lol, post some of the quotes from Lenin to justify your statements. You can say that car flies, but if you can´t justify that it is of a little of significance. I have justified it that he was Leninst and that Stalin was not (with many posts and quotes from Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin). It is your turn now.

So you admit that Stalin was against LEnin?

(Edited by Turnoviseous at 10:10 pm on Sep. 2, 2002)

I offend Trotsky, and defend Lenin.
All of you have this stereotype , that SINCE STALIN WAS PRETTY MUCH AGAINST TROTSKY, THEN EVERY PERSON WHO IS AGAINST TROTSKYSM IS A STALINIST. That is the most ignorrant opinion I have ever heard.
*Trotsky wanted a freedom of factions in the communist party. He hoped that if his menshevist faction have *become independent, then he would have been able to replace Leninism with the Trotskysm. He wanted to become a leader. Lenin and all of the bolsheviks were for the unity of the party structure and that is why the majority of the party, which was presented by the Bolsheviks, voted against Trotsky's suggestion.

No, as I said that Lenin and Trotsky were together *in deeds and theories from the days revolution in 1905 started.

Trotsky was not a Menshevik nor a Bolshevik. He stayed out of both wings. But from his writtings and ideas it canbe seen that he was the Bolshevik in deeds.
Even Lenin said that "there had been no better Bolshevik than Trotksy".

Prove me wrong if you can, you Stalinist fuck! You can not falsify facts and history!

(Edited by Turnoviseous at 10:26 pm on Sep. 2, 2002)

*Listen up, you stupid Trotskyst. I am not Stalinist, I criticize Trotsky from the Leninist positions. And you are very wrong and don't know the history. I don't falsify it and it is you who tries to lie about the true situation. You have made me very angry, but I don't want to write cusswords down. Here is some information for you:

*Lenin wrote about Trotsky:
" Trotsky always equals himself= prevaricates, swindles, pose as leftist, helps to the right-wingers..." ( 5th edition, vol.49, p. 390 (vol.35, p.231))

*Lenin criticized Trotsky for betraying the bolsheviks in the work " About the shame colour of Judas (!!!) Trotsky"( 5th edition, vol.20, p.96 (vol.17, p.25)) So, Lenin called Trotsky Judas. And that is true. You can't argue against the FACTS!!!


* OBJECTIVE HISTORY.
*Trotsky became one of the leaders of the "new opposition" in 1926. This group was against the party's policies, criticized party's decisions by using anti-leninist and opportunistic phrases. "New opposition" was basically a menshevist faction inside the bolsheviks' party.
*Trotsky and his followers attacked bolsheviks. Hence, they atacked Lenin, as bolsheviks made the decisions which were based on the Leninist position.

*According to the " History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union":
*
* " Opportunistic elements tried to lead the party astray from the Leninist principles on the 12th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Trotsky spoke in support of the industrial concentration and closing some of the biggest enterprises. This would have done a big harm to the heavy industry and set the working class against the party. Party's Central Committee voted Trotsky's offer down and pointed that it's acceptance would have lead to the political defeat of the Soviet Republic. 12th Congress supported Central Committee's decision.
*Trotsky also suggested the idea of the "dictatorship of the industry". In his understanding this slogan meant the industrial development by the exploitation of the peasantry. The Congress voted this offer down , too. Such kind of policy would have lead to the split in the workers' and peasants' union and to the downfall of the Soviet system. The Congress underlined *that the agriculture plays a very important role in the economy of the whole country."

*The 12th Conress took place in the year 1923. Lenin was still alive and was against all of trotsky's suggestions. It is clear that Trotsky presented anti-leninist and anti-soviet views on this Congress. And it is just one of the numerous examples, which prove his menshevist position.

*I am sorry for you if you still haven't understood the difference between Leninism and Trotskysm, between communism and anti-communism. I can post some more examples, so you would finally UNDERSTAND!!!

*I am also sorry for you if you disagree with the information from the " Dictionary *of the Scientific Communism", which contains in the first post, starting this thread. Scientific Communism is one of the most important parts of the Marxist-Leninist theory. If one doesn't respect Scientific Communism, then it means that he or she doesn't respect Marx and Lenin. Therefore, this person is not a true communist.

*

LOL.
Hey , troskysts, I hear nothing but a silence. Have nothing to say, don't you? Now, everybody will see , who was right and who was wrong!!!

I may sound unintelligent for you but ther's an archaic saying:

Talking is silver, keeping silence is gold

Maybe your arguments are just too fake to answer. And you are already too blind to see anything else but your great Scientifical communism. So there's no need to waste time for talking to you, it wouldn't change anything. Good luck!

*Thank you. You sounded very intelligent, but my arguements are not fake. You don't believe to the quotes, you don't believe to the history. You don't believe anything which is related to the USSR. That is your mistake.
*And here comes the biggest question: Who is blind? Definitely , not me.

I do have glasses and I really can't see very well. But I'm definitely not blind, not yet at least. I hope you will not wish me that kind of future. LOL

I have glasses too. But it doesn't mean that I can't see the truth.
*That's OK , if you don't want to believe to the concrete facts. Maybe you will realize your mistake later. I hope you will.

Hey, trotskysts I have something more for you. I just wait for your comments on the information that you have now. *

Maaja, I agree with you..

Although I always like to listen to the Stalinist lies. Keep posting your falsified things and cut-outs...

You have almost all answers in this thread..

(Edited by Turnoviseous at 11:52 pm on Sep. 22, 2002)

These are not lies. It is true, objective HISTORY of the Communist Party.

So my dear Revolution Rero, you are trying to tell us that USSR was the perfect (ok, well, let's not use this word because I already can imagine your reaction) but a very good and a 'real' communist country?! I am sure that most of the people here would never agree with you. Get real!!!!

*Because most people here don't know the truth about USSR. They were taught lies about this great country by the bourgeoisie media, they were too open and that is their problem.

*USSR= socialism. *If one negate this, then this person is not marxist.

They were taught lies about this great country by the bourgeoisie media

Reactionary Hero,

I agree, bourgeois say it was a socislist country.

I am with you Turnoviseous, altough USSR had some socialist elements. No unemployment or homeless people, I also have to admit that people were reading a lot more then they are not, it was a shame not to educate yourself (I am not talking about universities but about educating yourself by reading mostly). But that's it.

Reactionary Hero, I would forgive you what you are saying if you were with another backround. But you have also lived under USSR and you know mostly people who are too, that's why I think you are... wrong and somewhat ridiculous, sorry...

(Edited by Maaja at 7:51 am on Sep. 27, 2002)

* Actually, this is the only true part among their blatant lie.

*LOL.
By calling me reactionary, you both make reactionary yourself.

* That was very nice of you, Maaja. I have to say you the following:
*You call yourself Marxist, but you don't think like Marxist. If Marxist want to analyze a situation in a definite state, then this Marxist will not consider just social aspects of the internal situation, but marxist have to analyze economical and political situation before the social one. It is obvious that you don't even know what socialism is. I advise you to start learning with the following definition.

*Socialism is the first, the lowest phase of the communism, as social economical formation. It comes after the socialist revolution and the transitional stage from capitalism to the socialism, directly replace capitalism as the result of the liquidation of the exploiter classes and the consolidation of the socialist public property on the means of production in all sectors of the national economy.

*USSR possessed all of the features listed above, hence USSR is the socialist state.

''Reactionary Hero, I would forgive you what you are saying if you were with another backround. But you have also lived under USSR and you know mostly people who are too, that's why I think you are... wrong and somewhat ridiculous, sorry...''

Exactly the man (or woman) lived in the USSR, so he/she should know what he is talking about. *While I actually share many of Enver Hoxha's views on the USSR's international policies to deny that it was NOT a Socialist country is to deny the Earth is round. *Yes it made some mistakes but the key is to learn from those mistakes. *

Revolution Hero. *You are not the only poster around here that does NOT support Trotsky (His whole theory is just Imperialism under a differnt name and as for his 'labor armies' scheme that is nothing short of Fascism) and your posts are very imformative. *It seems though that you restrict your posts to the 'Theory' forum. *Somebody who actually lived in the USSR would be greatly apreciated in the History forum. *

Sorry Typo that should be 'To deny it WAS a Socialist Country'