>Lenin and Trotsky were good boys. It was that evil Stalin

After WWII the US propaganda machine was faced with a dilemma: the USSR had emerged as an opponent, yet the US had acted against it's interests in allying with the USSR and then not dropping a nuke on Moscow. What could be done?

Simple: The USSR wasn't an enemy back THEN because Lenin ( who was a good guy) was in charge. But not that Stalin is in charge, things are different.

>>2816176
Because of memes

>>2816176
I think that many communism-lovers just can't handle the fact that Bolshevism was rotten from the start.

>>2816176
I would bang all of them
But Trotsky needs to shave

>>2816176
Because Lenin and Trotsky wouldn't have killed 20 million people

They were brutal tyrants, certainly, but their regimes would have resembled Brezhnev much more than Stalin

>>2816203
That's kalinin not trotsky

>>2816176
That's not Trotsky it's Kalinin you retard

>>2816214
kalinin is hysterical. He was some old fuck that somehow survived the peak of stalinist purges. Stalin invited him to most events he hosted, and loved to bang a book on a desk when he fell asleep. Kalinin would wake up suddenly and everybody would laugh.

>>2816176

Stalin was probably worse than Lenin though. Lenin would have killed fewer.

>>2816218
Who gives a shit? They're all godless commies and are rotting in hell.

File: sovdepia.jpg (332KB, 1200x1656px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1200x1656px

>>2816176
Because western commies are unable to cope with the fact the USSR was a brutal, tyrannical regime, so they invented a myth of evil Stalin who corrupted communism and a gud boi principled humanitarian Trotsky, not realizing Trotsky was far more brutal than Stalin.

>>2816187
except we allied with stalin not lenin in the second world war you dummy

>>2816269
He said after WW2 not during you fucking retard.

>>2816271
yes, i know that. but this alleged myth doesn't hide the fact that we allied with stalin during world war ii.

>>2816281
That was because of Roosevelt's dumbassery, he genuinely thought the USSR was some kind of benign country and a natural ally since he was a crypto commie himself.

>>2816291
sure, but that doesn't explain the poster's original mistake

>>2816265
>That picture
Trotsky was an atheist.

>>2816319
Your point?

Trotsky said so and people believed him.

Lenin probably would have killed a degree less

Trotsky was simply Stalin with an IQ of 80 and with neither friends or fear on his side.

File: 1493761175509.png (409KB, 1280x1095px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 1280x1095px

Lenin and Stalin were both great actually

File: Ernst.jpg (103KB, 920x357px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 920x357px

>>2816176
We have a NatSoc version of this already - specifically brainfucked liberals talking about Ernst Rohm and how he was some sort of poor moderate who got killed for being a fag, not realizing he was FAR MORE radical than Hitler ever was and he only got killed because the conservatives were absolutely terrified of him.

>>2816209
lel
Trotsky wanted to "militarize" all the labor and turn the USSR into a literal slave state.

>>2816209
You have no idea what you're talking about.

>>2816378
>confusing Rohm with Strasser

Shameful

>>2816339
Trotsky was more radical and definitely believed in communist ideals more than Stalin did.

>>2816405
Strasser explicitly said Jews are okay as long as they aren't capitalists and wanted to ally with the USSR. NatSoc my ass, he was just a crypto-Marxist.

I believe people think Trotsky represented some kind of humanist vision of communism because, while his ideas were abhorrent and he would likely have been worse than Stalin had he won, he had personal charm and associated with artists and intellectuals in the Western world.

He had an affair with Frida Kahlo! He couldn't possibly wish to enslave all the Russian people.

>>2816209
Lol. Read more, dude. Brezhnev was a saint compared to Lenin and Trotsky.

>>2816449
>Friday Kahlo
I hate that meme whore.

>>2816508
>mentally ill histrionic Mexican jew communist hipster ugly cunt with an unibrow, a limp and rotten feet
I mean this is some trials of Job tier shit

File: camiseta-frida-kahlo-11.jpg (41KB, 320x480px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 320x480px

>>2816508
I particularly don't care about her, but I hate her fans.

>>2816449

It's because he died without ever getting to power. Also, Western useful idiots love the idea of worldwide revolution, which Trotsky espoused as against Stalin's "Socialism in One Country".

>>2816585
How come people don't understand that "world revolution" means "running your country like a military-with-a-state for years until you've finally "liberated"/conquered the world regardless of what they want, in the mean time ignoring the needs of your own people"?

>>2816771
Because Americans are detached from the sacrifices of war.

>>2816414

oh so he was right all along?

>>2816176

That's Mikhail Kalinin, not Trotsky.

>>2816449
>>2816508
>>2816559
>>2816567
if i had a time machine id kill her and her fat fuck husband

>>2816214
How brutal was his death, definetly deserved it for that pube hair
>>2816220
Banter

>>2816771
Because "world revolution" is supposed to be carried out by the local revolutionary proletariat, and not by "liberating" armies from your country without proletarian support

>>2816319
Still did the Devils work
The devil is technically an atheist as he rejects all gods >>2816407
We won't fight but we won't sign peace
He legitimately said that in ww1

>>2820057
Okay, so what happens if you and those around you decide you don't want capitalism and rise up to take control of the government, but those who aren't you and your nation don't simultaneously rise up?

Stalin and Trotsky agreed on the direction the USSR should head after Lenin's death. Trotsky only changed his tune after he lost the contest for power. If he had won, we'd likely use "Trotskyism" to refer to what "Stalinism" is today -- except, well, Stalin was a lot better at not getting assassinated.

>>2820057
THE workers overthrow the capitalist bourgeois and are then helped out by proletariat dictatorships of Germany France and britain, then once that happens globally you convert into true capitalism

>>2820079
You wait until the point where the contradictions of capitalism make the system collapse and cause a revolution there. No need for them all to "simultaneously rise up", they'll inevitably reach your state of historical development in their own good time.

(I'm going by classical Marxist stuff here, not Marxism-Leninism or Trotskyism)

>>2820119
So you admit that "Socialism in one country" or "National socialism" can make sense? Because most socialists I've ran into don't seem to agree with that.

>>2820141
No, I must have phrased myself poorly. The idea is more like what you said. I meant that after making a revolution in your country, you wait for the others to follow rather than running in and conquering them, not that you need to wait for them before starting a revolution in your own land. The "world revolution" follows country by country as each country reaches the right point in its development and is affected by its economic relations with neighboring classless societies.

I could also be getting all of this wrong, but that seems to be the idea Marx and Engels were going for in their early stuff at least.

>>2816176
Trotskyism is more compatible with the globalization ideology of the left of Western countries. Before communist parties become strong in thw West, after the sucesful bolshevik revolution of 1917, they were more internationalist, antinationalist and pro world goverment. Stalin was the one who introduced elements of patriotism, ethnoboshevikism, based on his theory of communism in one nation. After the collapse of USSR, western leftist paries reverted to antinationalist globalization ideas. Also Trotsky was a member of The tribe.

>>2820176
Nah, you worded it right; I just read it wrong, then realized as much and replaced that post with >>2820149.

>>2820186
>they were more internationalist, antinationalist and pro world goverment
>Stalin was the one who introduced elements of patriotism, ethnoboshevikism, based on his theory of communism in one nation.
>ethnoboshevikism

Thanks you burger, I haven't had such a good laugh in weeks.

>>2820149
The problem with reconciling "Socialism in one country"/"National socialism" with early Marxism is that the way things went wasn't at all the way Marx/Engels predicted they would go; they thought it would be the "civilized" countries that first raised a revolution, and the productive forces unleashed there would help spur the development of the less civilized countries through capitalism (and ultimately to communism). In reality, Russia, a backward, agrarian country, first underwent a premature revolution, and then because it hadn't really reached the right point in its historical development yet, it didn't spur the spread of communism, and the planned revolutions around it failed. This wasn't a situation classical Marxism had even considered, so "socialism in one country" was Stalin's attempt at patching up the gap between expectations and reality with some ad hoc theorizing. But it's not really what classical Marxism was going for.

>>2816319
What's the matter ?

File: 1487110960410.gif (1MB, 800x667px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x667px

>>2816176

Because the Soviets tried to salvage what credibility they could by pinning all the excesses and brutality of the Soviets until 1953 on Stalin, leaving the progenitor of muh glorious revolution a wonderful, pure dainty true believer who dindu nuffin and just wanted everyone to get along.