View source for User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/4000

<h2 id="section-4000"><span class="mw-headline">4000</span> <span class="mw-editsection plainlinks"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">[</span>[https://research.moraleconomy.au/index.php?title=User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/4000&action=edit edit]<span class="mw-editsection-bracket">]</span></span></h2>

Concepts related to Trotskyism, or named Leninisms in general.<noinclude><br /> Final live version of this section: [[Philosophical Research:Items 4,000 to 5,000]]</noinclude>

<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol start="4000" class="hue clean reset  field_ML">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/IV|Q=4000|Q2=4000}}Bolshevik-Leninism / Leninism (Trotsky's definition) {{9k|RD|Q4000}}
{{li|I=S1/IV/ML|Q=4001|Q2=4001}}Stalinism (corruption) {{9k|RD|Q4000}}
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=4002|Q2=4002}}[[E:Q4002|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] / <del>Stalin's Marxism is a form of Leninism</del> [false] {{9k|RD|Q4000}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4003" data-dimension="S">degenerated workers' state (Trotskyism)
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4004" data-dimension="S">restore the soviets
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4005" data-dimension="S2">State businesses equal capitalism  ->  Hayashi
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4006" data-dimension="S2">State capitalism inevitably evolves to uncontained capitalism  ->  Hayashi
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4007" data-dimension="S2">Workers will all take action given crisis
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="4008" data-dimension="S2">Workers will all take action given spontaneous tiny breakages / clinamen (Althusser) / The Fracture (meta-Marxism)  ->  Althusser actually

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX, MX onto Zv, MX onto IV" data-qid="40,09" value="4009" data-dimension="S2">A theory of society which cannot explain the Trotskyite conspiracy is no theory of society at all / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q41,91|9k]])

</li><li value="4010" class="field_geo" data-dimension="S0">internationally-scoped collection of connected Trotskyist groups  ->  important element of - international-conference Trotskyism, international-party Trotskyism, Trotskyism in one identity-federation

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,11|Q2=4011}}Abandon Trotsky, and Bolshevism has failed / If Bolshevism fails to take the educated individuals who are dedicated supporters throughout a revolution and integrate them into society such that they will not starve and can use their talents to improve society then Bolshevism has failed / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q41,91|9k]])

</li><li class="field_mdem" value="4012" data-dimension="S2">[[E:Q40,12|A Trotskyist group is a countable culture]] / Any particular Trotskyist group is a countable culture  / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="4013" data-dimension="S2">[[E:TrotskyIsSafeHere|Trotskyist groups are a safe space for Trotskyist identity]] / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4014" data-dimension="S">Trotsky syndrome of countable cultures / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,17|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,15|Q2=4015}}Trotsky caught the problem of substitutionism in 1904 before Lenin offered an improved model of how a Marxist party should function, therefore, in 1904 Trotsky's statement and Lenin's statement were both part of Leninism

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,16" value="4016" data-dimension="S">Trotsky, who founded the CPSU / Trotsky, who was the founder of the CPSU along with Lenin {{YouTube|C_wWvpXZTTg}} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q49,17|9k]])

{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=40,17|Q2=4017}}Trotskyist revolution / revolution that creates Trotskyist workers' state {{9k|RD|Q4017}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4018" data-dimension="S2">[[E:TheyWillHaveToTalkAboutTrotsky|They'll have to talk about Trotsky someday]]  ->  <i>I am madly trying to find a video. there was this video by the IMT, and Alan Woods is on a stage. the overall room looks kind of bluish. it's kind of like he's giving a <b class="caps">Ted</b> Talk or something. and he says, he says something to the effect of "They're going to have to talk about Trotsky someday. [glib, barely not winking]". I cannot find this video for the life of me. does anybody have any idea where it went</i> (2023-12-06)

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,19" value="4019" data-dimension="S">Trotsky disappearing from pictures  ->  one of those things that's very important to normal people as a "memorable historical event" and yet almost never gets talked about by Marxist theorists. unless maybe they're Trotskyists.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,20" value="4020" data-dimension="S">named Trotskyism / specific variation of Trotskyism with specific internal structure or set of material strategies

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,21" value="4021" data-dimension="S">international-conference Trotskyism  ->  motif, Particle Theory
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,22" value="4022" data-dimension="S">international-party Trotskyism  ->  motif, Particle Theory. [https://university.marxist.com/en/imt-history Fred Weston] believes that certain groups apart from Ted Grant were getting absorbed into reformism; Grant, apparently, is a believer in watching for crises (S2-4007). was trying really hard to name this thing a person's name but couldn't quite land on one
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,23" value="4023" data-dimension="S">multiple Trotskyisms in one country / multiple local Trotskyist parties  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory; Trotskyism - taking the shape of - North American Maoism / New Democracy
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,24" value="4024" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism in one supranational federation / Trotskyism in several union republics  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory; actually suggested by Trotsky once or twice regarding North America and Europe
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,25" value="4025" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism in one subpopulational minority / Ethnic Trotskyism  ->  believed to be different from: Maoism in one subpopulational minority
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,26" value="4026" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism in one union republic / Trotskyist nationality / Trotskyist local-state  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory; Trotskyism - taking the shape of - local state
</li><li data-qid="40,27" value="4027" class="field_geo" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism in one country / Trotskyist nation-state  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,28" value="4028" data-dimension="S">Fortress Trotskyism  ->  subset of: Trotskyism in one country; Trotskyism - taking the shape of - Juche-socialism
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,29" value="4029" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism in one identity subpopulation / hegemony Trotskyism  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory; Trotskyism - taking the shape of - Gramscianism; superset of: Ethnic Trotskyism

</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,30" value="4030" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism as structure integrated with other theory's structure / Trotskyism as large Particle Element containing smaller elements / Trotskyism as small Particle Element contained by larger elements
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,31" value="4031" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism-in-Maoism  ->  subset of: Trotskyism in one union republic
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,32" value="4032" data-dimension="S">Maoism-in-Trotskyism  ->  subset of: Trotskyism in one supranational federation
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,33" value="4033" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism in one identity-federation / international-identity Trotskyism / world hegemony Trotskyism / Trotskyism in Gramscianism in Trotskyism  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory; International or international-party on top, otherwise-anarchic political-identity subpopulations below
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,34" value="4034" data-dimension="S">economic peace Trotskyism / Deng Xiaoping Thought in Trotskyism in Wilsonianism  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory; Trotskyism - taking the shape of - Deng Xiaoping Thought
</li><li class="field_geo" data-qid="40,35" value="4035" data-dimension="S">Trotskyism for export / Deng Xiaoping Thought in Trotskyism in Liberalism / Trotskyism in Deng Xiaoping Thought / economic-imperialist Trotskyism  ->  hypothetical Particle Theory; Trotskyists hide inside Liberalism and smuggle all their activities through Third World exploitation. honestly, one of those possibilities I ironically came up with just because it was horrifying

{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=40,36|Q2=4036}}Stalin and Monokuma / Stalin and death games / Stalin's government supposedly or apparently putting pressure on all people to send each other to prison so the real criminals will confess {{9k|RD|Q40,36}}

{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=40,37|Q2=4037}}Pigs theory / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])
{{li|I=S1/DX|Q=40,38|Q2=4038}}Pig state / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])
{{li|I=S2/MX/DX|Q=40,39|Q2=4039}}A Pig state isn't the end of the world / A Pig state is not the end of the world / Orwell handed Russians to butcher knives {{9k|RD|Q1983}}

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,40|Q2=4040}}Stalin accidentally eventuated Dengism / ({{9k|RD/Q4040}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,41" value="4041" data-dimension="S2">Great productive forces mean great carrying capacity  ->  very popular and common remark in early 1900s Leninism, still pretty controversial to challenge, yet graph theory + chunk competition models bring some worrying suggestions for how trivial it is to make a reality. doesn't mean it's impossible to solve of course, just harder than we thought
</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="40,42" value="4042" data-dimension="S2">Extra production over the number of people who will buy at full price is waste  ->  the typical counterpart up to the time of Lenin; why Lenin's and Masnick's line graph is not widely accepted. notable weakness: does not explain how to actually tell if society needs something or not, only how to sell an unnecessary thing for as much as possible
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,43" value="4043" data-dimension="S2">Socialism-in-one-country is basically Existentialism with countries  ->  [https://university.marxist.com/en/imt-history Ted Grant]
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,44" value="4044" data-dimension="S2">Hegemony politics is reformism and Gramscians are a bunch of bureaucrats  ->  [https://university.marxist.com/en/imt-history Ted Grant]

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=40,45|Q2=4045}}Stalin accidentally eventuated James Morasco  ->  the claim that James Morasco's confused understanding of executives, unions, and bureaucrats as all being the same thing ultimately traces back to Stalinist understandings of Marxism.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,46|Q2=4046}}Revisionism is when Marxist parties aren't orange  ->  Cannon, Pablo, ICFI. this seems like a terrible stance to take if you want as many regions of the world in an era of socialism as possible.

</li><li class="field_ML" data-remark="Marx said this" data-qid="40,47" value="4047" data-dimension="S2">Having a movement at all is half the battle (having {{TTS|tts=a Social-Philosophical-Material System|an SPMS}}; is step zero) / The key to beginning socialist transition is grouping people into a movement / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,47|9k]])

</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="40,48" value="4048" data-dimension="S2">Capitalism only ends when workers' states cover the world  ->  note how different plural Trotskyisms twist this different ways, some claiming a sea of socialisms-in-one-country is enough, some claiming there are more stringent requirements of having a Fourth International, freeform international party, etc
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,49" value="4049" data-dimension="S2">Capitalism only ends when workers' states form into a single government  ->  the generic Trotskyist version.

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,50" value="4050" data-dimension="S0">derived Trotskyist proposition / statement that Trotskyists should logically believe although in practice they might not  ->  there are so, so many of these if you think about anything Trotskyists say for even a moment.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,51" value="4051" data-dimension="S2">Socialism in one country will fail because borders leave people unconnected / Socialism in one country will fail because the point of Bolshevism is to connect people, and borders leave many people unconnected
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,52" value="4052" data-dimension="S2">Any particular group of individuals pursuing socialist transition benefits from being part of something larger  ->  molecularized version of the statement that there can't be a socialist transition in one country.
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="40,53" value="4053" data-dimension="S2">If Trotskyists turn against a workers' state, they create a population too small to succeed  ->  logically true if you accept Q4052. if most of the people in the Soviet Union don't want to join Trotsky, the best result for Trotsky is he forms a teeny tiny Trotskyist workers' state, and if there can't be socialism in one country, by Trotskyist logic, that tiny Trotskyist workers' state will fail.
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,54" value="4054" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyists benefit from standing together with mainstream Marxism-Leninism  ->  clearly follows from Q4052 and Q4053. if it is more or less impossible for Trotskyists to ever form into a workers' state bigger than South Korea without eventually running into "Stalinist" interference, they will only ever overcome the rest of the world's capitalists by joining together with other named Marxisms and each socialism aiding the others.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="IV, MX onto IV, MX onto A" data-qid="40,55" value="4055" data-dimension="S2">Rosa Luxemburg was not an anarchist  ->  it's frustrating that anarchists still believe she is, and that people still have to be told this.<br/>
to be fair: Rosa Luxemburg was a bit of a sloppy Leninist who was {{em|okay with}} workers solving the whole shape of society and did kind of condone "[[E:Zinovievism (meta-Marxism)|Zinovievism]]". so, y'know, pretty much like Trotsky. it is wild to me that 'matching Trotskyism' is not enough to dissuade anarchists from thinking someone is an anarchist

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4056" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4057" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4058" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/MX/MD|Q=40,59|Q2=4059|h4= Math can save Trotsky }} / Mathematics can save Leon Trotsky, because morality never will

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,60|Q2=4060}}Trotsky predicted Stalinism's collapse / The Left Opposition was formed in 1923 because Trotsky predicted what would happen later; this is to imply he knew better ways to build a functioning Marxist party; this is to imply he knew how to actually counter the rise of The Stalinists {{9k|RD|Q1936}}

{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=|Q=40,61|Q2=4061}}red-to-orange transition / ({{9k|RD/Q618-EconomicProblemsStalin}})

{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=|Q=40,62|Q2=4062}}Kill Trotsky, split Bolshevism / Stalinists killing Trotskyists shows the two are incompatible / Violence between Stalinists and Trotskyists shows the two are incompatible / The annihilation of ... the middle generation which participated in the civil war, and that part of the youth that took up most seriously the Bolshevik traditions, shows not only a political but a thoroughly physical incompatibility between Bolshevism and Stalinism (1938) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/stal-o20.html]

{{li|I=S2/DX/IV|Q=40,63|Q2=4063}}Stalin was a crimson Dengist / Stalin was basically a Dengist in terms of the theoretical content he advanced at the international scale, and only deceived people into thinking he was mainstream Marxism-Leninism because he was a solid ally of crimson factions who functioned as a class traitor / ({{9k|RD/Q4040}})

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,64|Q2=4064}}Deng Xiaoping states caving to the First World is The Pigs showing they are not the proletariat / Deng Xiaoping states making concessions to the First World instead of standing with the world's other proletariats is The Bureaucracy admitting defeat and showing they are not the proletariat (ICFI) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2026/04/21/mgaz-a21.html] / Deng Xiaoping states making concessions to the First World instead of standing with the world's other proletariats is the bourgeoisie and their close allies in government admitting defeat (Maoism, mainstream Marxism-Leninism, Hoxhaism, etc) / ({{9k|RD/Q4040}})

{{li|I=S2/DX/IV|Q=40,65|Q2=4065|rem=ai.wsws.org subtext; remove this comment if you find an article source}}Strawberry states smash Lattices / Strawberry states are not protecting Marxist theorists or organizations because they smash violet threads joined together by a correct (Marxist-)Leninist program and correct material analysis of workers' struggles  ->  this is one of the only {{em|believable}} arguments Trotskyists can make against Dengism.

{{li|I=S2/DX/IV|Q=40,66|Q2=4066}}Liquidators are partially defined by persecuting Bolsheviks / The "equality" between an illegal Social Democrat (Bolshevik) and the legalist who is safeguarded by his divorce from the party is the equality between worker and capitalist {{9k|RD|Q19,04}}

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,67|Q2=4067}}Krupskaya carried Trotskyist history / Krupskaya knew the history of the party to be the history of Trotskyism, and although spared, was heavily edited by the central party / She knew the history of the party [...] all of the latter day historiography which assigned to Stalin a place alongside of Lenin could not but appear revolting and insulting to her [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/03/krupskaya.htm]

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,68|Q2=4068}}Trotskyist characteristics include extending the worker Lattice / When a country goes through socialist transition, if that transition has Trotskyist characteristics, Trotskyist characteristics include international connections to groups of workers in other country regions / ({{9k|RD/Q28,92}})
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,69|Q2=4069}}Trotskyist characteristics include the Fourth International / When a country goes through socialist transition, if that transition has Trotskyist characteristics, Trotskyist characteristics include each country region maintaining the Fourth International until it is not needed; this is to imply a Communist International that does not break apart due to conflicts between its contained Marxist parties / ({{9k|RD/Q28,92}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="40,70" value="4070" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyism-in-one-country would not be a Trotskyism / Trotskyism-in-one-country would not fit the definition of Leninism given by any Trotskyism / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,70|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,71" value="4071" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyism-in-one-country would be a Maoism / If a group of Trotskyists built socialism in one country it would actually be a Maoism and they would not be Trotskyists any more / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,70|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,72" value="4072" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyism-in-one-country would be Juche-socialism / If a group of Trotskyists built socialism in one country it would actually be a Juche-socialism and they would not be Trotskyists any more / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,70|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,73" value="4073" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyism-in-one-country would be mainstream Marxism-Leninism / If a group of Trotskyists built socialism in one country it would actually be an instance of Stalin's Marxism and they would not be Trotskyists any more / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,70|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,74" value="4074" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyism-in-one-country would be Trotskyism / If a group of Trotskyists built socialism in one country it would distinctly still be Trotskyism and have its own particular Trotskyist content and identity, regardless of what other groups of Trotskyists feel like saying about it / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,70|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,75" value="4075" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyism-in-one-country would be Bordigism / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,70|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,76" value="4076" data-dimension="F2">Trotskyism-in-one-country would be Deng Xiaoping Thought (troll proposition; meta-Marxism) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q40,70|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4077" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4078" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4079" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4080" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4081" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4082" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,83|Q2=4083}}Trotskyism-in-one-country would be Pabloism / Trotskyism-in-one-country would be a countable instance of Pabloism

{{li|I=S1/ML|tradition=ML, W|Q=40,84|Q2=4084}}wage slavery / slave class of workers (Marx) / slave labour (in reference to proletariat; Marx) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4084|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/A|Q=40,85|Q2=4085|rem=85 as anti-authoritarian number}}Communism is the perfection of society / Socialist transition, Communism, and the era of communism are the same thing, which is the general perfection of society into the best form of what society inherently is or could be over all of time  ->  sounds accurate on the surface but look really closely and you'll only see there are more and more things wrong with it. by this definition Liberal-republican anticommunists are communists.
{{li|I=S2/LR|Q=40,86|Q2=4086}}Socialist transition, Communism, and the era of communism are the same thing  ->  this is the definition used by Liberal-republicans and anarchists.

{{li|I=Z1/IV|tradition=IV, LR|Q=40,87|Q2=4087}}ice ax incident / Trotsky assassination (1940)

</li><li class="field_nations" data-tradition="ML, PT" data-qid="40,88" value="4088" data-dimension="F2">Whites working for Blacks is slavery / White people working for Black people is slavery / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4084|9k]])
</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, ML" data-qid="40,89" value="4089" data-dimension="S">wage slavery in fiction / workplaces as wage slavery, portrayed in fiction / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4084|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="Bordigism" data-qid="40,90" value="4090" data-dimension="S2">Bordiga hates examining theorists / Bordiga hates talking about theorists [https://www.marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1952/stalin.htm]  ->  I don't really blame him, because it's dumb we always have to. why {{em|not}} focus on the objects, processes, or ideas instead? but {{censor|god}} everything he says is so hard to read because I never know what point it's actually building to. as a writer or orator he could have learned a lot from Gramsci

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="ES, A" data-qid="40,91" value="4091" data-dimension="S2">Wage slavery is when somebody is blocked from being a Careerist and forced to be a proletarian / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4084|9k]])

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="40,92" value="4092" data-dimension="S2">Communism doesn't work, but {{TTS|tts=poly-Communism|polycommunism}} does  ->  the claim that a central party-nation such as the Communist Party of China is incapable of steering a country toward the right path because of how little control it has over the rest of the world and the needs of the population inside the country to survive, while a bloc of two or three Communist parties is actually capable of making decisions that affect all three countries as long as the countries are tightly linked economically. a reasonable person would allow that this could be a new form of Trotskyism, but I am not sure if Trotskyists are reasonable people.

</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="40,93" value="4093" data-dimension="S">poly-Maoism  ->  case of: Bauplan. the hypothetical configuration of several separate Maoisms forming as party-nations, going through Deng Xiaoping Thought, and then connecting to each other only to turn back into one large Maoism.
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="40,94" value="4094" data-dimension="S">poly-Trotskyism  ->  the hypothetical configuration of several smaller Trotskyisms-in-one-country forming and then joining into a bigger more favorable Trotskyism. if there is anything categorically wrong with this according to Trotskyists the color swatch can be changed. this entry does not specify the content of the Trotskyisms-in-one-country beyond that they dislike Stalin's government (if asked about that historical period) and are "somehow" Trotskyisms.
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="40,95" value="4095" data-dimension="S">poly-Bordigism  ->  knowing that Bordigism is supposedly more than one country to begin with, this <em>may</em> be logically possible?

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4096" data-dimension="S2">??
{{li|I=F2/IV|Q=40,97|Q2=4097}}Stalin was the worst / The Moscow Trials exposed Stalin as the dirtiest, most criminal and most repulsive figure in history (Trotsky) / ({{9k|RD/Q642}})
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=40,98|Q2=4098}}Spare the original Bolsheviks / Don't kill original Bolsheviks / Trotsky and/or other Trotskyist theorists are members of Leninism (non-revisionist Marxism; the best form of Marxism; proletarian revolution), so you cannot kill them / [Stalin as] the great negator and principal enemy of the proletarian revolution (Breton) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4001|9k]])

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="40,99" value="4099" data-dimension="S">poly-Menshevism  ->  the hypothetical configuration of three or more center-Liberalisms joining together to make it so that not having social-democracy in any of the individual countries is somehow utterly illegal and considered basically treason. I don't know how this would be possible, but if you propose poly-Maoism or poly-Trotskyism somebody's going to propose it.

{{li|I=Z1/MN|Q=4100|Q2=4100}}[[E:Q4100|Leninism]] (top-level category) / ({{9k|RD/Q4100}})
</li><li class="field_ML field_14quarters" data-qid="41,01" value="4101" data-dimension="Z">early Marxism  ->  this refers to Marxist theories or movements that existed before Lenin, notably Marx and Engels. it genuinely might not include the people Marx thought were "hardly Marxists". definitely not if those people can be shown to be integral sources to Western Marxism or in some particular grouping of their own, like Menshevism or some new category of "proto-Western-Marxism" or whatever. at the same time: it is always technically okay for things to be grouped into multiple traditions if they were important to both.
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="41,02" data-qid="41,02" value="4102" data-dimension="S0">Third-World Marxisms
{{li|I=Z1/ML|tradition=|Q=41,03|Q2=4103}}Stalin's Marxism / Stalinism (Marxist model used by Stalin) / ({{9k|RD/Q41,03}})
{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=41,04|Q2=4104}}[[E:Trotskyism|Trotskyism]] (top-level category) / Leninism (Trotskyist movement) / revolutionary socialism (Trotskyist movement) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q41,04|9k]])
</li><li class="field_gramsci" data-qid="41,05" value="4105" data-dimension="Z">Juche-socialism (North Korea) / <s>leadership socialism</s> (mistranslation) / socialism in one country (generic)
</li><li class="field_ML field_mao" data-qid="41,06" value="4106" data-dimension="Z">Maoism / ([[User:RD/9k/Q41,06|9k]])
</li><li class="field_gramsci" data-qid="41,07" value="4107" data-dimension="Z">[[E:Deng Xiaoping Thought|Deng Xiaoping Thought]] / Dengism / socialism with Chinese characteristics (Deng era)
</li><li class="field_gramsci field_althusser" data-qid="41,08" value="4108" data-dimension="Z">Western Marxism
</li><li class="field_gramsci field_althusser" data-qid="41,09" value="4109" data-dimension="Z">Gramscianism / Antonio Gramsci's Marxism
{{li|I=Z1/ML|Q=41,10|Q2=4110}}Bordigism (named Marxism) / Amadeo Bordiga and ICP's Marxism / ({{9k|RD/Q41,10}})

{{li|I=S1/IV/MX|Q=4111|Q2=4111}}versioning Communist Internationals like software packages / ({{9k|RD/Q4111}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4112" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4113" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4114" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4115" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="41,16" value="4116" data-remark="Q41,06" data-tradition="MZ" data-dimension="Z">North American Maoism / United States Maoism (sense) / Canadian Maoism (sense) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q41,06|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=41,17|Q2=4117}}Marxism already is meta-Leninism {{9k|RD|Q4117}}

{{li|I=Z1/MS|Q=41,18|Q2=4118}}Hoxhaism / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q41,18|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4119" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4120" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4121" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4122" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4123" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4124" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4125" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4126" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4127" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4128" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4129" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4130" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4131" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4132" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4133" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4134" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4135" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4136" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4137" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4138" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4139" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4140" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=41,41|Q2=4141}}Trotsky changed his name to Sedov for citizenship reasons {{9k|RD|Q44,36}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4142" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4143" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4144" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4145" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4146" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4147" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4148" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4149" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4150" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4151" data-dimension="S2">There are references to Trotskyism in {{game|Pokémon}}  ->  there are approximately two. Blaziken and Pyroar, which are references to {{film|Ultraman Leo}} and in turn references to Trotskyism.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4152" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4153" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4154" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4155" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4156" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4157" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4158" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4159" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4160" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4161" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4162" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4163" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4164" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4165" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=Z1/BP|Q=41,66|Q2=4166}}BlackPantherism / Black Panther Party's theory of revolution / Black Panther Party's [[E:apparent form of Marxism|Marxism]] / ([[User:RD/9k/Q41,66|9k]])
{{li|I=S1/A/BP|Q=41,67|Q2=4167}}abolitionism (Western-Marxism) / abolition (generic)

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4167" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4168" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4169" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4170" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4171" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4172" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4173" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4174" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4175" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/IV/LR|Q=41,76|Q2=4176}}A Liberal-republican party is not a competing Marxism; this includes early 1900s Mensheviks when they functioned as a Liberal-republican party, or so-called Eurocommunists

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4177" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4178" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4179" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4180" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4181" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4182" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/IV/MX|tradition=MX, IV, IV onto DX, IV onto LR|Q=41,83|Q2=4183}}Marxist errors invite capitalism / When Marxism falters, capitalists return / A bad Marxist party will ultimately do almost everything a Liberal-republican party does, including running an entire national government around capitalism  ->  quite honestly, yeah, the Trotskyists were right when they said (in different words) that there were similarities between the USFI, IMT, and Dengism. it seems like {{em|every time}} a party takes over anything and doesn't understand Marxism you just get capitalism again, and the further they are from understanding Marxism the quicker you see Liberal-republicanism regenerated, while when they're closer it takes longer but it still happens. thus all the tiny errors inside the IMT's understanding pile up quickly into never really creating a workers' state at all and replicating the Labour Party, but the Communist Party of China sort of accomplished something because it vaguely understood things like joining everyone into a national movement and unifying the people.<br/>
fervent perfidious enemies + ?? = this.<br/>
all failed progressivisms are ironic + ?? = this.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=41,84|Q2=4184}}Stalinism is a Thermidorian negation / Stalinism begins when older forms of society crush the proletarian revolution (Trotskyism) / Stalinism is a Thermidorian negation of Bolshevism; this is to imply it is similar to when the Jacobins were defeated in the French Revolution / ({{9k|RD/Q4000}})

{{li|I=S2/MX/IV|Q=41,85|Q2=4185}}Stalin "defended the country" using bureaucrats / If Stalin wanted to defend his country, he needed a physical group of people to actually defend the Soviet Union, which would all be united by characteristics inherent to that group of people; this is not to imply said group of people is "a class" capable of creating a [[E:top-level sociophilosophy (meta-Marxism)|top-level sociophilosophy]], but this is to state that said group of people follows a repeated pattern analyzable by [[E:existential materialism (meta-Marxism)|existential materialism]]

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4186" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4187" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_nations" value="4188" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=IV, IV onto ML, MX|Q=41,89|Q2=4189}}The Bolshevik Party contained a second tendency of Trotskyists, which was actually its first tendency and the first form of Leninism in the Soviet Union region (Trotskyism) / The Bolshevik Party contained a second tendency of Trotskyists, which was not necessarily distinguishable from Stalin's Marxism in 1900, but starting circa 1906 slowly differentiated into a second Communist party such that the Soviet Union effectively had two Communist parties crammed into one central party-nation (meta-Marxism) / ({{9k|RD/Q4189}})
{{li|I=S1/IV|tradition=IV onto ML|Q=41,90|Q2=4190}}The Bolshevik Party {{em|did not}} contain a second tendency of Trotskyists and was primarily defined by a group of Stalin-followers / ({{9k|RD/Q4189}})

{{li|I=S1/MX|tradition=MX onto IV|Q=41,91|Q2=4191}}We live in a post-Trotsky world / ([[User:RD/9k/Q41,91|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/MX|tradition=MX onto IV|Q=41,92|Q2=4192}}Trotskyism-in-one-country would be upper-phase communism / The end state of Stalin's Marxism is the beginning of Trotskyism-in-one-country; with no errors, Stalin himself would create the conditions for Trotskyism-in-one-country / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4192|9k]])
{{li|I=F2/ML|tradition=MX onto IV|Q=41,93|Q2=4193}}Trotskyism does not have socialism / As a named Marxism, Trotskyism does not anticipate an era of socialist transition; anything that happens before a period of upper-phase communism is not recognized as part of the named Marxism / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4192|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4194" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4195" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4196" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4197" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4198" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_gramsci" data-qid="41,99" value="4199" data-dimension="M1">unknown Marxist subdivision / Marxism unknown  ->  may be used for coding any work that "sounds" Marxist but whose particular preceding Marxist theorists or movements haven't been traced. in practice, some works that are technically anarchist or Existentialist in their affiliation may get marked with this, just because sometimes it can be difficult to separate these non-Marxist traditions from Western Marxism. again, sometimes that is not necessarily harmful, and there's a "[[Ontology:Is topology a threat to Marxism?|topology]]" effect where a non-Marxist theory describes something very real, and yet the theory is something other than Marxism.

</li><li class="field_ML" value="4200" data-dimension="S2">In 1992, the vast majority of self-professed Marxists supported counterrevolution [https://bolshevik.org/1917/no30/no30-Rev_Regroupment.html]  ->  I can't tell if they are talking about Zinovievizing or not, or if they mean Western Marxism and Existentialists, or what. if they do mean Zinovievizing it would be a huge admission from Trotskyism, while if they don't the same statement means nothing at all. this is a really common problem in Trotskyism, that you never know if a statement that sounds correct internally is good or whether it's weirdly a lie.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,01" value="4201" data-dimension="S2">Trotsky thought he believed in Leninism  ->  the claim that Trotsky thought the theory he held of workers' movements, revolution, and/or constructing workers' states was the same theory Lenin had leading up to 1925. mostly uncontroversial, although some may tell you Trotsky was absolutely nothing but a liar. I think that's an exaggeration, because he spent significant effort telling parties in North America and Europe things that <em>sounded like</em> correct Marxist positions (but had subtle errors hiding behind them in terms of actually applying them). I think the evidence supports that Trotsky <em>was</em> dedicated to Leninism but his "Leninism" managed to be a garbled, totally wrong version of Leninism. many Marxists don't like to admit that that kind of thing is possible, because it would vulgarize Marxism into a mere identity that doesn't guarantee the class composition of the movement. but I think the dark truth of things is that that has always been the case. mathematically, all arrangements of people are identities, even if they're class subpopulations. organizing people always creates identities. the fact East Germany came to exist shows that all workers' states are identities, like any other nationality. so what's wrong with realizing that "theoretical" Marxism and the basic phenomenon of people sorting into movements are always separate until they're not? it explains how there can be multiple rival Marxisms. it might be that several of them are not connected to the people at all, that some of them connect to a really specific subset of actual workers but not all of them, or that none of them are correct, none of them predicting or guiding what people are actually doing at all. it's particularly believable this could happen if every current movement is operating under a [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology|different theory]] of connecting people together that replaces Marxism.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="MX onto IV" data-qid="42,02" value="4202" data-dimension="S2">Rosa Luxemburg thought she believed in Leninism  ->  I am actually not totally sure on this one... but when "the three L's" exists as an expression I mean I think other people thought she did. are they wrong? is everyone just projecting which Marxism or anarchism they actually want Rosa Luxemburg to be?

{{li|I=F2/IV|Q=42,03|Q2=4203}}Every Trotskyite Stalin eliminated was a Leninist / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4001|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,04|Q2=4204}}A Fourth International is an act of filtration <small>— it is the act of collecting parties or organizations with the best lines and material understandings to form a new object or active process which will have only Trotskyist content ("orange" content) and will hopefully be able to realize some sort of large orange historical period that functions as a continuous dictatorship-of-the-proletariat on a scale that covers some significant fraction of the world</small> / ({{9k|RD/Q42,04}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,05" value="4205" data-dimension="S2">Bonapartism is when Germany prevents the Berlin wall / Bonapartism is when a bourgeois and proletarian subpopulation become deadlocked and The State becomes an instrument for keeping the lid on the country and preventing the proletarian subpopulation from breaking out  ->  okay. that's more of a word definition than something that's strictly a wrong application of a concept. I wish this wasn't the same word as they use to criticize Stalin though. if this is what it means then why do they use it on Stalin?

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,06|Q2=4206}}The party is not the repository of class interests, but the instrument of class interests [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1904/tasks/ch02.htm] / substitutionism (argument against; generic)

{{li|I=F2/IV|tradition=IV, A|Q=42,07|Q2=4207}}Germans are a bourgeois conspiracy / ([[User:RD/9k/Q19,08|9k]])

</li><li class="field_ML" data-tradition="ML, IV" data-qid="42,08" value="4208" data-dimension="S2">I'm a Leninist but China needs to be Zinovievized / I'm a Marxist-Leninist but China needs to be Zinovievized / I'm not anticommunist, but... (Zinovievizing China)  ->  this feels like one of the biggest blunders of modern Marxism besides people around the world thinking Trotskyism is more valid than any of the Marxisms that have actually worked. like, no, you've lost the plot. one of the major reasons for Marxism is to understand how countries have developed in order to understand how countries can stop fighting each other, and this does neither of those things. you genuinely need some kind of meta-ontology to understand China, which actually deals with the prospect of a totally different Marxism existing and the "correct" Marxism having to exist alongside it, broadly predict what it will do, and take appropriate kinds of actions to unify with it against non-Marxisms.

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX onto IV" data-qid="42,09" value="4209" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyism puts Leninism below universal rights / ([[User:RD/9k/Q42,09|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,10" value="4210" data-remark="Q42,18 Che is Trotskyist?" data-dimension="S2">British Trotskyists care about Vietnam / British Trotskyists cared about Vietnam in [year?? try to retrieve year this was said] {{YouTube|mmxfao7FtR}}  ->  Trotskyists are so quick to tell you that this is true but I highly doubt it. Trotskyists assembled against the Vietnam War? believable. Trotskyists actually care about Vietnam? don't think so. behind the scenes there is this oddly specific thing they do where it's almost like they are <em>taking advantage of</em> other countries rather than actually helping them. imagine Trotskyists were effective, and they liberated Vietnam from empire. what would they do then? they'd probably start trying to subtly dominate the country like Vietnam has to do what Greg and Ted in Britain and some random Rosa over in Vietnam want rather than what the workers of Vietnam want.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,11" value="4211" data-dimension="S2">U.S. Trotskyists care about Cuba / ([[User:RD/9k/Q42,11|9k]])

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="LR, ML, JC" data-qid="42,12" value="4212" data-dimension="S2">Militant opposition to Castro drilling into Cuba from outside would only serve his cause (1960)  ->  U.S. government makes a claim about Communism I fully agree with. look how badly attacking North Korea and Vietnam backfired, it's like it made Kim Il-sung a hero twice over.

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX onto IV" data-qid="42,13" value="4213" data-dimension="S2">If a Trotskyist civilization committed imperialism, what would it look like? / ([[User:RD/9k/Q42,13|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,14" value="4214" data-dimension="S2">[[E:Q42,14|The Cuba blockade preserved the republic]] / The blockade of Cuba is what's preserved the regime (Alan Woods) {{YouTube|mn7nv15rgKA}}  ->  as far as I can tell, that's correct. one of the most successful things Marxists have ever done is simply close off Third World countries from foreign capitalists.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,15" value="4215" data-dimension="F2">[[E:Q42,15|Deng Xiaoping Thought has a limited lifespan]] / You can't have both capitalism and a Stalinist regime, it'll blow up (Alan Woods) / It's like a pressure cooker (on Deng Xiaoping Thought styled countries; Alan Woods) {{YouTube|mn7nv15rgKA}}  ->  this seems to be the opposite of what's true. [[User:RD/9k/Q49,98|[...]]]

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,16" value="4216" data-dimension="S2">[[E:Alan Woods had books published in Cuba|Alan Woods had books published in Cuba]] / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4219|9k]])
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="42,17" value="4217" data-dimension="S2">Trotskyists don't understand global empire / The reason Trotskyists bash Deng Xiaoping states and East Germany is that they don't understand global empire  ->  I think there's a pretty good case for this. you lay out what a [[E:Deng process|Deng process]] is and it seems Trotskyists really don't get that. they are really against measures that happen to make countries actually independent from imperial powers and protect them from utterly being colonized. the bright side? this is a colonialism discourse I actually can stand. fine-scale neocolonialism and crude national independence are both things that make material sense, unlike the notion that prejudices in White people's heads are somehow colonialism.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,18" value="4218" data-dimension="S2">Che Guevara got his ideas of international revolution from Trotsky / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4219|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,19" value="4219" data-dimension="S2">Che Guevara could have become a Trotskyist / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4219|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,20" value="4220" data-dimension="S2"><cite>[[E:Q42,40|Reason in Revolt]]</cite> (1995) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4219|9k]])

</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,21" value="4221" data-dimension="S">crisis of capitalism  ->  Trotskyists are always talking about these. as are most Marxists. it's a fairly good talking point.
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,22" value="4222" data-dimension="S">crisis of Bolshevism  ->  the motif of a system within a workers' state ripping apart and not working as intended. everyone outgrowing microdistricts as populations expand could be considered one, as could ripping open the economy into a trapped capitalism. a country opening up to imports and exports isn't necessarily a crisis of Bolshevism in and of itself. in general these are more "orderly" than crises of capitalism; the central party can often see them coming and see why they happened whether they ultimately get stopped or not.
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,23" value="4223" data-dimension="S">crisis of named Leninist movement  ->  system-breaking crisis that occurs in a Marxist movement which has not become a workers' state.
</li><li class="field_trotsky"  data-qid="42,24" value="4224" data-dimension="S">crisis of Trotskyism  ->  there are about two kinds: groups falling apart and everybody simply dropping out.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="42,25" value="4225" data-dimension="S">crisis of schizoanalysis  ->  when schizoanalysis tries to assert that different movements are inherently connected but the different movements just start fighting each other.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4226" data-dimension="S">??

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,27|Q2=4227}}The central party is not correct {{em|because}} it wins / The central party is not correct {{em|because}} it wins; Marxists and labor movements <!-- labour movements --> push for parties with programs that will be correct in the future to win before they have won

{{li|I=S1/LR|Q=42,28|Q2=4228}}the boring Bread store {{9k|RD|Q42,36}}
{{li|I=S1/ES|Q=42,29|Q2=4229}}fonts as culture of The Government {{9k|RD|Q42,36}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4230" data-qid="42,30" data-dimension="S2">Stalin built the country wrong / Stalin's government built the country with structures that are bad although we are not specifying what the actual error is / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4231" data-qid="42,31" data-dimension="S2">Ministries existing means there is no democracy / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])

{{li|I=F2/ML|Q=42,32|Q2=4232}}Trotskyism is popular on moral grounds (First World) / Trotskyism has gained popularity in the First World because people commonly view it through morality  ->  honestly, no. that is absolutely not why it's popular. the ICFI has decently demonstrated that it's possible to conceptualize Trotskyism in ways that are not based in morality, and are based on the material study of how to successfully join together Trotskyist groups into an International versus creating groups that split apart, such that there are understandable logical reasons for why a Trotskyist group expels other ones (which is an important distinction, because it seemed for a while like there were a lot of them that just obsessed about 'corruption' and accused each other of being 'the bureaucracy'). as well, I think the video I just watched again by Alan Woods on philosophy explains it well. much of the way, Trotskyism is almost like Marxism that takes itself too seriously, and that [[E:Trotskyism blames the results of external pressures on countries' internal structure|overzealously tries to materially analyze the inner workings of things in the wrong way before quite discovering the right one]]. the kinds of people who are drawn to coherent logical interpretations of things that may include Materialism, philosophy of science, "atheist" philosophy against religion, {{em|or}} traditional philosophy like Plato and Kant when he talks about science, but who are repulsed by postmodernism are the kinds of people who are drawn to Trotskyism. there are actually coming to be fewer and fewer of those in the United States I feel like, but in places like South America people have been less resistant. I like the way Trotskyists stress Materialism and analyzing the roots or uses of various ideas. I find it a lot easier to identify with that than all the absolutely confusing muddy {{em|stuff}} critical theory and the amorphous [[E:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition|Existentialist]] "pond" spits out. like oh my god once you have listened to a year of that it doesn't matter how much you hate Trotsky and Zinoviev, you start clinging to whatever Marxism exists that hasn't eaten up "The Subject" and believing that all Marxisms are in this together, all Marxisms have to stick together actually until they've defeated all of {{em|that}}. unless the content of the Marxism happens to actually be Existentialism or [[E:Menshevism (1900s)|classical Menshevism]], but that's another matter entirely.

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=42,33|Q2=4233}}Socialist transition and Communism are the same thing, but the era of communism is a different thing  ->  this is the definition used by both mainstream Marxism-Leninism and Deng Xiaoping states. I am not {{em|sure}} if it's the definition used by Trotskyism, but it should be.

{{li|I=S1/Zv|Q=42,34|Q2=4234}}they purged members of the scientific community / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4235" data-qid="42,35" data-dimension="S2">The internal shape of a workers' state leads to buffer state conflicts / There is something about the internal activity of a workers' state which can cause it to participate in international war or not / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])

{{li|I=S1/IV/LR|Q=42,36|Q2=4236}}[[E:Q4236|I'm eating stale rat bread and I can't take it any more]] {{9k|RD|Q42,36}}
{{li|I=S1/DX|tradition=Zv onto DX onto STM|Q=42,37|Q2=4237}}the science bureaucracy / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})
{{li|I=S1/Zv|tradition=Zv onto DX onto STM|Q=42,38|Q2=4238}}science Trotskyites / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})
{{li|I=S1/HM|tradition=LR, ES, HM|Q=42,39|Q2=4239}}science Tories / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="42,40" value="4240" data-dimension="S2">Absurdism, nihilism, and existentialism are all the same thing / Existence-philosophy, nihilism, and absurdism are all the same thing  ->  sounds like it couldn't be possible, but all three of them say individuals make their own meaning. all three of them are versions of the same existentialism. (this has nothing to do with Trotskyism, and is only here because of the number.)
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="42,41" value="4241" data-dimension="S2">Optimistic nihilism is about making your own meaning  ->  sic. heard somebody say this verbatim. five years ago I might have gotten pedantic and said "that's (early-) existentialism!!" but now I think there is no actual difference.
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="42,42" value="4242" data-dimension="M3">Is there a point to believing in existentialism? / Is it possible for individuals to assert existentialism is meaningful? / Is believing in early-existentialism meaningless? / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q4244|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="42,43" value="4243" data-dimension="S2">A Trotskyism-in-one-country could invest in Vietnam / A Trotskyism-in-one-country can invest in a Third World country  ->  not sure why this wouldn't be true considering China does this. but the implications of a Trotskyism doing this are maybe a bit chilling. imagine there's a Trotskyist Britain. it invests in Vietnam before other countries get there, ostensibly in order to keep Liberal-republican countries out, but also to make sure Vietnam doesn't team up with "Stalinist" countries — stay on the good side of Trotskyism and there will be no Trotskyite conspiracy, but the Communist party of Britain controls your factories. British Trotskyists position themselves like they are trying to be nice and they will listen to Vietnam's workers, but the whole thing is an inch from erupting into Trotskyists just gutting Vietnam's government and putting the population of Vietnam under colonial rule of Trotskyist theorists. ostensibly not doing anything worse to them than a workers' state would do to its own people and yet they have absolutely no national autonomy because Trotskyism didn't value it. you know what's worse than this hypothetical scenario though? the fact capitalism can already do this with no responsibility to anyone. if Trotskyism was exploiting Vietnam there would at least be a consolidated group of people to hold responsible. if capitalists complained about the human rights abuses of Trotskyist Britain you'd never hear the end of it. but capitalism manages to be worse than Trotskyist empire would likely be because it's always hiding behind the notion of globally universal individuals that have to be free yet get to dominate everyone with all the choices they make about how everyone else has to be.<br />
this statement is false if it can be conclusively shown that there's no such thing as Trotskyism in one country and there would never be a group of Trotskyists that would create it at least without all of them deciding they are not Trotskyists any more. if this statement is appropriate to a different named Marxism in one country then a new proposition must be created.

{{li|I=M3/MX|tradition=MX onto IV|Q=42,44|Q2=4244}}Is Trotskyism real Leninism? / Is Trotskyism accurate to what Lenin actually said? / hyper Trotskyist question  / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q4244|9k]])
{{li|I=M3/MX|tradition=MX onto ES|Q=42,45|Q2=4245}}Is ethics ethical? / Is morality moral? / Is ethics moral? / Is morality ethical? / hyper morality question  / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q4244|9k]])

{{li|I=F2/ES|Q=42,46|Q2=4246}}Academic science is a planned economy / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})
{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=42,47|Q2=4247}}Academic science is capitalism / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="42,48" value="4248" data-dimension="S2">Absurdism, nihilism, and existentialism are the biased political compass of philosophy
</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="42,49" value="4249" data-dimension="S2">Absurdism, nihilism, and existentialism are reversed stages of grief  ->  thought of this while adding "all the same thing". first comes absurdism, then nihilism, then existentialism, so it's like, acceptance, depression (optional), then anger and denial. first we realize that nothing actually makes coherent sense including morality or justice. then we get upset. then we try to convince ourselves "in each of ours groups separately in parallel" there really is a meaning and we have the answers

</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,50" value="4250" data-dimension="F2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in The West [https://actuallyexistingstalinist.substack.com/p/western-anti-marxist-leninist-leftism] / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,51" value="4251" data-dimension="F2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in the United States / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,52" value="4252" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in Britain / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,53" value="4253" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in Australia / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,54" value="4254" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in Canada / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,55" value="4255" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in Germany / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,56" value="4256" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in Spain / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,57" value="4257" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in Japan / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,58" value="4258" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in South Korea / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])

</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="42,59" value="4259" data-dimension="S2">It's acceptable to be a Trotskyist in South America / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4250|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/STM|Q=42,60|Q2=4260}}Not All String Theorists / String theorists are not suppressing dissent / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})
{{li|I=S2/ES |Q=42,61|Q2=4261}}Prediction markets could pick the best researchers / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})
{{li|I=S1/PT |Q=42,62|Q2=4262}}doctors hate him! / ({{9k|RD/Q42,34}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4263" data-qid="42,63" data-dimension="S2">Steven Universe is actually about Trotskyism / Steven Universe is definitely about Trotskyism  ->  this was the subject of an <cite>MDem</cite> chapter I didn't finish — one of the off-the-wall satirical "B-side" chapters. I think it works better in chapter form but this proposition can still be about the underlying concept that it's possible to argue a work into meaning utterly anything.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4264" data-qid="42,64" data-remark="40,64 The Matrix is about Toryism etc" data-dimension="S2">The Matrix is actually about Trotskyism  ->  troll argument / jamming proposition. the claim that <cite>The Matrix</cite> is actually about realizing capitalism makes no sense and will inevitably fall into crises, while the whole world is stuck in the illusion that it won't so you have to break the whole world out of it, which leads to Trotskyism. it's funny how almost logical this is when it began as a total {{censor|ass}} pull, more so than the Lion = Trotskyism one. I think what's so funny about it is that the whole trans erasure red pill proposition is so toxic but although this is meant to be the same thing in a different color it's more or less harmless; if Trotskyists are convinced their message is more important than a trans identity message it will probably just wrap around to them pushing parties that support trans identity anyway.

{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=ML onto IV|Q=42,65|Q2=4265}}The {{abbr|PSL|title=Party of Socialism and Liberation}} did not split from the Workers' World Party for ideological reasons; this is not to imply that the party did not drift away from Trotskyism later (United States)

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,66|Q2=4266}}James P. Cannon believed that each country must construct an orange central party that performs filtration just like any Marxist party would, and the central parties of multiple countries would form into a larger-scale era of socialism / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,67|Q2=4267}}Stalinist parties are preventing countries from completing revolution and creating socialism (Cannon) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html]  ->  I'm confused on what Cannon is saying but this is my best guess on what he means. I {{em|think}} he's trying to point at countries like Japan where all the parties were failing at getting anywhere and claim that {{em|actually}} they weren't succeeding because they weren't Trotskyist, and more specifically that they weren't succeeding because they didn't have help from central parties in other countries. it's.... a thought. I'm not really sure how it could possibly work realistically when like, you are going to need so many workers united together from other countries just to overpower countries which have made themselves majority bourgeoisie. you can't just take every First World country and join them together because all the people who could plausibly become Communist allies in those countries are quite a minority versus the overall population of that group of countries. you'd have to do something more like join up 40 Third World countries to specifically focus on Japan and nowhere else and then move on to another country.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,68|Q2=4268}}Stalin's Marxism is a petty-bourgeois agency of imperialism (Cannon) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html]  ->  those words definitely sound like they mean something but I'm not sure what they mean.

{{li|I=F2/MX|Q=42,69|Q2=4269}}Posadism is a form of Pabloism  ->  <s>Cannon implies this.</s> [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html] okay he doesn't, he actually sort of gave a definition. I'll leave this proposition anyway.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,70|Q2=4270}}Marxism's great crisis is the crisis of revolutionary leadership (Trotsky 1938)  ->  this is... actually not untrue. the problem is that he contributed to the crisis. that's the only major problem with that statement.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,71|Q2=4271}}The ICFI (Fourth International of 1953) aims to realize an era of socialism which stretches around the world / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,72|Q2=4272}}??
{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=|Q=42,73|Q2=4273}}The IMT is experiencing a crisis of revolutionary leadership / The RCI is not meaningfully leading a Leninist movement
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,74|Q2=4274}}??

{{li|I=S2/ES|tradition=MX onto ES, MX onto LR|Q=42,75|Q2=4275}}Every color revolution is [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition|blue]] / ([[User:RD/9k/Q42,76|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/ES|Q=42,76|Q2=4276}}Color revolutions are revolutions (Liberal-republicanism, Existentialism) / "Color revolutions" aren't revolutions (meta-Marxism; metaphysical statement) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q42,76|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV/ML|tradition=MX onto IV|Q=42,77|Q2=4277}}Trotskyists believe in exporting revolution / Trotskyists believe in effectively selecting or installing particular people within a country who are specifically dedicated to realizing an orange civilization and insisting that only the orange theorists get to bring about Communist revolution, which often conflicts with the Marxisms and theorists that would appear if Trotskyists from other countries didn't attempt to intervene, thus Trotskyists are attempting to export revolution; this is to imply that if China produces Maoism and Trotskyists don't like it and think the entire thing should have been a different orange process they are exporting revolution; this is to vaguely imply but not argue that if China produces Deng Xiaoping Thought and Trotskyists don't like it or understand it and think Maoism and Dengism should have been replaced by [[E:Trotskyist revolution|an orange process]] they are exporting revolution; this is to strongly imply but not require that Molecular Trotskyism is fundamentally different from non-Molecular Trotskyism because Molecular Trotskyism, grounded in a theory of Bauplan elements that make up individual countries from the inside and constitute the process of countries flipping over to specific colors, would not actually ground itself in exporting revolution  ->  this statement does depend on which Trotskyism and which Trotskyist theorists you're talking about, because everything about Trotskyism depends on which theorists you're talking about.

{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=MX onto IV|Q=42,78|Q2=4278}}Trotskyism cannot be exported / Trotskyists within any particular country cannot practically orchestrate whether other countries actually turn orange as opposed to crimson or strawberry; this is to imply that only Trotskyism in one country could be relied on for successfully completing a revolution without reverting to capitalism

{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=unknown|Q=42,79|Q2=4279}}Revolutionaries do not include Tony Cliff / "revolutionaries (a category which does not include Cliff)" [https://en.internationalism.org/wr/235_tcliff.htm]  ->  I should expect this kind of sass in Leninist texts but the needless specificity of this one blindsided me<br/>
I mean depending on your definition there are a lot of Communist parties which have hardly done anything, so, speaking really literally you might say this is true. but I think there are also a lot of theorists or organizers (some of them even good at what they do) for which "revolutionaries" isn't quite the right division, and "Communist allies" or some synonym ("fellow travelers" etc) versus non-allies would be a better division of things. the early stages of a Communist revolution take a lot of skill, education, and correct perception to where there are just these select few people that will actually be able to lead it and fulfill that statement that "without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement". like, a lot of the people who are actually going to carry a successful revolution aren't even revolutionaries.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="Bordigism" data-qid="42,80" value="4280" data-dimension="S">commodity (Bordigism) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4280|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="Bordigism" data-qid="42,81" value="4281" data-dimension="S2">Commodity production suggests enslavement / any existence of a mass of commodities suggests ... If in the past there was [[E:commodity (Bordigism)|commodity production]] ... it was not because the labour-power was sold "voluntarily" as it is today, but rather because it was squeezed by force of arms (Bordiga) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4280|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4282" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S1/LR|tradition=|Q=42,83|Q2=4283}}Carl Sagan on early Trotskyism {{9k|RD|Q36,02}}

{{li|I=S1/IV|tradition=IV, Zv|Q=42,84|Q2=4284|rem="doublespeak"}}fervent perfidious enemies  ->  the motif of revisionist Marxists or strawberry, orange, etc incorrect Marxist theorists saying something terribly ironic that easily reads as a criticism of them but that they haven't reflexively applied to their own theories or practice.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="Bordigism" data-qid="42,85" value="4285" data-dimension="S2">Commodity production destroys socialism (Bordiga) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q4280|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,86|Q2=4286}}Pabloism / the opportunist current that sought to liquidate the Fourth International into Stalinist parties, social-democracy, and bourgeois nationalism [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html]  ->  so Pabloism wanted to dissolve the Fourth International? why? by 1950 the Third International was already dissolved, so you'd think it would be the perfect time to have a Fourth International just in terms of anybody being able to "obstruct" it. were they simply not Leninists? was the Fourth International predictably flooded with Western-Marxists that just didn't even get it? or what the hell was going on there

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4287" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4288" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=42,89|Q2=4289}}First World countries would choose Stalinisms over Trotskyism / If the people of the Soviet Union had been allowed to vote for Stalinism or Trotskyism, injustice would surely follow, because in the event everyone voted for Trotskyism, Trotskyism would threaten to break open the boundaries of First World governments, which would then cause First World governments to panic, declare Trotskyism an atrocious natural crime committed against them, and intervene in the Soviet Union to reinstall Stalinism or Dengism in order to rid the world of the "imperialism" Trotskyism perpetrated against sovereign capitalist populations / ({{9k|RD/Q42,13}})

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=42,90|Q2=4290|rem=almost 91}}The world will cover itself in a number of Stalinist workers' states that last for centuries (Pablo) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html]  ->  oh so that's what Pablo said. from how negative the ICFI was about him I thought he was gonna be like, a classical Menshevik. but he's kind of cool actually. I mean, so far he was closer to correct and the only thing he didn't get right is the magnitude, that there would be somewhere around less than 15 Dengisms that would do basically what he said, and a number of generic anti-imperialisms that didn't even get very far (Venezuela, South Africa, Sahel States? or are those better than that). really, in my opinion the "Pabloisms" should have just formed a Third International and they would have gotten a lot more accomplished that way than the Fourth International.<br/>
what does Pabloism even mean practically? so far I see three possible definitions. A) failing to form the Fourth International. B) forming a scattered sea of socialisms-in-one-country, with or without a Third International. C) any socialism-in-one-country that is not orange and won't form a Fourth International.<br/>
I really want to know if I'm actually a Pabloist. otherwise it would just be a silly bit of trivia. but apparently this is actually something I can be or not be depending on if I align with the ICFI?? and I never knew.<br/>
Cannon seems to believe that Pabloism means no Third International, because otherwise the notion of it destroying the Fourth International wouldn't be such a big issue.

{{li|I=S2/ES|Q=42,91|Q2=4291}}Surely Marx imagined determinism / ({{9k|RD/Q4291}})

{{li|I=S2/MX|tradition=ML, IV, MX|Q=42,92|Q2=4292|rem=42,84}}What is analyzed is accounted for / Taking documents, remarks, anecdotes, or memoir material into account means Materialist analysis of what produced them / To take documents "into consideration" does not mean to take them at their face value. ... (Trotsky 1938) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q26,92|9k]])
{{li|I=S2/MX|tradition=ML, MX|Q=42,93|Q2=4293}}It isn't enough to show an idea is wrong, you must show why a wrong idea arises (Marx) / It's worth showing why anarchism is wrong (Stalin) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q26,92|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=IV|Q=42,94|Q2=4294}}The Khrushchev speech suppressed more facts than it revealed [https://www.marxists.org/archive/fraser/1956/kruschev.html]  ->  oh my god thank you. nobody in Liberal-republicanism ever admits this. now admit that defeating Stalin wasn't entirely a good thing, and led to this outcome.

</li><li value="4295" data-remark="Clippy, 1995" class="field_trotsky" data-dimension="S2">change your profile pic to Clippy / change your profile picture to a Clippy {{YouTube|2_Dtmpe9qaQ}}  ->  normal people baffle me. how can they so confidently believe that "corporations treating people like human beings" is a coherent thing that corporations would intuitively understand and wouldn't need a whole book explaining it to them. I'd need a whole book explaining it to me just to understand how they think a bunch of Clippy could actually teach anyone the intended message. people who would defend factory workers getting confused about "artists" and whether they're workers is one thing, this is entirely another thing.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4296" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S1/MX/IV|Q=42,97|Q2=4297|rem=The Subject}}Trotskyism and metallic rules

</li><li value="4298" class="field_trotsky" data-dimension="Z"><cite>Socialism: Stalinist or scientific</cite> (Hayashi 1998/2000) / "Stalinism, socialist ..." (typo)
</li><li class="field_ML" data-tradition="MX onto ML" value="4299" data-dimension="S2">State capitalism isn't even bad / Complaining about state capitalism is like complaining about {{TTS|tts=nation-state local-state-ism|nationstate localstateism}}

</li><li class="field_ML"   value="4300" data-dimension="M3">[[E:What was wrong with East Germany?|What was wrong with East Germany?]] / Why was the existence of East Germany a problem? / Why did center-Liberals dislike the existence of East Germany?  ->  I know "center-Liberals" can almost be neatly replaced with "bourgeoisie" to create a laughable tautology, but come on, we have to at least pretend to sound fair.
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="4301" data-dimension="M3">[[E:Why wasn't East Germany progress toward Trotskyism?|Why did Trotskyists not consider East Germany to be progress?]]  ->  you have to think about this a bit to realize that it's a good question. Trotsky wants each country in Europe to overthrow capitalists and create a workers' state. East Germany pushed out capitalists and created a workers' state. if other European countries had each become "East Germany", it would have been one possible route to a union of European socialist republics — even one independent from the USSR, potentially, given that the USSR stopped occupying East Germany at a certain point. the process of creating East Germany is more or less in line with the mechanism Trotsky proposed for creating Trotskyism. so why were Trotskyists not on board with East Germany?
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4302" data-dimension="S2">[[E:East Germany was too small to be Trotskyism|East Germany was too small to be Trotskyism]] / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4303" data-dimension="S2">East Germany did not have the correct internal structure to be Trotskyism / East Germany had the wrong internal structure according to Trotskyists / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,92|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4304" data-dimension="S2">If East Germany had been a Fortress Trotskyism, it would have been okay / If East Germany had had the correct internal structure to be Trotskyist, Trotskyists would have found it acceptable / East Germany could have built up to a Fourth International if only it were Trotskyism in one country  ->  derived Trotskyist proposition. I have literally never heard this. but it's rather confusing <em>why</em> nobody says this. 1) Trotsky believed every country in Europe could become Trotskyist 2) The European countries form workers' resistances separately around local groups of workers, then they link up into a Trotskyism 3) What's wrong with each of the European countries being Trotskyism in one country, when it's the only way you can build a bigger Trotskyism? put another way, if several European countries can be Trotskyist and oppose Stalin's government, why not just one? how does one prevent there being others? I guess you could argue from Stalin's point of view that because Trotskyisms are sectarian two Trotskyisms-in-one-country would fight each other, but I don't think Trotskyists would actually be that mean in criticizing their own parties. I don't think they see it that way.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=43,05|Q2=4305}}Pablo expected that Stalinist workers' states might change themselves and become part of Trotskyism (Cannon) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q43,21|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=43,06|Q2=4306}}An uprising in East Germany means that workers' states are making concessions to the people, which is to imply they are making concessions toward forming an orange party or Fourth International (Pablo)  ->  cool idea. I'd hate it much less than a lot of Trotskyist ideas if it was true. Cannon had problems with this but they seem to have been the wrong problems. Cannon was fixated on the fight between Zinovievization and "Stalinist" governments but didn't really bother to talk about the notion of capitalist reversion inside countries or the prevalence of people like Yaroshenko and Deng Xiaoping, which around 1938-1960 are the primary reason "the Stalinists" fought against being Zinovievized.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=43,07|Q2=4307}}The Soviet Union promoted Pabloism  ->  implied by Cannon. [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html] what he seems to be saying is that a miscellaneous sea of disconnected socialisms-in-one-country that don't form a Communist International are Pabloism. so like, North Korea is a manifestation of Pabloism? Cuba is? or is it only the existence of both of them sitting there disconnected. which material thing is Pabloism exactly?

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=43,08|Q2=4308}}James P. Cannon unknowingly promoted Pabloism [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html]  ->  cannon's whole letter reads like this: hello fourth international, so in the United States we had to disband the Fourth International in order to not get caught, imagine my horror when I found out that Trotskyists not being allowed to create a Fourth International was invented by Pabloites and not by national bourgeoises and their associated states like I just said<br/>
it makes me wonder, is Cannon determined to believe in Pabloism existing just so he doesn't have to take the blame for chickening out on forming the Fourth International and hiding?<br/>
in every era Trotskyists have been so bad about attributing problems in forming parties to the wrong causes. first it was "Stalin invented underdeveloped countries", then in 1953 it's "Pabloites invented failure to form the Fourth International"<br/>
well. they almost made a bit of progress. the one good thing about this is it almost resembles a real actual problem you could tell parties to avoid. {{i|oh no the parties are letting the Fourth International fracture, it must be Pabloism, that's what that error is called now.}} I have no idea why it's called that but you know what, sure, you can call it that as long as you admit that Cannon was at least bordering on doing the same thing.

{{li|I=S2/MX|tradition = MX onto IV|Q=43,09|Q2=4309}}Trotskyism is mostly tailism / Trotskyists don't do anything but tail other parties or factions and claim it's Leninism / Trotskyists don't do anything but tail anarchists and claim it's Leninism  ->  I was confused why recently Trotskyists suddenly turned around and apparently changed their position on Cuba. it isn't because they're sensible, or they would have given a lot more weight to James P. Cannon before today and not said the things about Cuba they kept saying. so what changed? I had to think about it and then I realized that what probably happened was in order to gain anything resembling a mass of people they were probably hanging around anarchists, and the anarchists probably forced them to behave. really ironic when anarchists don't like Cuba either, but they {{em|are}} obsessed with the concept of prejudices and very annoying. for better or for worse once they get something in their heads they don't give up.
{{li|I=S2/MX|tradition = MX onto IV|Q=43,09|Q2=4309}}Trotskyism is mostly tailism  ->  I can think of at least three contexts in which this is true. 1) The 1930s Trotskyite conspiracy basically tailed anarchists or general counter-revolutionary factions. 2) Cannon tailed somebody else to suddenly decide to defend the Soviet Union. 3) US Trotskyists are tailing center-Liberals of all things to decide to defend Cuba.

{{li|I=S1/HAS|Q=43,10|Q2=4310}}non-Marxist error in Marxist text / non-Marxist error in Marxist talk / "can't believe all these Trotskyist errors!" (the errors are typos) / Marxist making mistake unrelated to Marxism  ->  non-fictional motif which may be framed either humorously or seriously. this concept first came to mind when I was reading the first edition of a Trotskyist text with typos in it. but it could apply to any number of things, like Marxists making a background-information error about science, etc. Trotskyists using Kalinin as Trotsky's actor would fall under this.

</li><li class="field_anarchy" value="4311" data-dimension="S2">Slavoj Žižek is an anarchist / Slavoj Žižek is not a Trotskyist in any sense and can only be termed either an anarchist or an [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition|Existentialist]]  ->  this is true if Q43,12 is true. Slavoj Žižek is "a Trotskyist" if Zinovievism is Trotskyism. if Zinovievism, when separated from the small number of Leninist theorists who would lead it and claim it is Leninism, is definitely an anarchism, then Žižek is not a Trotskyist. this proposition has the charcoal swatch because I saw an anarchist text define "[[Term:anarcho-nihilism|anarcho-nihilism]]" and it seems very similar to the definition of Zinovievism although I honestly do not have extensive enough historical background information about either of them to verify that they're the same.

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=43,12|Q2=4312}}Early Trotskyism was actually an anarchism {{9k|RD|Q4312}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4313" data-dimension="S">Kalinin as Trotsky's actor / Kalinin in place of Trotsky  ->  every so often with independent videos you see a video accidentally use a picture of Kalinin to represent Trotsky, as if he's not Trotsky but he plays him on TV. as far as I know this doesn't really happen with actual Trotskyist parties, thankfully.

{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=43,14|Q2=4314}}Trotsky doors  ->  people say there was an incident where Stalin got so mad at Trotsky he walked out and slammed the door, but then later Trotsky attempted to slam a door and could not because it was too heavy {{YouTube|Z6sLCpDzECM}}<br/>
case of: Marxist making mistake unrelated to Marxism.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4315" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/IV/A|Q=43,16|Q2=4316}}Trotsky stole his point about restoring the soviets from anarchism  ->  I do not know if this is true but it definitely feels like something anarchists would claim is true.<br/>
Bolshevism appropriated anarchist movements + restore the soviets (Trotskyism) = this.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=43,17|Q2=4317}}Trotsky recounting Lenin<br/>
Russian revolution according to Trotskyists + Lenin = Trotsky recounting Lenin.<br/>
Trotsky recounting Lenin + "{{TTS|&|and}}" ship versus "{{TTS|/|slash}}" ship = Trotsky counterpart {{TTS|×|X}} Lenin counterpart.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4318" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4319" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4320" data-dimension="S2">??
{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=43,21|Q2=4321|rem=post revolution}}international bank of Trotskyism (hypothetical; motif) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q4321|9k]])
{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=43,22|Q2=4322}}international health care program (hypothetical; motif) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q4321|9k]])
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4323" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4324" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4325" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4326" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4327" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4328" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4329" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4330" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4331" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4332" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4333" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4334" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4335" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4336" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4337" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4338" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4339" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4340" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4341" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4342" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4343" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4344" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4345" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4346" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4347" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4348" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4349" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=43,50|Q2=4350}}Trotskyism and postmodernism {{9k|RD|Q43,50}}
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4351" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4352" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=43,53|Q2=4353}}A letter to Trotskyists throughout the world (James P. Cannon, 1953) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/open-o21.html] {{a|title=A letter to Trotskyists throughout the world|href=https://archive.is/JCdgs}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4354" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4355" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4356" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4357" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4358" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4359" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4360" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4361" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4362" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4363" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4364" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4365" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4366" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4367" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4368" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4369" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4370" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4371" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4372" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4373" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4374" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4375" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4376" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4377" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4378" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4379" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4380" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4381" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4382" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4383" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4384" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/MX/RG|Q=43,85|Q2=4385}}George Orwell would not have thought about nationalism the same way if he had been Black {{9k|RD|Q43,91}}
{{li|I=S2/MX/LR|Q=43,86|Q2=4386}}George Orwell would have thought about nationalism the same way if he had been born in China {{9k|RD|Q43,91}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4387" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4388" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4389" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=43,90|Q2=4390}}the James Cannon of Britain {{9k|RD|Q43,90}}
{{li|I=F1/ES|Q=43,91|Q2=4391}}nationalism (George Orwell) {{9k|RD|Q43,91}}
{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=43,92|Q2=4392}}permanent revolution (Trotskyism) {{9k|RD|Q43,92}}
{{li|I=S1/IV/DFy|Q=43,93|Q2=4393}}Trotskyist reading of {{book|Animal Farm}} {{9k|RD|Q19,83}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4394" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4395" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4396" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4397" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4398" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4399" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4400" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4401" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4402" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4403" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4404" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4405" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4406" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4407" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4408" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4409" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4410" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4411" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4412" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/Fy|Q=44,13|Q2=4413}}See through one lie, and their whole testimony falls apart / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q64,30|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4414" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4415" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=44,16|Q2=4416}}If your Communist party is so revolutionary, why isn't it defending workers against capitalists? / ({{9k|RD/Q44,16}})  
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=44,17|Q2=4417}}Where's the class analysis? / Why didn't you use class analysis? / ({{9k|RD/Q44,17}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4418" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4419" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4420" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4421" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4422" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4423" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4424" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4425" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4426" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4427" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4428" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4429" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4430" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4431" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4432" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4433" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4434" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4435" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S2/IV/ML|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov {{9k|RD|Q41,91}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4437" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4438" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4439" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4440" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4441" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" data-qid="44,42" value="4442" data-dimension="S2">All republics threaten to disintegrate when a population of people is no longer oppressed  ->  this poses its problems for Bolshevism but there is a potential answer: Bolshevism, a republic, is supposed to transition to some material object that is somehow not considered a republic and after the stages of monarchy and republic is properly called something else.

{{li|I=S1/ML|tradition=MX onto ML|Q=44,43|Q2=4443}}Stalinism as meta-Marxism / Stalin's Marxism as meta-Marxism (2020s)
{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=44,44|Q2=4444}}Trotskyism as meta-Marxism / molecular Trotskyism (as theory; generic) / ({{9k|RD/Q26,92}})

{{li|I=S1/ML|tradition=Zv, ML, IV onto Zv|Q=44,45|Q2=4445}}sectarian Communist International / Communist International formed around specific named Marxism and not admitting other named Marxisms  ->  on one hand, it was kind of inevitable these would be invented. on the other, it feels like they have never ever been effective. it may be worth saying under the "spanishness office principle" that sectarian Communist Internationals are <em>probably</em> a symptom of Marxist parties consisting of detached Filaments of bourgeoisie that have no inherent reason to work together. (the spanishness office principle: if people are complaining about Spanishness Offices, they're the bourgeoisie, because people who fight for control of "institutions" of elite experts are generally the bourgeoisie. institutions includes the Communist International should it happen people are fiercely squabbling over it.)

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4446" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4447" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4448" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4449" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4450" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4451" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4452" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4453" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4454" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4455" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4456" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4457" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4458" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4459" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4460" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4461" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4462" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4463" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4464" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4465" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4466" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4467" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4468" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4469" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4470" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4471" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4472" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4473" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4474" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4475" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4476" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4477" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4478" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4479" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4480" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4481" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4482" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4483" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4484" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4485" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4486" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4487" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4488" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4489" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=M3/MX|Q=44,90|Q2=4490}}Why is Trotskyism so ironic? / Why is Trotskyism the biggest irony? / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q44,91|9k]])
{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=44,91|Q2=4491}}Faulty progressivisms produce irony / Every incorrect progressive theory produces irony / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q44,91|9k]])
{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=44,92|Q2=4492}}Molecular Marxisms are not ironic / Irony is the failure to predict reality to the point outcomes are logically consistent (in context of meta-Marxism and hypothetical [[E:Q1992|molecular Marxisms]]) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q44,91|9k]])

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4493">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4494">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4495">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4496">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4497">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4498">??

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=44,99|Q2=4499}}Trotskyism is molecularized at the international scale / Trotskyism is not about preserving the Communist International, but actively regenerating a Communist International at any time in any place from correct understandings; Trotskyism is a molecularized model of Communist Internationals in which the relativity process within history is taken into account and thus any group of parties with correct understandings of historical materialism can snap together and become the Communist International (ICFI) / ({{9k|RD/Q46,02}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4500">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4501">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4502">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4503">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4504">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4505">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4506">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4507">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4508">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4509">??

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=45,10|Q2=4510}}Trotskyist prison notebooks [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/09/16/jpea-s16.html]  ->  it didn't occur to me that this existed but yeah, that makes sense. it is... darkly funny that compared with Gramscianism Trotskyists are also better at this. gosh. trotskyists are great, [[E:Soviet Union denying Trotskyists entry to hospitals|stop trying to kill them with tuberculosis]]

</li><li class="field_mdem" value="4511" data-remark="guy fawkes, 05/11" data-dimension="M3">Treason of what? / What is treason? / Treason is not a Materialist term (meta-Marxist answer to question)  ->  on the surface, Trotskyists will love this one, although when you actually drill down into it the question is very complicated. Communism is treason to the United States! okay, but treason of what? the constitution!! okay, but why is the constitution there? you still haven't really answered treason of what. one somewhat valid answer would be "the population". this answer is somewhat meta-ontologically sound, as both the United States and the historical Soviet Union could say it. if there are one million people behind Stalin and ten thousand Trotskyites attack, attacking Stalin's government is <em>treason of</em> the one million people by the ten thousand Trotskyites. however, this also means that if there are half a billion people behind Deng Xiaoping and anybody attacks that government, this is <em>treason of</em> half a billion people. that's so many people that although it should be less bad, in a logical contradiction it should also be much worse. the United States also has a third of a billion people, which is definitely a few. so is Liberal-republicanism good then? no. the amazing thing about Communist revolutions is that if and when they happen they open up the weirdest loophole in this question — if nearly all the people in the United States defect from the United States, can they even meaningfully commit treason against themselves? and the answer is no. this is one coarse answer to how revolutions happen, or at least how they stop not happening. but with that said, how do you teach Trotskyists and Tories and even anarchists that the [[E:Sunny fallacy|Sunny fallacy]] is different from a successful revolution? every single group of people that separates from anything will try to claim it can't commit treason against itself.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4512" data-dimension="S2">??

</li><li class="field_mdem" value="4513" data-dimension="S2">[[E:Q45,13|A revolution in the United States is revolution against two separate countries at once]]  ->  this is part of why it's so hard. in daily life people have to pretend to be part of two separate countries which are violently hostile to each other (quite literally when there are so many shootings), and only a small portion of people are skilled enough to even pull off that act. it's almost trivial for one of the two countries to prevent a strike simply by breaking up the graph population of workers and owners along the lines of the two nations and call foul on one countable culture [[E:Being wrong means relinquishing freedom|violating the cultural self-determination of the other countable culture]]. conditioned by things like religious teachings about the sanctity of religion and humanities teachings about [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition|the sanctity of inner experience of individuals and identity-demographics]], people are quick to flare up even across countable cultures when they think any "community" is getting hit by an external threat. all this is to say that Lived-Experience nonsense is the weapon of the bourgeoisie against the people. it facilitates the general pattern of all existing owners and their allied {{TTS|tts=Wasp Swarm|WASP Swarm}} banding together to crush anything that could actually bring change better than it facilitates anyone actually overcoming them. which should cast a lot of doubt on whether schizoanalyst concepts of [[E:the united nonviolence of identities|the united nonviolence of identities]] should just totally be dismissed as inherently incorrect. I'm not quite confident enough to say that just yet, although I think with a better explanation of what is supposed to replace them that might become okay. my thoughts are something like this: A) people are made of populations, not inherently born into culture or identity. A1) culture can be developed or created in a group of people once they are linked. B) the proletariat is born beginning at all the slots for people to even be useful for anything filling up, and people thrashing their way back in to be able to work without creating a whole new business. C) the United States is saved if some unknown significant ratio of people thrashes back into industry like ten or fifty times the number of workers to owners, and the subpopulation of workers creates almost everything in society of its own will while nobody with the power to create a business creates much of anything. D) this outcome is really different from the way things work right now in huge swaths of the United States. E) the cleanest process, which I don't think will happen, would be your fifty Tory types per owner overtaking Tory businesses as a coherent population and your fifty progressive types per owner overtaking progressive businesses separately. F) most identity-politics populations all fall inside the progressive subpopulation and inherently only have the power to take back half the country. G) progressive types have an interest in overcoming all the Tory owners but Tory types have no serious interest in overcoming Tory owners. these two political subpopulations belong to truly different ideologies and different [[Term:Bauplan|Bauplans]], as different as West Germany and East Germany right now at this second. that map with Mao and the [[Term:KMT|KMT]] graph-struggling [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gu%C3%A8rra_Civila_Chinesa_(1946-1950).png over a giant area] comes to mind. H) postcolonial theories have to go because at the present second no matter what ideology you choose (center-Liberalism, Toryism, anarchism, unnamed-Frantz-Fanon-obssessed-ideology...) every single good outcome is colonial. this might be fixable with the brightest Marxists working on it, but that's not the step the United States is at right now. I) unity between the two proletariats or twenty proletariats wouldn't actually matter if each proletariat somehow had the ability to win and guard its sector separately. but right now the individual proletariats are very weak and not very functional as industries. the {{TTS|tts=Wasp Swarm|WASP Swarm}} is honestly just hiding behind its owners pretending that isn't true. I1) that technically means that if there were a totally bourgeois Marxism and it somehow defeated all the Tory owners tomorrow the Tory workers probably wouldn't put up much of a fight. but then of course you'd have a bottom-tier Marxism. it would have absolute dumpster level theory as bad as all the Gramscian and Existentialist theory going around now or worse. J) if all the progressive workers were able to conquer the whole Tory population as a sheer whole monolithic chunked-together ethnic group, ripping their owners away from them, Marxism can win. J1) actually stopping and thinking about this, and realizing it is inherently colonial, anarchists will hate it. the sheer bulk of all actual progressives beyond center-Liberalism would not want to acknowledge the truth. K) banish the Tories to West Germany, you get East Germany. banish the KMT to Taiwan, you get the People's Republic of China. conquering a monolithic {{TTS|tts=Wasp Swarm|WASP Swarm}} is hard, but banishing them actually does work. where exactly would United States Tories have to go? on what lines would the country have to be sheared in two?

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4514">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4515">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4516">??
{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=45,17|Q2=4517}}A revolution redefines treason / Revolution happens when the group of people defecting from a country is so much bigger than the country it cannot commit treason against itself {{9k|RD|Q44,36}}
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4518">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4519">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4520">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4521">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4522">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4523">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4524">??

{{li|I=S2/Zv|tradition=|Q=45,25|Q2=4525}}Trotskyite conspiracy period (1925-1940, Soviet Union / Germany / Mexico; historical period within particular countries or groups of countries)  ->  Items like this may be used to perform [[E:time slice analysis (meta-Marxism)|slice analysis]] on objects like the Soviet Union, dividing those specific objects into very specific historical periods that are physical in nature.<br/>
Trotskyite conspiracy period + Soviet Union = Communist Party of the Soviet Union (1925-1940).

{{li|I=S2/IV/ML|Q=45,26|Q2=4526}}Stalin could have stopped / ({{9k|RD/Q61,20}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4527">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4528">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4529">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4530">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4531">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4532">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4533">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4534">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4535">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4536">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4537">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4538">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4539">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4540">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4541">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4542">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4543">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4544">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4545">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4546">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4547">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4548">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4549">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4550">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4551">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4552">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4553">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4554">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4555">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4556">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4557">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4558">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4559">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4560">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4561">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4562">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4563">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4564">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4565">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4566">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4567">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4568">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4569">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4570">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4571">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4572">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4573">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4574">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4575">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4576">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4577">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4578">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4579">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4580">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4581">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4582">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4583">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4584">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4585">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4586">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4587">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4588">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4589">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4590">??
</li><li class="field_gramsci" value="4591" data-dimension="Z">Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4592" data-dimension="Z">Bolshevik party
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4593" data-dimension="Z">Third International
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4594" data-dimension="Z">Left Opposition
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="4595" data-dimension="Z">Menshevik party
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4596">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4597">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4598">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4599">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4600" data-dimension="S0">Trotskyist group, organization, or party
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4601" data-dimension="Z">International Secretariat (1953) / ISFI (attempted International)
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4602" data-dimension="Z">International Committee (1953) / ICFI (attempted International) {{9k|RD|Q46,02}}
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4603" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4604" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4605" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4606" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4607" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4608" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4609" data-dimension="Z">Committee for a Workers' International (defunct) / CWI (attempted International)

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4610" data-dimension="Z">local Trotskyist group unaffiliated with larger formation
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4611" data-dimension="Z">Denver Communists (??; United States Midwest)
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4612" data-dimension="Z">Japan Revolutionary Communist League (JRCL) [https://tankyuka.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/07/25/005113 '23]  ->  you find the weirdest things when searching for arbitrary Japanese words. one of them is miscellaneous Trotskyist blogs. every time I find one of these, I am like, man, these are the coolest people in Japan. most of the time Japan is so crushingly the same but... if you look around enough.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4613" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4614" data-dimension="Z">??

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="4615" data-dimension="S">Žižekian
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="46,16" value="4616" data-dimension="S">Zinovievizing / Zinovievize / Zinovievism (process noun / nominalized verb, similar to "imperialism")  ->  to declare another entire ideology a conspiracy based on the whole group of people believing the wrong culture, and attempt to bash the SPS to pieces. I have a bad feeling that given enough time most Anarchisms naturally do this to each other.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4617" data-dimension="S">terrorist (Zinovievism)  ->  wrecker, rival proletarian revolution
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4618" data-dimension="Z">??
{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=46,19|Q2=4619}}Trotskyists against 1619 Project {{9k|RD|Q4619}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4620" data-dimension="S0">Trotskyist group affiliated with the Fourth International of 1938
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4621" data-dimension="Z">Socialist Workers' Party (United States)  ->  helped split the Fourth International into the ISFI and ICFI, funny enough
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4622">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4623">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4624">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4625">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4626">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4627">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4628">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4629">??
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="4630" data-dimension="Z">International Marxist Tendency (party)  ->  international-party Trotskyism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="4631" data-dimension="Z">Workers' International League (1938)  ->  [https://university.marxist.com/en/imt-history]
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="4632" data-dimension="Z">"The Militant"  ->  [https://university.marxist.com/en/imt-history]
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4633" data-dimension="Z">Revolutionary Communist Party  ->  [https://university.marxist.com/en/imt-history] [https://www.workersliberty.org/story/2024-05-07/tale-three-rcps]
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4634" data-dimension="Z">In Defence of Marxism (outlet; Britain)
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4635" data-dimension="Z">Socialist Appeal (Britain)
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4636" data-dimension="Z">Socialist Alternative (United States)
{{li|I=Z1/ML|tradition=IV, ML, MZ|Q=46,37|Q2=4637}}Party of Socialism and Liberation (United States)

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4638" data-dimension="Z">[[E:Q4601|Fourth International]] (1938)  ->  became: Q46,01 International Secretariat, Q46,02 International Committee
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4639">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4640">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4641">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4642">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4643">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4644">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4645">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4646">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4647">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4648">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4649">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4650">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4651">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4652">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4653">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4654">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4655">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4656">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4657">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4658">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4659">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4660">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4661">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4662">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4663">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4664">??
</li><li value="4665" class="field_trotsky" data-dimension="S">contentless revolutionary socialism - Rosa Luxemburg
</li><li value="4666" class="field_trotsky" data-dimension="Z">[[E:Q4666|contentless Trotskyite-conspirator ideology]] / Zinovievism (meta-Marxism)
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4667">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4668">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4669">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4670"><cite>Literature and Revolution</cite> (Trotsky 1924) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1924/lit_revo/]  ->  the origin of most of the stupid claims about Trotsky in <cite>The Giver</cite>. ex-Trotskyist novelists really had some problems with this text apparently.
</li><li class="field_nations" value="4671" data-dimension="F2">Trotsky wanted to abolish sex / Trotsky hated the concept of sex and wanted to get rid of it, according to the text <cite>Literature and Revolution</cite>  ->  I found this BS in a YouTube comments section once, and ever since then I have not been able to forget it; it was just too funny. the misinterpretation seems to have stemmed from a work where Trotsky was lightly criticizing people <em>escaping from their problems</em> through one or two genuninely weird pieces of sexual literature that had been put out recently — the key word was escaping, not sex. I have no idea exactly what group of people were getting things so twisted but man, when people want to misinterpret Communists they really go all the way. this was one of those things that led to me realizing that <cite>The Giver</cite> was actually a skewed portrayal of Trotsky in the first place, because you see the theme of abolishing sex and "controlling emotions" in both places. in the original Trotsky text he was talking about "emotions" like clinical depression and anxiety, when they did not even really have psychotherapy in Russia.

</li><li class="field_nations" value="4672" data-dimension="S2">Lenin hated the concept of sex  ->  this one is actually somewhat true. Lenin felt like whatever he or anyone else sacrificed to make the Russian Revolution happen was more or less okay in that the longer you are committed to having principles and not falling into a bloc of bourgeoisie the more there are some things you stop caring about giving up because the alternative to the choice that led to that is simply so much worse. this whole situation is much easier to understand if we look at a totally different example like North Korea "banning radios". Third World countries have to have this crushingly strict discipline about building things in their own country and only using their own stuff no matter what kind of short-term suffering that brings just because trusting the totally untrustworthy bloc of foreign bourgeoisie is so exponentially worse that they have to wrest themselves free just to be free and be able to think, exactly like if an individual was in a toxic relationship and has to get a divorce and be poor just to not endure spousal abuse.<br />
so... if you're taking Trotsky at his word he has nothing to say about sex, but if you think Trotsky believes whatever Lenin believes then you might think it's transitively true that Trotsky hates people having sex because Lenin does. but actually, that logic is a little off because Lenin's reasoning goes A) people should make sacrifices to create the Second World B) in a poor country people might not have sex C) the proletariat cannot or might not have sex. but Trotsky doesn't really adhere to the first proposition. Trotsky just hates Third World countries and likes Europe, so he doesn't really like temporary solutions and sacrifices. that means his reasoning is more like A) socialist transition is {{YouTube|a5K3o2wCKC8|taking too long}} B) sacrifices are dumb unless they produce socialist transition right now C) have sex if you want but I'm going to smash the Soviet government and create a Marxism purely based on ordering everybody around and not on compromises, let's just see if any Marxist states survive me

</li><li class="field_ML" data-tradition="ML, JC" value="4673" data-dimension="S2">People must make sacrifices to create the Second World / If an individual's higher needs and an imminent process of creating the Second World are in conflict — an imminent revolution or transition process is one that's happening across the next couple of years with little uncertainty — the Second World is more important  ->  this is like, the single proposition that tenuously allowed Juche-socialism to have the red swatch instead of the strawberry one. I suppose that in the end I think that historically this concept has been very important. considering countries like China and Cuba, I don't think it has the level of relevance now that it did in 1910-1950. but I still think it's worth always remembering that it did have relevance then. it still has some limited relevance over in North Korea, and terrifyingly, in the rust-tinted areas of the United States that aren't the major cities. some days I swear we actually live in one big North Korea that never saved itself from the teeny tiny United Stateses that rule it.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4674" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4675" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4676" data-dimension="S2">??

{{li|I=S1/ML|tradition=|Q=46,77|Q2=4677}}I will not drink from the gutter [https://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1920/lenin/zetkin1.htm]  ->  the motif of Lenin saying some vague but oddly negative things about the concept of "sexual freedom". I somehow remembered it as being more specific than it was. it was really quite vague.<br/>
I will not drink from the gutter + ?? = Lenin hated the concept of sex.

{{li|I=S1/ML|tradition=|Q=46,78|Q2=4678}}Lenin on relationships [https://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1920/lenin/zetkin1.htm] [https://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1924/reminiscences-of-lenin.htm] [https://www.marxists.org/archive/krupskaya/works/ethics.htm] / Lenin on potentially sexual relationships  ->  I would not be dwelling on this topic if he hadn't said some actually-somewhat-interesting things. but he did, and they need unpacking.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4679" data-dimension="S2">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4680">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4681">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4682">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4683">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4684">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4685">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4686">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4687">??

{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=46,88|Q2=4688}}Trotskyist orientalism / Trotskyists treating the bloc of populations that they expect to join together and transition to Trotskyism as superior to Third World populations with an urgent need to defend themselves against First World capital and more worthy of protection from neocolonialism, scattering across the world, or starvation / ([[User:RD/9k/Q22,96|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=46,89|Q2=4689}}Speaking of the concept of a "reformed Communist" is like saying "reformed gay person" or "reformed transgender person" / ({{9k|RD/Q46,91}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4690" data-dimension="Z">Left Voice (federated outlet)

{{li|I=S1/MX/LR|Q=46,91|Q2=4691}}Stalin's abuser (motif) / the world's greatest bully who was scary enough to make Stalin hide in the shadows / ({{9k|RD/Q46,91}})
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="4692">??
{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=46,93|Q2=4693}}why would that masochist let himself be broken / the specifically modern malady which makes such repentant intellectuals radically change their opinions and renounce in a masochistic and exhibitionist manner their own testimony, becoming champions of a cause quite contrary to that which they began serving with great fanfare (Breton) / ({{9k|RD/Q49,57}})
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4694">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4695">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4696">??
{{li|I=S1/ML|Q=46,97|Q2=4697}}a vast black vacuity / ({{9k|RD/Q49,57}})
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4698">??

{{li|I=Z1/LLM/IV|Q=46,99|Q2=4699}}Socialism AI / ({{9k|RD/Q46,99}})
{{li|I=S1/LLM/IV|Q=47,00|Q2=4700}}ICFI socialism prompts / ICFI "Socialism AI" questions
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,01|Q2=4701}}Why did Trotsky argue socialism must be international?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,02|Q2=4702}}What is the difference between Trotskyism and Stalinism?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,03|Q2=4703}}What was Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,04|Q2=4704}}What is the Fourth International? / What is the Fourth International and when was it founded?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,05|Q2=4705}}What would a socialist society look like?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,06|Q2=4706}}Why are democratic rights under relentless attack today?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,07|Q2=4707}}How do billionaires control politics and the economy?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,08|Q2=4708}}How much wealth have billionaires accumulated lately?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,09|Q2=4709}}What is the extent of inequality in America and globally?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,10|Q2=4710}}What future does capitalism offer young people?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,11|Q2=4711}}What conditions do warehouse and logistics workers face?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,12|Q2=4712}}How can teachers fight budget cuts and privatization?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,13|Q2=4713}}How can we put an end to the Gaza genocide?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,14|Q2=4714}}What were the real reasons for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,15|Q2=4715}}Why are the tech giants censoring online speech?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,16|Q2=4716}}How did the French Revolution change world history?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,17|Q2=4717}}What was the significance of the 1917 October Revolution?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,18|Q2=4718}}What is Long COVID and how has it affected global society?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,19|Q2=4719}}How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted healthcare workers?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,20|Q2=4720}}Why have all governments abandoned pandemic mitigation measures?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,21|Q2=4721}}What is the elimination strategy for ending the COVID-19 pandemic?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,22|Q2=4722}}How can we oppose the far-right attacks on science and public health?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,23|Q2=4723}}Why are schools chronically underfunded in America?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,24|Q2=4724}}What were Lenin's April Theses?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,25|Q2=4725}}What caused the degeneration of the Soviet Union?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,26|Q2=4726}}How can we stop the danger of nuclear war?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,27|Q2=4727}}What is "Pabloism"?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,28|Q2=4728}}How does capitalism destroy the natural world?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,29|Q2=4729}}Why have capitalist governments ignored global warming?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,30|Q2=4730}}What causes the climate crisis and how can it be stopped?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,31|Q2=4731}}What is the class basis of police violence in America?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,32|Q2=4732}}How does police violence maintain capitalist class rule?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,33|Q2=4733}}Why is Trump targeting immigrants for persecution?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,34|Q2=4734}}What is the socialist policy towards borders?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,35|Q2=4735}}How do AI and automation affect workers under capitalism?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,36|Q2=4736}}How did Stalin betray the goals of the October Revolution?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,37|Q2=4737}}How did imperialism develop historically?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,38|Q2=4738}}How is Trump trying to build a fascist movement in America?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,39|Q2=4739}}What is the connection between fascism and imperialism?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,40|Q2=4740}}Why does poverty persist amid unprecedented wealth?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,41|Q2=4741}}How does capitalism concentrate wealth among the ruling class?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,42|Q2=4742}}What is surplus value and how is it extracted from workers?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,43|Q2=4743}}What is "commodity fetishism" and how does it hide exploitation?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,44|Q2=4744}}What is required to transform the consciousness of the working class?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,45|Q2=4745}}How do Marxists approach prompts of art and culture?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,46|Q2=4746}}What role does art play in the class struggle and revolution?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,47|Q2=4747}}What did Marx mean by "historical materialism"?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,48|Q2=4748}}Why do the union bureaucracies always betray workers' struggles?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,49|Q2=4749}}How can workers build a real socialist movement?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,50|Q2=4750}}How can workers build rank-and-file committees?
{{li|I=M3/IV|Q=47,51|Q2=4751}}Why is independent working-class organization essential?

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4752">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4753">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4754">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4755">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4756">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4757">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4758">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4759">??

{{li|I=S1/IV|tradition=|Q=47,60|Q2=4760}}International Workers Alliance of Rank-and-File Committees (IWA-RFC) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/04/24/pers-a24.html]

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4761">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4762">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4763">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4764">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4765">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4766">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4767">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4768">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4769">??

</li><li class="field_ML" value="4770" data-dimension="S">the Vegeta of Communism / the Vegeta of Bolshevism (Marxism, Leninism; motif)  ->  a very silly metaphor I came up with early in {{book|MDem}} 5.1 when I was thinking about {{book|Dragon Ball}} and the relationship between it, religion, non-belief, wars, and historical materialism. there was this particular concept of two people in a rivalry and one of them really upset about not being able to get into the top position of something instead of ever cooling down about it, and it just haunted my mind. I was like, honestly, Trotsky is the [[E:Vegeta IV|Vegeta]] of Bolshevism. and it never really left me.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4771">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4772">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4773">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4774">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4775">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="MX onto Zv" value="4776" data-remark="Liberal-republicanism" data-dimension="S">negative democracy / un-voting (act of casting a vote for something to not exist) / Antiliberalism (in the sense of "anti-matter" or "anti-clockwise", not "anti-war" or "anti-communism"; hypothetical republic based on voting against things more than for them)  ->  the motif of defining democracy specifically as a bunch of people voting for something to not exist. note that this does not refer to protests. this actually refers to a hypothetical ballot box or equivalent exercise of individual (non-)allegiance within a system where people cast a ballot for not-the-president rather than voting for said president to be president, or cast a non-purchase to get rid of a corporation they are tired of.<br />
I could totally imagine a hypothetical Trotskyism implementing this on everything, and honestly... in that context of a country having a central Leninist party where some people will be appointed by representatives but then if people don't like them you take them back, and you can also take the representatives back, it doesn't sound half bad. Antiliberalism might actually be better than Liberalism. see, my biggest problem with Trotskyism has always been that it hasn't happened, not in the concept of people trying it if it did exist. really. this is one way to stop the Trotskyite conspirators. simply let them un-vote and watch the numbers until the problem has reached its minimum solution and they stop un-voting. once they stop un-voting you've got their loyalty and the country stays together.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="IV" value="4777" data-dimension="F2">Trotskyism succeeding will be a black swan event  ->  the claim that all the previous events of Trotskyism failing are not predictive of what it will do in the future relative to those events. honestly, this is basically what Trotskyists already say. but given that it has had almost a century to happen and hasn't happened, while mainstream Marxism-Leninism and Deng Xiaoping Thought each <em>have</em> happened during the same time, it's probably fair to mark it false.

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=47,78|Q2=4778}}Trotskyism is like cold fusion / ({{9k|RD/Q47,78}})
{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=47,79|Q2=4779}}Trotskyism is like livermorium: it's really big, but it falls apart and disappears immediately before it can even be observed / ({{9k|RD/Q47,78}})
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4780">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4781">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4782">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4783">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4784">??
{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=47,85|Q=4785}}world where Trotskyists surpass North Korea / ({{9k|RD/Q47,78}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4786">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4787">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4788">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4789">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4790">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4791">??

{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=47,92|Q2=4792}}interobjectivity (meta-Marxism) / violet interlock / ({{9k|RD/Q92}})

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4793">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4794">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4795">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4796">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4797">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4798">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4799">??
</li><li class="field_ML field_mao" value="4800" data-dimension="S0">Maoist group, organization, or party
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4801">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4802">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4803">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4804">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4805">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4806">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4807">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4808">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4809">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4810">??
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="48,11" value="4811" data-dimension="Z">New Communist Party of Canada / {{TTS|lang=fr|(Nouveau) Parti Communiste du Canada}} / NCPC {{YouTube|bKq-iip4LXs}} [https://ncpc-npcc.ca/about/]
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4812">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4813">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4814">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4815">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4816">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4817">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4818">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4819">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4820">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4821">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4822">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4823">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4824">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4825">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4826">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4827">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4828">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4829">??

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4830" data-dimension="Z"><cite>The Energy Conspiracy</cite> (Seman 1981) {{YouTube|ozqj75e574s}}

{{li|I=S2/Zv|Q=48,31|Q2=4831}}Orange anarchism is partly defined by pulling chunks of people out of some greater structure or population when they are dissatisfied with their relationship with that population / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300|9k]])

</li><li value="4832" class="field_trotsky" data-dimension="S2">[[E:Q4832|The correct group will make you free]] / The correct relationship and shared culture will make you free / The truth will make you free (John 8:32)  ->  if you read this the way it's intended, like, it applies to Marxism if Marxism is true — though it equally applies to Anarchism if Anarchism is truer. it is so telling that Tories would use this in a context totally outside of religion and purely against "Big Government". it shows that some people cling to religion purely because they believe having the correct Social-Philosophical System, the correct group of people and culture, will give them a better life either taking away their worries or crushing their enemies, or both. {{YouTube|ozqj75e574s}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4833">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4834">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4835">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4836">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4837">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4838">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4839">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4840">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4841">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4842">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4843">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4844">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4845">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4846">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4847">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4848">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4849">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4850">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4851">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4852">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4853">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4854">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4855">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4856">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4857">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4858">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4859">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4860">??

{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=48,61|Q2=4861}}comparing Trotskyites with Confederates (meta-Marxism) {{9k|RD|Q48,61}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4862">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4863">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4864">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4865">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4866">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4867">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4868">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4869">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4870">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4871">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4872">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4873">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4874">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4875">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4876">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4877">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4878">??

{{li|I=F2/ES|tradition=MX onto ES|Q=48,79|Q2=4879}}Predictions cause independent events / Predicting bad outcomes causes them / If there is a box sitting around in the back of a truck which was filled about an hour ago by an unseen person you do not know the preferences or goals of, and all you know is that the only options are that the box could only have been filled with either a toy cat or an actual dead cat with both outcomes equally possible, and you predict there is a dead cat in the box before opening it, and then you open up the box and find a dead cat, your prediction {{em|caused}} the box to contain a dead cat and you should have predicted the box to contain a toy cat if that was your desired outcome  ->  this is largely a blue-anarchist thing, not necessarily something Trotskyists are usually guilty of. but it belonged next to the Monty Hall problems

{{li|I=S1/MX/STM|Q=48,80|Q2=4880}}generalized Monty Hall problem
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,81|Q2=4881}}outcome in superposition / cat in superposition (independent of box) / car-goat superposition / princess-tiger superposition / [[E:Q48,80|Monty Hall problem]] (generic)
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,82|Q2=4882}}closed door (probability) / box (probability; container for cat) / [[E:Q48,80|Monty Hall problem]] (generic)
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,83|Q2=4883}}princess (outcome)  ->  "The Lady, or the Tiger?" represented as a game theory problem. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady,_or_the_Tiger%3F]
{{li|I=S1/ML|tradition=ML onto IV|Q=48,84|Q2=4884}}movement blocked by Monty Hall problem  ->  if I said Trotskyism's greatest weakness was Monty Hall problems, you might not believe me at first. but if you thought about it a bit and realized that Monty Hall problems, cats in boxes, telling whether multiple countries are going to go off in revolution at once, predicting what other individuals are going to do, and predicting the future are all the exact same thing, you'd shortly have an epiphany. Schrödinger's cat is general relativity is the principle of least action before solving it is Monty Hall problems.<br/>
schizoanalysis is even weaker against Monty Hall problems, if that's possible, because none of the minorities know what any of the other minorities are going to do to each other.
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,85|Q2=4885}}tiger (outcome)
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,86|Q2=4886}}goat (outcome)
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,87|Q2=4887}}dead cat (outcome)
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,88|Q2=4888}}car (outcome)
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,89|Q2=4889}}live cat (outcome)
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,90|Q2=4890}}toy cat (outcome)  ->  a neutral outcome which is not directly causally connected to a hypothetical bad outcome but is just as unpredictable.
{{li|I=S1/STM|Q=48,91|Q2=4891}}princess in other castle (outcome) / Toad (outcome)  ->  a bad outcome with one of the following connotations: A) the bad outcome is not final and you can keep trying for the good one B) the bad outcome would have been expected by somebody who already knows the entire trajectory of the "Mario game".<br/>
this came to mind as soon as I put in one of the outcomes behind doors as "princess". at first it was just funny, and then I was like.... wait, this is actually interesting because there's a connotation here of knowing what will happen if you already know the output of a random number generator or the trajectory of a story

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4892">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4893">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4894">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4895">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4896">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4897">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4898">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4899">??

{{li|I=Z0/MN|Q=49,00|Q2=4900}}prominent Marxist theorist or organizer {{9k|RD|Q4900}}
{{li|I=Z1/MN|Q=49,01|Q2=4901}}[[E:Q49,01|Karl Marx]] {{9k|RD|Q4900}}
{{li|I=Z1/MN|Q=49,02|Q2=4902}}[[E:Q49,02|Friedrich Engels]] {{9k|RD|Q4900}}
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4903" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4904" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4905" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4906" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4907" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4908" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_ML" value="4909" data-dimension="Z">??

{{li|I=Z0/ML|Q=49,10|Q2=4910}}prominent Stalinist theorist or organizer {{9k|RD|Q4900}}
{{li|I=Z1/MN|Q=49,11|Q2=4911}}[[E:Q49,11|Vladimir Lenin]] {{9k|RD|Q4900}}
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="49,12" value="4912" data-dimension="Z">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4913">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4914">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4915">??
{{li|I=Z1/ML|Q=49,16|Q2=4916}}Ho Chi Minh {{9k|RD|Q4900}}

</li><li data-qid="49,17" value="4917" class="field_trotsky" data-dimension="S">Russian Revolution according to Trotskyists / ([[User:RD/9k/Q49,17|9k]])

{{li|I=Z1/ML|Q=49,18|Q2=4918}}Mao Zedong / Mao Tse-tung {{9k|RD|Q4900}}
{{li|I=Z1/MS|tradition=MS, ML|Q=49,19|Q2=4919}}Enver Hoxha {{9k|RD|Q4900}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4920">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4921">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4922">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4923">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4924">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4925">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4926">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4927">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4928">??

{{li|I=Z0/LR|Q=49,29|Q2=4929}}prominent apparently-Trotskyist organizer / prominent apparently-Trotskyist theorist or organizer  ->  there are entirely too many of these parties.
</li><li class="field_gramsci" value="4930">prominent Western-Marxist theorist / prominent Western Marxist theorist or organizer  ->  I add "or organizer" to cover edge cases but let's be honest, there are very few of them who went all the way to being classifiable as Leninist organizers on any level. one of the most notable characteristics of Western-Marxism is that nearly all of them are purely theorists. except for Gramsci, and possibly the leaders of East Germany if they count as Gramscianism.<br/>
note: do not enter Western-Marxist propositions into the 4000s. there is already a space for them in the 2000s and 3000s. Gramsci or East Germany doing Leninism is the exception
</li><li class="field_gramsci" value="4931">Antonio Gramsci
</li><li class="field_gramsci field_althusser" value="4932">Louis Althusser
</li><li class="field_gramsci field_althusser" value="4933">Mark Fisher
{{li|I=Z1/W|Q=49,34|Q2=4934}}György Lukács (1885–1971) {{9k|RD|Q4934}}
{{li|I=Z1/W|tradition=W|Q=49,35|Q2=4935}}Stuart Hall  ->  Western-Marxist cultural theorist; [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Hall_(cultural_theorist)] one of many "Fisherist" philosophers writing about how mass media supposedly program us to be prejudiced when we wouldn't have been otherwise [https://thesociologyguy.com/2025/10/27/stuart-hall-understanding-the-media-power-and-representation/]

{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=49,36|Q2=4936}}left to die in a shoddy Third-World prison {{9k|RD|Q618-FreeBogdanSyrotiuk}}

</li><li class="field_gramsci" value="4937">??

{{li|I=Z1/DX|Q=49,38|Q2=4938}}Nikita Khruschev
{{li|I=Z1/LR/ES|Q=49,39|Q2=4939}}Yaroshenko {{9k|RD|Q22,13}}

{{li|I=Z0/IV|Q=49,40|Q2=4940}}prominent Trotskyist theorist or organizer / notable Trotskyist theorist or organizer
{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=49,41|Q2=4941}}Leon Trotsky  ->  Soviet Union / miscellaneous; Fourth International
{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=49,42|Q2=4942}}Rosa Luxemburg  ->  Germany
{{li|I=Z1/IV/LR|Q=49,43|Q2=4943}}Ted Grant  ->  United Kingdom (?)
{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=49,44|Q2=4944}}James P. Cannon  ->  United States; Socialist Workers' Party
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4945">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4946">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4947">??
{{li|I=Z1/ES|Q=49,48|Q2=4948}}Tony Cliff {{9k|RD|Q49,48}}
{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=49,49|Q2=4949}}{{caps|Hayashi}} Hiroyoshi {{9k|RD|Q4900}}

{{li|I=Z0/IV|Q=49,50|Q2=4950}}notable Trotskyite resistance leader or advocate / notable Left Opposition ally
{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=49,51|Q2=4951}}Grigori Zinoviev  ->  he became my arbitrary example of Trotskyite conspiracies versus what Trotskyism claims it is, after a few modern-day Trotskyites called him a hero just for wrecking the Soviet Union
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4952">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4953">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4954">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4955">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4956">??
{{li|I=Z1/ML|Q=49,57|Q2=4957}}Nikolai Bukharin {{9k|RD|Q49,57}}
{{li|I=Z1/LR|Q=49,58|Q2=4958}}George Orwell {{9k|RD|Q4900}}
{{li|I=Z1/Aa|Q=49,59|Q2=4959}}Slavoj Žižek {{9k|RD|Q4900}}

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4960">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4961">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4962">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4963">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4964">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4965">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4966">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4967">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4968">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4969">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4970">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4971">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4972">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4973">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4974">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4975">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4976">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4977">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4978">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4979">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4980">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4981">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4982">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4983">??
{{li|I=Z1/ML|Q=49,84|Q2=4984}}[[E:Q49,84|Joseph Stalin]]
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4985">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4986">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4987">??

{{li|I=S2/PT/LR|Q=49,88|Q2=4988}}Fascism is over / European-style fascism (Hitler; Mussolini; Tōjō; Franco) is over

</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="49,89" value="4989" data-dimension="S2">[[E:Q4989|Anarchism is over]]

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=49,90|Q2=4990}}Stalinism is over / Stalin's Marxism is over ({{9k|RD/Q4000}}
{{li|I=F2/ML|Q=49,91|Q2=4991}}[[E:Q4991|Trotskyism is over]] {{9k|RD|Q4000}}
{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=49,92|Q2=4992}}Non-molecular Trotskyism is over {{9k|RD|Q49,92}}
{{li|I=S2/LR|Q=49,93|Q2=4993}}[[E:Q49,93|Leninism is over but "Marxism" is not]] {{9k|RD/Q43,50}}

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="49,94" value="4994" data-dimension="S2">Party-nations are not specifically Marxist / Marxism is over but party-nations are not / Marxism is over but Leninism is not  ->  the claim that central party-nations are not over but the attempt to regulate the stochastic sorting of people into corporate countable Cultures basically is. somewhat credible when there are about three countries that can vouch for it. many people like to think you can immediately springboard off this to justifying Existentialism but you actually can't. it almost implies the opposite: that primitive Existentialism is most stable when it's regulated from above and not allowed to become a government in and of itself.

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4995">??
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="4996">??
{{li|I=F2/MX/ML|Q=49,97|Q2=4997}}No Marxism is actually over / For any given apparent form of Marxism, including crimson tendencies and orange tendencies, none of these tendencies has outright been shown to be more or less capable of creating socialist transition than others ... / ({{9k|RD/Q49,97}})
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="49,98" value="4998" data-dimension="S2">[[E:Deng Xiaoping Thought is over|Deng Xiaoping Thought is over]] / ([[User:RD/9k/Q49,98|9k]])
</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="49,99" value="4999" data-dimension="F2">[[E:Q4999|Liberalism is over]]  ->  fun. cathartic. as time goes on, bizarrely not true. why not? that's the question of the century.
</li></ol><noinclude>

[[Category:First nine thousand (RD)]]</noinclude>