loyal communists than Hitler so the argument Trotsky giving in communists to the FBI is unjustifiable whereas it is known that the Soviet had gone through "PURGES"

[RedNickII]

Stalin signed the pact with Hitler because he needed time to 1) build up the military and industry in order to protect the USSR and 2) to basically stall any attack by Hitler. Even Hitler himself admitted that this was the reason the pact was signed, to delay the inevitable. No country wanted to help the USSR organize against Hitler because the capitalists wanted to use Hitler to crush communism, but then Hitler turned on them.

[RedNickII]

The supposed death toll under Stalin was originally made up by the Nazis as part of their propaganda campaign against the Soviets. The purges were necessary because some of the accused people had wanted to cooperate with the Nazis (more than Stalin supposedly did), and others were infiltrators trying to restore capitalism. Some of the original Bolsheviks had even turned into mere bourgeois liberals. There is a video about this called "The Moscow Trials and Great Purge" on my RedNickD channel.

[RedNickII]

Certainly Stalin did a lot that was wrong, as well as a lot that was right. And of course his regime was a little more repressive than it should have been, but we need to look at Stalin's actions within the historical context of the time. Often he had no choice.

Also, a lot of unjust arrests and executions were carried out by asses within the gov't, like Yezhov for example. Not Stalin, who allowed them to be removed from the gov't.

[RedNickII]

And let's not forget how he turned other communists over to the FBI.

[YurChuck23]

Can someone please explain to me the flaws of Trotskyism.I know flaws of Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism and other left ideologies, but I haven't anything saw anything wrong with Trotskyism in my opinion even that ideology seems more democratic than the rest (aside from Marxism, Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism and Socialism). I don't really know it seems more appealing to me, I guess and no country had a real Trotskyist party in absolute power. We'll never really know.

[RedNickII]

Sure. There is a video on my channel called "Leon Trotsky: A Biography" you should go check it out. Also, Trotsky supported using market mechanisms under socialism, which I believe is a horrible idea that will lead to the return of competition instead of Marxist emulation.

[stureremil1942]

Maoism thirdworldism is now a new development of Marxism.

[Reztopia]

is it true troskyists r trying to say che guevara was a trotskyist?

[RedNickII]

Some are trying to say that, others aren't. Castro said Che was just a Marxist-Leninist. Che had a copy of one of Trotsky's books in his bag when he was captured. But throughout a good portion of his life, Che read the works of Mao Zedong. Che liked Mao according to author Jon Lee Anderson. But Che wasn't a Maoist, just a Marxist-Leninist.

[M1rinecorps]

nice video man. i'm 13 years old and know a good deal about government and politics but Mao isn't really an industrialist, right?

and wasn't trotsky and marx the only democratic ones?

[RedNickII]

@M1rinecorps

Mao tried to industrialize China, and he had limited success with that. Trotsky was a traitor who gave information about other communists to the FBI. Go watch my video about him. Don't listen to the bourgeois lies about communists being undemocratic.

[M1rinecorps]

but i don't consider Stalin a true communist. he was a dick. killed many innocent people. holodomer, etc.

Che Guevara is who i'm a fan of. a real humanitarian who wanted to end poverty and that's why i'm a communist not for all the violent stuff. and I know you cant possibly compare the people murdered by communism to the people murdered by capitalist imperialist.

It's strange how the media brainwashes kids, I went to school and never learned about the invasion of Hawaii, phillipenes, etc.

[RedNickII]

@M1rinecorps

Stalin didn't kill anyone, that is an American lie made up by the Chicago media baron Mr. Hearst. The Kulaks raised grain prices and killed livestock in Ukraine, and this caused a small famine which was over-exaggerated and blamed on Stalin. I have videos on Stalin on my channel and the RedNickD channel. Check them out. Also, Che liked Stalin and Mao. Jon Lee Anderson even proved this in the book "Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life".

[hectorbolshevik]

...Also if you look at Maoists, they stood in solidarity with numerous anti-Communists such as the pro-Apartheid UNITA in Angola, Afghan Mujahideen, Solidarnosc in Poland, the capitalist reunification of Germany, and Yeltsin's barricades.

[RedNickII]

Are you on drugs? I have never met a Maoist who supported the capitalist reunification of Germany. Mao died long before that happened anyway. The Maoist rebels in Afghanistan were attacked by the Mujaheddin. Quit listening to the FBI.

[hectorbolshevik]

@RedNickII: Maoists were among those who chanted "down with the wall" in Berlin during the reunification, and their refusal to defend East Germany is pretty much support for the capitalist reunification. In Afghanistan the Maoists tried to form an alliance with the Mujahideen against the Soviet Army but ended up getting butchered instead of embraced.

[RedNickII]

There is nothing wrong with temporary alliances in order to overthrow an invading force, which they viewed as imperialist. This is how you win the trust of the people. Yes, Maoists didn't support the Soviets and their allies because they felt a counterrevolution had taken place, that doesn't mean they supported capitalist reunification. I think you are checking out biased sources. Even if a few clowns did chant "down with the wall" they still don't speak for the entire ideology not its followers

[hectorbolshevik]

@RedNickII: Well, I think that the fate of the Afghan Maoists at the hands of the Mujahideen more than proves your theory wrong. You don't side with rabid anti-Communist fanatics against a Communist army. The Soviets were no more imperialists than China was when the PLA extended the Chinese Revolution to Tibetans. So the Maoists who supported Yeltsin also didn't speak for the ideology?

[RedNickII]

It doesn't prove my theory wrong because it is more of a strategy than a theory. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. We need to take into consideration that the Mujahideen were on the CIA payroll (which many people weren't aware of, sadly). Had they not been, things might have been different. They might not have been imperialist in the brutal US sense, but the way they were viewed made so they might as well have been. China and Tibet has a different history than Russia-Afghanistan.

[RedNickII]

So it's not a good comparison. What Maoists supported Yeltsin? You act as if everyone except you Trots are a bunch of traitors who don't view any capitalist critically, and that is the wrong way to think. I'll admit, I'm guilty of that too. In a way, we all are.

[Reztopia]

hey rednickll, ive been a huge admire of ur videos and stuff but wanted to know if stalinism is another brand of nationalism?

[RedNickII]

"Stalinism" is just a term thought up by Trotskyists to slander Stalin. Stalin, Lenin, and Marx believed that in countries suffering from imperialist aggression the class struggle is tied to the struggle of national liberation. Once the nation is liberated from the imperialist invaders, then the country will need to industrialize and develop itself so it can help other countries have revolutions. Help in developing from other socialist countries is good too if you can get it.

[soviet140]

communism shouldn't be asbolished with war

[yadsik]

Essentially, the basis of Marxist-Leninism and Maoism and it's difference from basic socialism, is that it is intended for a society which is not ready for revolution. Truly, the current capitalist world system is far too hegemonic and wide spread for a Leninist violent revolution to take place. What should be investigated is teleological materialism in relation to modern evolution in social relations. Marx investigated the world straddling two systems, and so do we.

[VolanteRossaVideo]

Not stalinist and not trotskijist but only LENINIST!

[ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER]

No Leninist just Marxist

[RedNickII]

One minute you're a Trotskyist, the next you're some anarcho-Marxist. But god forbid you study the pro-Mao and pro-Stalin point of view. Even if it's just for a deeper understanding of various ideologies. You must be some petty-bourgeois kid who actually believes the crap you hear from the American history propaganda machine. Why should I take you seriously?

[ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER]

Lenin was a Blanquist, Stalin was a butcher and Mao's idea was a great leap backward. Trotsky was Murderer who killed Anarchists with Lenin so thats why I'm not a Trotskist anymore.

[RedNickII]

Actually, those are all lies except for the one about Trotsky. The bourgeoisie lies about petty things like sex-scandals, why wouldn't they lie about communists? Why wouldn't they try to divide the left? If you had actually bothered to study the Stalinist version of things, you'd at least be saying "maybe things were only half bad." But no, you believe everything you're fed, just like a child. Even your screen name is immature. We all hate Hitler, but all caps is just dumb. Grow up, little boy.

[ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER]

It's good to know you like to judge people rather than providing theoretical arguments or bear any proof.

[RedNickII]

It's good to know you only care about theories than interest you, just like a typical American.

[Ilikenuman]

@RedNickII are you trying to say that tabloid newspapers and girl magazines are all written by the same people as academic journals in universities that are agreed upon and debated about in universities throughout the world?

[RedNickII]

@Ilikenuman

No, reread what I wrote and quit trolling. They are certainly influenced by the same class and class interests though. You think the US government doesn't filter information? That it doesn't use propaganda? You are simply accepting the bourgeois line, but looking at it from a different angle. Where as I reject it outright.

[Guevaristas]

well probably no country has achieved "communism". As, in communism, there is no state.

After the revolution the socialist state takes control on behalf of the people. However, eventually it's existence becomes surperfluous-it withers away.

What country has ever got beyond the socialist phase?

[retardedeskimo]

What countries have got to socialism in the proper definition? None. economically some would be partially socialist.

[ZYKLONBKILLSHITLER]

None thats why I am a Anarchist

[dunaman10]

and greedy always makes wars

[dunaman10]

Communism rule, in the capitalism is all war because they are greedy

[PumpkinGorge]

Communism is the perfect political and economic system when you do it the right way. How we are living right now shows that Capitalism and imperialism doesn't work.

If true Communism came around, we would be less materialistic and more INDIVIDUALS, and would stop letting celebrities from shitty popular consumer culture form our opinion. Everyone would be happy and would be EQUAL. And no need for religion, that's great too.

[MaxyPadUltra]

I am interested in reading up about Mao, can you recommend a good place to start?

[RedNickII]

I sent you a private message about this.

[MaxyPadUltra]

I agree with your stance on violence, as in a revolution or even democratic change to socialism it is inevitable, though it is of extreme importance that this violence does not resemble the tactics and oppressive nature of the late Soviet Union or Cubas troops in South Africa after they received Soviet training. The causes they were fighting for were just, but sadly it had become a totalitarian militaristic movement that saw any criticism as fascism, and responded with extreme oppression.

[RedNickII]

All of those have degenerated into state-capitalism, but they are communist according to the capitalists. Venezuela, however, is not. Hugo Chavez is just a regular socialist. You can add Laos to your list, and China if you are going by right-wing standards. Moldova and Cyprus elected communists, but I heard Moldova's communists were only communist in name, and were just social-democrats. I hope that helps. I'm guessing this is for school?

[Tsukae]

I think you make a very good point. If I could give you a rating it would be 5 stars!