this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
157 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15914 readers
12 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] usernamesaredifficul@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

to be fair there is definitely a case to be made that Trotsky's permanent revolution would have involved arming Rosa Luxemburg and fighting the nazis before they took over Germany. But this is in the realm of alternate history

[–] Catradora_Stalinism@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

there is a case, but not a very good one

[–] usernamesaredifficul@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No I'm just saying it is a coherent belief someone might have not that I agree with it. I also don't think there's much point in talking about what Trotsky might have done because he didn't.

Let the dead bury the dead the living are where the action is

[–] Catradora_Stalinism@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

yeah and it's important to understand the past but what might have happened if history in some way changed is not a worthwhile question

[–] Vncredleader@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

That's just ahistorical. Trotsky's idea of permanent revolution was not clearly defined till later, but more importantly, the Bolsheviks did attempt to assist the Spartakus League. Despite negotiating it, Trotsky had been opposed to Brest-Litovsk which created the conditions for a lot of demobilized soldiers as well as Germany focusing on a spring offensive westward now that they had no eastern front. An offensive that caused more discontent in the German people and soldiers and led to the revolution.

When Germany did revolt, it was premature and had various flaws, not helped at all by the fact that the expectation of simultaneous revolutions across developed Europe didn't happen. The permanent revolution required everyone to be on the same page and level of capitalist development leading to a purely class based revolution.

That wasn't reality though. By spring 1919 the major revolutionary outbreaks had been put down. The Soviets had no time or means to actually assist Rosa, and a lack of arms was not really the problem in the first place. The Soviets had no direct means of helping, at this time they had been struggling with Poland invading western Ukraine, the Bolsheviks in the rest of Ukraine being thrown back by a German occupation and then puppet government, and a bunch of other issues. By the time the move was made to spread westward most revolutions had been destroyed, and pushing the war with Poland after its invasion of Kiev proved wasteful.

It's like saying there is a case to be made that they could've assisted the Battle of Blair Mountain.