Ontology:Q28,94 - Revision history

Reversedragon: heading

2026-01-18T14:27:10Z

heading

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:27, 18 January 2026
Line 39:		Line 39:
	</dl>		</dl>

	== ~~Usage notes~~ ==		== Background ==

	This is the motif of a hypothetical variation of Marxism which falls within [[E:Trotskyism\|the Trotskyist tradition]] and yet manages to not be revisionist. At least according to mainstream Marxism-Leninism and every theorist who has been aligned with workers' states at the time of major world conflicts, such a thing has never been observed; every single Trotskyist organization, in general, has failed to adequately align its theoretical models and practice with information collected from the actual course of history. Some common complaints about Trotskyism include Trotskyists spreading inaccurate accounts of historical events, claiming that models corrected and updated by Lenin were errors invented by Stalin, and exaggerating the importance of Trotsky to the Russian Revolution, as well as turning against every real-world instance of a non-Trotskyist workers' state with a depressing level of consistency. When there are a considerable number of negative things to be said about Trotskyism, it is an open question what the minimum set of changes to make it acceptable would actually be and what section of the complaints they would begin at.		This is the motif of a hypothetical variation of Marxism which falls within [[E:Trotskyism\|the Trotskyist tradition]] and yet manages to not be revisionist. At least according to mainstream Marxism-Leninism and every theorist who has been aligned with workers' states at the time of major world conflicts, such a thing has never been observed; every single Trotskyist organization, in general, has failed to adequately align its theoretical models and practice with information collected from the actual course of history. Some common complaints about Trotskyism include Trotskyists spreading inaccurate accounts of historical events, claiming that models corrected and updated by Lenin were errors invented by Stalin, and exaggerating the importance of Trotsky to the Russian Revolution, as well as turning against every real-world instance of a non-Trotskyist workers' state with a depressing level of consistency. When there are a considerable number of negative things to be said about Trotskyism, it is an open question what the minimum set of changes to make it acceptable would actually be and what section of the complaints they would begin at.

	Across drafts of the <cite>MDem</cite> text and the Litho<span style="text-transform: lowercase;"><em>Graph</em>Ica</span> prototype (the first list of propositions on this wiki), a number of different possibilities have ~~already~~ emerged for what the "only good Trotskyism" might be. Being from such an unknown source these obviously will not be exhaustive.		Across drafts of the <cite>MDem</cite> text and the Litho<span style="text-transform: lowercase;"><em>Graph</em>Ica</span> prototype (the first list of propositions on this wiki), a number of different possibilities have emerged for what the "only good Trotskyism" might be. Being from such an unknown source these obviously will not be exhaustive.

	* Trotskyism would be acceptable if it reinvented itself as [[E:Trotskyism in one country\|Trotskyism in one country]], and somehow did not attack other workers' states or hand them over to blocs of capitalist empires just for not being Trotskyism.		* Trotskyism would be acceptable if it reinvented itself as [[E:Trotskyism in one country\|Trotskyism in one country]], and somehow did not attack other workers' states or hand them over to blocs of capitalist empires just for not being Trotskyism.

Reversedragon: Usage notes

2025-08-13T10:26:46Z

Usage notes

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:26, 13 August 2025
Line 9:		Line 9:
	{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}		{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\| {{E:Q28,94}} }}		{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\| {{E:Q28,94}} }}
	{{HueClaim \|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| non-revisionist Trotskyism (hypothetical possibility; motif) }}		{{HueClaim \|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| non-revisionist Trotskyism (hypothetical possibility which has seemingly never been observed in real life; motif, meta-Marxism or mainstream Marxism-Leninism) }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=P42/BB\| {{E:Q2900}} }} <!-- en: QID references -->		{{HueRoster\|EP=P42/BB\| {{E:Q2900}} }} <!-- en: QID references -->
	{{HueRoster\|EP=P34\| {{E:Q92}} }} <!-- en: color swatch references -->		{{HueRoster\|EP=P34\| {{E:Q92}} }} <!-- en: color swatch references -->
Line 39:		Line 39:
	</dl>		</dl>

	== ~~[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand\|Prototype]]~~ notes ==		== Usage notes ==

	~~<ol class="hue clean">~~		This is the motif of a hypothetical variation of Marxism which falls within [[E:Trotskyism\|the Trotskyist tradition]] and yet manages to not be revisionist. At least according to mainstream Marxism-Leninism and every theorist who has been aligned with workers' states at the time of major world conflicts, such a thing has never been observed; every single Trotskyist organization, in general, has failed to adequately align its theoretical models and practice with information collected from the actual course of history. Some common complaints about Trotskyism include Trotskyists spreading inaccurate accounts of historical events, claiming that models corrected and updated by Lenin were errors invented by Stalin, and exaggerating the importance of Trotsky to the Russian Revolution, as well as turning against every real-world instance of a non-Trotskyist workers' state with a depressing level of consistency. When there are a considerable number of negative things to be said about Trotskyism, it is an open question what the minimum set of changes to make it acceptable would actually be and what section of the complaints they would begin at.
	<li class="field_anarchy" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Lenin said workers never become class-conscious / Lenin said that workers in trade unions only get to trade union consciousness, therefore within the ~~historical process~~ of a ~~Leninist movement and transition into the beginning~~ of ~~Bolshevism workers never extract themselves from rule by the bourgeoisie~~ [~~https~~:~~//libcom.org/article/pretension-class-consciousness~~] ~~-> ... so let's assume that this is true. traditional capitalists are toeing the line~~ and ~~Lenin is toeing the line, and Stalin and Trotsky are toeing the line. Lenin takes capitalism and he replaces it with a new capitalism which is headed by Marxist theorists. ..~~. ~~that argument only even begins~~ to ~~have any legs when you recognize Stalin's~~ Marxism and ~~Trotskyism and Maoism as separate parallel Marxisms. ... it~~'~~s only when we get~~ to ~~China~~ and the ~~Soviet Union separating and failing to form an International because at different times they call each other revisionist (if I remember right?) that we start to see that there is kind~~ of ~~an argument to be made <em>only</em> if you somehow know what existential materialism is [...]~~.~~<br />~~
	~~starting from this article's premises you can argue~~ Trotskyism, ~~but argue anything else~~ and ~~you basically deny the Cold War~~ and the ~~latter half~~ of the ~~1900s. why is arguing Trotskyism not denying the Cold War?~~ well~~, because you said the movement was somehow made~~ of a ~~solid base of~~ workers ~~exactly like it totally wasn~~'~~t the first time~~. ~~if Trotskyism was made~~ of ~~workers constantly kicking out their theorists for bad Leninism and refusing~~ to ~~split apart versus joining into~~ an ~~increasingly huger population of people, yet also actually accepting at the end of the day that~~ the ~~workers need Marxist theorists and the concept~~ of ~~countable populations~~ to ~~actually defeat borders and become connected, then~~ it actually ~~wouldn't~~ be ~~all that bad. out~~ of ~~all~~ the forms of Trotskyism there are like fifteen I hate and two I like but the problem is <em>nobody advocates the actually good ones</em>. I wonder if the problem is that I'm naming things that aren't Trotskyism Trotskyism. I have [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|so many civilizational shapes]] to study the history of and properly distinguish and name.

	</li><~~li class~~="~~field_ML" data~~-~~remark="concept of a non-revisionist Trotskyism" value="2894" data-dimension="S~~">~~the only good form of Trotskyism~~ / ~~non-revisionist Trotskyism~~ (~~hypothetical possibility; motif) ->~~ the ~~motif~~ of ~~someone, usually me~~, ~~claiming that there is~~ a ~~form~~ of ~~Trotskyism which would be acceptable to people who are Stalin-followers today but which currently practically nobody advocates~~ for. I have always been confused why this is. it's not like Trotskyists are totally stupid and that's why they could never realize their theories are wrong. so is it that I am naming things that aren't Trotskyism Trotskyism and then asserting they're the only good Trotskyism~~? I am still unpacking this~~.		Across drafts of the <cite>MDem</cite> text and the Litho<span style="text-transform: lowercase;"><em>Graph</em>Ica</span> prototype (the first list of propositions on this wiki), a number of different possibilities have already emerged for what the "only good Trotskyism" might be. Being from such an unknown source these obviously will not be exhaustive.
	~~</li></ol>~~

	~~== Usage notes ==~~		* Trotskyism would be acceptable if it reinvented itself as [[E:Trotskyism in one country\|Trotskyism in one country]], and somehow did not attack other workers' states or hand them over to blocs of capitalist empires just for not being Trotskyism.
			** Trotskyism would be acceptable if it formed a [[E:Fortress Trotskyism\|fortress state]] to get away from Stalin but entered into a period of relative peace or ceasefire against workers' states.
			* Trotskyism would be acceptable if instead of trying to usurp the Soviet Union as a whole it had simply created a Trotskyite nationality and turned into the 15th union republic.
			* Trotskyism would be acceptable if through some mysterious method it actually emerged upward from the world's workers who all [[Special:PermanentLink/8034#Unsorted_Items\|insisted on uniting around good Marxist theorists and refused to be divided by bad ones]], and was based on expelling bad theorists rather than forming an entire movement around keeping bad theorists in the party.
			* Trotskyism would be acceptable if it first formed as several instances of Trotskyism in one country that each understood the importance of other countries' national sovereignty but then all joined together.
			* Trotskyism would be acceptable if, putting the exact material structure it intends to create aside, Trotskyists acknowledged that the [[E:1930s Trotskyite conspiracy\|1930s Trotskyite conspiracy]] was either a crime or an attempted war against the proletariat and was not justified.

			One important problem or question that comes up with this motif is, out of all the possible "better versions of Trotskyism", how many would actually be considered Trotskyism by people who are currently members of Trotskyism and how many of them would be considered a totally different variation of Marxism? It can be argued, somewhat reasonably, that the major difference between different named Marxisms is a material one based on their inner content: Trotsky insists on soviets and hates government ministries, Stalin allows government ministries, and this difference among others slowly splits the two different Marxisms apart. This could lead to the argument that literally speaking no structure which consists of a single country can constitute "a Trotskyism", although it can feasibly constitute "a Maoism" or some other name referring to a different named Marxism than Trotskyism. This changes the question into a more metaphysical question of what the name of a particular [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|country structure]] is. Perhaps this proposition would better be framed in a form like "The only good version of Trotskyism is Maoism".

			The question of whether Trotskyism can ever be defined in the context of a one-country state depends on the answer to the question of whether Trotskyism is actually a [[E:Trotskyism is a countable culture\|countable culture]] capable of having its own [[E:Socialism can have Trotskyist characteristics\|country characteristics]]. If "socialism with Trotskyist characteristics" is at all a sensible concept, then Trotskyism in one country is also logically possible regardless of what Trotskyist theorists currently say. No one said it is impossible that on one day Trotskyist theorists could be convinced that Trotskyism in one country will never come to pass and then on the day it finally does they could all change their minds and decide they had been wrong about the question for decades. Equally, Trotskyism in one country could come to pass and Trotskyist theorists could all align onto the conclusion that it is not Trotskyism any more and it is now something else. There would likely be particular historical reasons for such a decision, such as the new variation of Trotskyism forming from a new countable culture which does not mix well with the Trotskyist countable culture, or Trotskyists making a principled decision that the internal content of this particular country simply is not Trotskyist content. It is hard to say what would realistically happen in this scenario when there has never been a single real-world Trotskyism either the size of one country or larger than one country. For the moment, logical arguments and the study of [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|different civilizational shapes]] independent of their most commonly-accepted names will have to suffice.

			The final, most glaring question raised by this motif is also the simplest. If there exists a better version of Trotskyism, why is that not the version Trotskyists are advocating? For this, there is no clear answer. Maybe every single better version of Trotskyism is not technically Trotskyism. Maybe the plurality of different Marxisms makes it inherently difficult for each individual Marxism to evaluate the others and realize that the others are actually better; every group of people has the incentive [[E:SuperMonkeyGodFallacy\|to believe it is the best and others are not as good]]. Maybe there is some other non-obvious reason that makes the concept of "the only good Trotskyism" impossible.

Reversedragon: prototype notes

2025-08-13T02:54:35Z

prototype notes

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:54, 13 August 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:
	<dl class="wikitable hue">		<dl class="wikitable hue">
	{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}		{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\| {{E:~~Q2894~~}} }}		{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\| {{E:Q28,94}} }}
	{{HueClaim \|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| -- }}		{{HueClaim \|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| non-revisionist Trotskyism (hypothetical possibility; motif) }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=P42/BB\| {{E:Q2900}} }} <!-- en: QID references -->		{{HueRoster\|EP=P42/BB\| {{E:Q2900}} }} <!-- en: QID references -->
	{{HueRoster\|EP=P34\| {{E:Q92}} }} <!-- en: color swatch references -->		{{HueRoster\|EP=P34\| {{E:Q92}} }} <!-- en: color swatch references -->
Line 18:		Line 18:
	{{HueRoster\|EP=P14\| -- }}		{{HueRoster\|EP=P14\| -- }}
	</dl>		</dl>
			<!--
	=== Components ===		=== Components ===

Line 24:		Line 24:
	{{HueRoster\|P=model combines claims\| -- }}		{{HueRoster\|P=model combines claims\| -- }}
	</dl>		</dl>
			-->

	== Wavebuilder combinations ==		== Wavebuilder combinations ==
Line 34:		Line 35:

	<dl class="wikitable hue data_wavebuild three">		<dl class="wikitable hue data_wavebuild three">
	{{WaveRoute\| {{E:Q4104}} \| self-criticism \| {{E:Q2894}} }} <!-- en: From Trotskyism ?? -->		{{WaveRoute\| {{E:Q4104}} \| {{E:Q618/ML\|self-criticism}} \| {{E:Q2894}} }} <!-- en: From Trotskyism ?? -->
			{{WaveRoute\| {{E:Q4941}} \| {{E:Q618/ML\|socialism in one country}} \| {{E:Q2894}} }}
	</dl>		</dl>

			== [[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand\|Prototype]] notes ==

			<ol class="hue clean">
			<li class="field_anarchy" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Lenin said workers never become class-conscious / Lenin said that workers in trade unions only get to trade union consciousness, therefore within the historical process of a Leninist movement and transition into the beginning of Bolshevism workers never extract themselves from rule by the bourgeoisie [https://libcom.org/article/pretension-class-consciousness] -> ... so let's assume that this is true. traditional capitalists are toeing the line and Lenin is toeing the line, and Stalin and Trotsky are toeing the line. Lenin takes capitalism and he replaces it with a new capitalism which is headed by Marxist theorists. ... that argument only even begins to have any legs when you recognize Stalin's Marxism and Trotskyism and Maoism as separate parallel Marxisms. ... it's only when we get to China and the Soviet Union separating and failing to form an International because at different times they call each other revisionist (if I remember right?) that we start to see that there is kind of an argument to be made <em>only</em> if you somehow know what existential materialism is [...].<br />
			starting from this article's premises you can argue Trotskyism, but argue anything else and you basically deny the Cold War and the latter half of the 1900s. why is arguing Trotskyism not denying the Cold War? well, because you said the movement was somehow made of a solid base of workers exactly like it totally wasn't the first time. if Trotskyism was made of workers constantly kicking out their theorists for bad Leninism and refusing to split apart versus joining into an increasingly huger population of people, yet also actually accepting at the end of the day that the workers need Marxist theorists and the concept of countable populations to actually defeat borders and become connected, then it actually wouldn't be all that bad. out of all the forms of Trotskyism there are like fifteen I hate and two I like but the problem is <em>nobody advocates the actually good ones</em>. I wonder if the problem is that I'm naming things that aren't Trotskyism Trotskyism. I have [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|so many civilizational shapes]] to study the history of and properly distinguish and name.

			</li><li class="field_ML" data-remark="concept of a non-revisionist Trotskyism" value="2894" data-dimension="S">the only good form of Trotskyism / non-revisionist Trotskyism (hypothetical possibility; motif) -> the motif of someone, usually me, claiming that there is a form of Trotskyism which would be acceptable to people who are Stalin-followers today but which currently practically nobody advocates for. I have always been confused why this is. it's not like Trotskyists are totally stupid and that's why they could never realize their theories are wrong. so is it that I am naming things that aren't Trotskyism Trotskyism and then asserting they're the only good Trotskyism? I am still unpacking this.
			</li></ol>

	== Usage notes ==		== Usage notes ==

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page Ontology:Q2894 to Ontology:Q28,94: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

2025-08-13T02:19:08Z

Reversedragon moved page Ontology:Q2894 to Ontology:Q28,94: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

← Older revision	Revision as of 02:19, 13 August 2025
(No difference)

Reversedragon: copy or update fake Item from Q28,99

2025-08-13T02:18:52Z

copy or update fake Item from Q28,99

New page

{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean compound"><li> {{ArticleTitle|the only good form of Trotskyism / MX / S / Q28,94}}
<onlyinclude><dfn class="{{{class|field_ML}}} manual" data-dimension="S" data-qid="28,94" data-numbersign="404" data-field="" data-object="" data-note="" data-lexeme="">{{IS1/MX/ML}}{{#if: {{{1|}}} | [[E:Q28,94|{{{1}}}]] | [[E:Q28,94|the only good form of Trotskyism]] }}<ins class="field"></ins>{{#if: {{{2|}}} | <ins class="edition-sense term"> ([[E:Q28,94/{{{2}}}|{{{2}}}]]<nowiki />)</ins> }}{{WaveScore|sum=1|quilt=1|ply=1|enddfn=1}}{{#switch: {{{C|}}} | L = <span></span> | Q = <span></span> }}</onlyinclude> 

</li></ol> __NOTOC__

== Core characteristics ==

<dl class="wikitable hue">
{{HueClaim |P=item type| {{Template:S1}} }}
{{HueRoster|EP=PPPA/L| {{E:Q2894}} }}
{{HueClaim |EP=PPPA|lang=en| -- }}
{{HueRoster|EP=P42/BB| {{E:Q2900}} }} 
{{HueRoster|EP=P34| {{E:Q92}} }} 
{{HueRoster|EP=P147| -- }} 
{{HueRoster|EP=P3| named Marxism substantiated by history / non-revisionist Marxism }} 
{{HueRoster|EP=P4| meta-Marxist motif }} 
{{HueRoster|EP=P5| -- }} 
{{HueRoster|EP=P14| -- }}
</dl>

=== Components ===

<dl class="wikitable hue">
{{HueRoster|P=model combines claims| -- }}
</dl>

== Wavebuilder combinations ==

<dl class="wikitable hue data_wavebuild three">
{{WaveBuildNone| -- | -- | -- }} 
</dl>

== Wavebuilder characterizations ==

<dl class="wikitable hue data_wavebuild three">
{{WaveRoute| {{E:Q4104}} | self-criticism | {{E:Q2894}} }} 
</dl>

== Usage notes ==