Editing Philosophical Research:MDem/4.4r/3556 peanut-butter (section)

== "You got Trotskyism in my Stalin Thought!" "No, you got Stalin Thought in my Trotskyism!" ==

<div class="bop top">
<h3><time datetime="2025-01-02T01:34:49Z">1-02</time></h3>
<div>when we understand Social-Philosophical-Material Systems,
we begin to realize that any instance of "reaction" or "wrecking" is simply an instance of taking a large established Social-Philosophical-Material System and constructing a different new Social-Philosophical System inside it

the Russian revolution can be conceptualized as a Social-Philosophical System of Bolshevism which extended itself across the country and began realizing itself into a Social-Philosophical-Material System of Bolshevism.
although mostly inaccurate, what Trotsky says is not entirely false. it is actually true that the internal structure of the Soviet Union changed, to the point it might be fairly said that it changed from one possible Material System of Bolshevism to another possible Material System of Bolshevism. it may even be fair to say that the new Material System of Bolshevism specifically owed itself to Stalin followers and their efforts at realizing their own particular Stalin Thought. the major error made by Trotsky is in never explaining what was actually wrong with the Material System of Stalin Thought nor attempting to properly explain the "correct" Material System of Trotskyism. Trotsky attributes the problem to deliberate conspiracies and bad actors, while there are many mundane explanations for what happened.

any particular group of Trotskyites coming together to resist the Soviet government is a group of people with a shared interpretation of the world, just as a constellation of reactionary businesses around a pillow company is a Social-Philosophical System. inasumch as it has the ability to gain any material power to generate Property structures or armies, any particular Social-Philosophical System has the ability to generate a State.
the Trotskyite conspiracy attempting to assassinate members of the Soviet government is an assertion of the Trotskyite State and its ability to enforce Trotskyite laws and penalties.
</div></div>

<div class="bop">
<h3><time datetime="2025-01-02T05:05:50Z">1-02</time></h3>
<div>if the Tea Party conspiracy wasn't justified to spontaneously assert Tea Party laws over the country, then how can it be that Trotsky was?
if the Trotskyite conspiracy <em>was</em> justified to break open the country, then how can we be entirely sure that the Tea Party wasn't?

if the Trotskyite conspiracy <em>wasn't</em> justified to break open the Soviet Union, how can we evaluate the legitimacy or illegitimacy of Stalin Thought? if everything must be done within a system rather than from outside it, the system becomes unable to evaluate itself.
yet sometimes wreckers are simply wrong. how do we know the difference? how can we be sure we know the difference?

we can't just answer every single question with "morality, constitution, common sense, prison".
</div></div>

<div class="bop-foot">

<dl class="bop-meta">
{{BopFwd|Ontology:Q19356|MDem SSR/ Ontology Item}}
<!-- ; -->{{BopComment}}
{{BopCreated|2025-01-02T01:34:49Z}}
{{BopHandle|peanut-butter}}
{{BopHandle|v4-4_3556_peanut-butter}}
{{BopCommentTitle|v4.4 scraps/ pillows are not ideologically neutral}}
</dl></div><!--
-->[[Category:MDem v4.4 entries]]  __NOTOC__