Leon Trotsky

[kahncccp]

Communism could've worked out if his leftist movement had killed Stalin in the 1920's. He opposed Stalin's totalitarian regime and was assasinated because of his beliefs. His idea of Socialism was democracy. I think this the TRULY greatest leader of all time. Discuss.

[SolInvictus]

At 9/13/07 06:10 PM, kahncccp wrote: Communism could've worked out if his leftist movement had killed Stalin in the 1920's.

mildly conflicted? or are you just increasing your trolling quota?

[kahncccp]

What?

[K-RadPie]

At 9/13/07 06:10 PM, kahncccp wrote: I think this the TRULY greatest leader of all time.

He was never a leader... just sayin'.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

Give it up commie no one will support you and all communist nations have been colossal failures because your beliefs are flawed and inferior. Please go kill your self.

[kahncccp]

At 9/13/07 06:23 PM, K-RadPie wrote:

At 9/13/07 06:10 PM, kahncccp wrote: I think this the TRULY greatest leader of all time.

He was never a leader... just sayin'.

He was leader of the Red Army for a short time, since he created it.

[kahncccp]

At 9/13/07 06:27 PM, GaiusIuliusTaberna wrote: Give it up commie no one will support you and all communist nations have been colossal failures because your beliefs are flawed and inferior. Please go kill your self.

They have failed because Communism got fucked up by Stalin. He paved the way for tyrannical leaders like Kim Il Sung and Mao.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

At 9/13/07 07:02 PM, kahncccp wrote:

At 9/13/07 06:27 PM, GaiusIuliusTaberna wrote: Give it up commie no one will support you and all communist nations have been colossal failures because your beliefs are flawed and inferior. Please go kill your self.

They have failed because Communism got fucked up by Stalin. He paved the way for tyrannical leaders like Kim Il Sung and Mao.

No they failed because they relied on people to do the right thing and contribute to the state with out a tangible reward. You need social classes to give people direction. People aren't going to work hard to help the nation they are only going to work hard if it betters there own existence: a lower class worker becomes middle class, and middle class becomes upper, and the upper becomes a politician or even president. This is why the economies of communist nations are notoriously bad also if the state runs business there is no competition and as a result no progress or at least very slow progress in comparison to capitalist societies.

The fact is its just human nature to be greedy the idea of communism is nice but it just isn't possible and people just need to except that its not as if capitalism is out right corrupt or elitist. It's the corruption itself that causes its negative aspects just as corruption made Stalinist Russia as bad as it is. I hope you have read animal farm it is a bit childish but it's a perfect allegory for communism.

[Tancrisism]

At 9/13/07 07:29 PM, GaiusIuliusTaberna wrote:

At 9/13/07 07:02 PM, kahncccp wrote:

At 9/13/07 06:27 PM, GaiusIuliusTaberna wrote: Give it up commie no one will support you and all communist nations have been colossal failures because your beliefs are flawed and inferior. Please go kill your self.

They have failed because Communism got fucked up by Stalin. He paved the way for tyrannical leaders like Kim Il Sung and Mao.

No they failed because they relied on people to do the right thing and contribute to the state with out a tangible reward.

I agree with most of what you said, but you are arguing about the morals and realities of the ideal of communism. Historically in Russia, Communism was never truly tried out because almost as soon as it was instated, Vladimir Lenin died and Stalin turned it into a totalitarian regime.

The fact is its just human nature to be greedy the idea of communism is nice but it just isn't possible and people just need to except that its not as if capitalism is out right corrupt or elitist. It's the corruption itself that causes its negative aspects just as corruption made Stalinist Russia as bad as it is. I hope you have read animal farm it is a bit childish but it's a perfect allegory for communism.

Exactly, I agree. Animal Farm isn't childish at all, it was meant to be that way. Animal Farm was more of an allegory for Soviet communism though. George Orwell was a staunch anti-totalitarian, and he saw what the Soviet movement said it was as its true colors, and that was totalitarian. He was a socialist himself though, after having lived homeless for a bit of time, and believed firmly in some socialistic ideals mixed with plenty of democratic.

Communism is still somewhat undefined. If you look to Marx, it's a world-wide revolution. If you look to Stalin, it's a place where, as Orwell said, everyone is equal but some are more equal.

I do agree though that it is too good to be true without using something along the lines of Huxley's "soma" from Brave New World. And I would never approve of altering humanity, despite all of its flaws.

[stybayo]

Don't you get it? i still don't understand how communist can be so close-minded. Trotski would have done the same mistakes that Stalin and Mao and anyone else. Power drives them mad and like GaiusTaberna said: its in our nature the non-communism.About democracy-socialism: thats an oximoron: democracy is tottaly opposed to socialism-communism, because both need tottalitarism to work

[animehater]

You truly are a wannabe Communist. Flip flopping between people and all. Try to stick to one.

[Empanado]

At 9/13/07 08:50 PM, animehater wrote: You truly are a wannabe Communist. Flip flopping between people and all. Try to stick to one.

Wannabe? You haven't been around any real commies, have you? They tend to flip-flop more than John Kerry wearing rubber sandals.

[Tancrisism]

At 9/13/07 08:42 PM, stybayo wrote: Don't you get it? i still don't understand how communist can be so close-minded. Trotski would have done the same mistakes that Stalin and Mao and anyone else.

That's not necessarily true. Trotsky, by reading what we know about him, seemed to truly believe in the ideas of freeing the Russian people from the oppression of the czar, and not reinstating an even more oppressive regime.

Power drives them mad and like GaiusTaberna said: its in our nature the non-communism.

Again, not necessarily true. Did George Washington go mad with power when he was given it? Or are you assuming that Communist power is a certain type of power that immediately turns the most pure of character into a corrupt totalitarian monster?

About democracy-socialism: thats an oximoron: democracy is tottaly opposed to socialism-communism, because both need tottalitarism to work

That's not true at all, you obviously know nothing about socialism. Ever heard of the FDA? If not, it's what keeps it so that way people can't have dead rats falling in the sausage vats, and dead people from being turned into your burgers. And have you heard of the laws keeping monopolies illegal, and thus making it so we don't have mini-dictatorships plagueing our democracy?

Both are examples of - GASP - socialism.

Democracy without socialism is flawed, just as is socialism without democracy.

[TonyTostieno]

At 9/13/07 06:14 PM, kahncccp wrote: What?

Best answer to a question I've seen all day.
Anyways, on the socialist-democracy bit, I'll pass on that buddy, socialism goes against human nature, simple as that, humans have ambition, greed, and bat-shit insanity and thus only a very few would ever be able to live in a truly socialist nation without going insane and pulling a Rebellion out of the air.

[SolInvictus]

communism, to a certain extent, is possible and is human nature in small groups; i.e. the family groups of our hunter gatherer ancestors.

[TonyTostieno]

At 9/14/07 02:03 AM, SolInvictus wrote: communism, to a certain extent, is possible and is human nature in small groups; i.e. the family groups of our hunter gatherer ancestors.

Point taken, but the thing is that it's only in very small groups, and with those it was necessary to survival, in a way. I'm saying that Communism on the large scale he's suggesting, including the people's army, is not possible.

[SolInvictus]

At 9/14/07 02:07 AM, TonyTostieno wrote: ...

don't worry, wasn't arguing against you.

thats why i put so much emphasis on the "small".

[TonyTostieno]

At 9/14/07 02:13 AM, SolInvictus wrote:
don't worry, wasn't arguing against you.

thats why i put so much emphasis on the "small".

Right-o got it, blech I should probably go to bed...it's like...1:30 AM.

[Kreen]

Trosky wasnt leader. He was just one of the Lenin's followers.

[JakeHero]

At 9/13/07 09:14 PM, Empanado wrote:

At 9/13/07 08:50 PM, animehater wrote: You truly are a wannabe Communist. Flip flopping between people and all. Try to stick to one.

Wannabe? You haven't been around any real commies, have you? They tend to flip-flop more than John Kerry wearing rubber sandals.

Empanado is quite correct. Early teenage-angst can do that to a person's views, jumbled with lyrics of Rage Against the Machine's albums.

[Kreen]

At 9/14/07 07:39 AM, Lastin wrote: Too bad his name wasnt Leonidas Trotsky, or he'd chest kick stalin and yelled "THIS IS RUSSIAAAAAAAAA!!"

No, he will yell "THIS IS SOVIET UNIOOOOOOOOON!!!!!!!!!!!"

[The-evil-bucket]

At 9/13/07 06:13 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

At 9/13/07 06:10 PM, kahncccp wrote: Communism could've worked out if his leftist movement had killed Stalin in the 1920's.

mildly conflicted? or are you just increasing your trolling quota?

He's trying to get everyone pissed.

[tony4moroney]

omg can we just have a best leaders of all time thread?

[Kev-o]

Communism failed, because the Soviet Union, (as well as all other "communist" nations) did not recognize that a dictatorship of the proliteriat was supposed to be a transitional period. After problems are dealt with, the government is to wither away, and the people are to live united, free, and peaceful. This never happened. It is expected of a communist leader to eventually get rid of their power, and none of the leaders were willing to do so. These people were never truly revolutionaries, but used communism to gain power, in their favor. Stalin lived in riches, while Russia lived in a shithole.

If Lenin had not passed away, the Soviet Union could have been different, and Communism would have been seen as less than a power mongerer's tool. Stalin set a standard, and it is due to this reason why communism failed throughout the world.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

If I may raze a distinction regarding power. Leaders can have total power and not be corrupt take emperor Trajen he had total power yet was one of the best emperors of Rome the same can be said of many leaders however for every 5 good dictators there are at least 50 tyrants and Its not often that you get a good government that centralized hence I am apposed to the idea.

Also as I stated the idea of communism means not having competing businesses which means little innovation and as a result little progress. Communism in many ways breeds stagnation as well as requiring near totalitarian rule in order to maintain it.

Until they day a new Caesar is born we must maintain democracy and a firm constitution.

[SolInvictus]

At 9/14/07 03:57 PM, The-evil-bucket wrote: He's trying to get everyone pissed.

thank you captain obvious.

[slackerzac]

We will never know because Stalin had him killed with an ice pick. Look it up if you dont believe me

[Joodah]

he wasn't a great leader because he never controlled his, or any other country, and he was assassinated. this may be incorrect, but i like it.

[elegy]

Communism will never work. We need class as a society. If everybody is the same and everybody gets paid the same, why be that doctor when you can be that shoe-maker? Some random guy gets paid the same amount for sitting on his ass, as the leading surgeon of the country. It makes no sense. There's no drive in a communist society. Marx's vision came with good intentions, but It will never work. Then came lenin, and then came stalin and trotsky. Stalin fucked the world up big time. The end.