Research talk:X4mer/MovementsBetrayed01 - Revision history

Reversedragon: numbers

2026-05-28T03:38:06Z

numbers

Reversedragon: Stalinists were not Marxists / links

2026-05-28T02:53:37Z

Stalinists were not Marxists / links

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:53, 28 May 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:
	== Prompt ==		== Prompt ==
	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
	Trotskyists have a general guideline applying to either movement strategy or modeling movement behavior that when movements take action together they "take action together" separately. As a descriptive model, this has been applied to China and the Kuomintang, reminding people that the KMT was never to be trusted in that acting together with the Communists did not mean it intended to continue to cooperate with the Communists or spare the Communists. As a prescriptive model, this has been applied to say that Trotskyist parties can demonstrate along with other movements that are not Marxist to achieve short-term goals, and it does not mean that Trotskyists are going to change into anarchism or into a Stalinist party.<br/>		[[E:Trotskyism\|Trotskyists]] have a general guideline applying to either movement strategy or modeling movement behavior that when movements take action together they "take action together" separately. As a descriptive model, this has been applied to China and the Kuomintang, reminding people that the KMT was never to be trusted in that acting together with the Communists did not mean it intended to continue to cooperate with the Communists or spare the Communists. As a prescriptive model, this has been applied to say that Trotskyist parties can [[E:March separately, strike together\|demonstrate]] along with other movements that are not Marxist to achieve short-term goals, and it [[E:stay with the program\|does not mean]] that Trotskyists are going to change into anarchism or into a Stalinist party.<br/>
	The prescriptive model and descriptive model meld together well such that "movements demonstrate together separately" can in effect function as a descriptive model of how other movements can predict Trotskyism to behave (at least at particular points in time, in particular situations).		The prescriptive model and descriptive model meld together well such that "movements demonstrate together separately" can in effect function [[E:existential materialism\|as a descriptive model]] of how other movements can predict Trotskyism to behave (at least at particular points in time, in particular situations).

	This leaves open the question: if Trotskyists take "movements demonstrate together separately" to be part of Leninism in general and how Leninism in general describes proletarian revolution, then why were the Trotskyists of the 1930s surprised when Stalin-followers separated from them and continued to carry out a conflicting program afterward, "betraying the revolution"? Haven't Trotskyists established that this is just the way all Marxist movements behave, demonstrating together with other movements but then separating from those movements and trying to exclusively realize their own goals? If it were the case that the Soviet Union between 1900 and 1936 in fact had two Marxist movements — whether those movements successfully got all the way to forming parties or a functioning dictatorship-of-the-proletariat, or not — then wouldn't it be the expected trajectory of events for each of those two movements to assume it is the only valid Marxist movement and for both of them to fight for exclusive control of the Soviet Union and try to eliminate the other? This would not be rational behavior on the part of party leadership as people, but at the same time it would be the expected material consequence of the parties existing as interacting material objects with internal behavior that causes them to disregard each other.		This leaves open the question: if Trotskyists take "movements demonstrate together separately" to be part of Leninism in general and how Leninism in general describes proletarian revolution, then why were the Trotskyists of the 1930s surprised when Stalin-followers separated from them and continued to carry out a conflicting program afterward, "betraying the revolution"? Haven't Trotskyists established that this is just the way all Marxist movements behave, demonstrating together with other movements but then separating from those movements and trying to exclusively realize their own goals? If it were the case that the Soviet Union between 1900 and 1936 in fact had two Marxist movements — whether those movements successfully got all the way to forming parties or a functioning dictatorship-of-the-proletariat, or not — then wouldn't it be the expected trajectory of events for each of those two movements to assume it is the only valid Marxist movement and for both of them to fight for exclusive control of the Soviet Union and try to eliminate the other? This would not be rational behavior on the part of party leadership as people, but at the same time it would be the expected material consequence of the parties existing as interacting material objects with internal behavior that causes them to disregard each other.
Line 32:		Line 32:

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Two movements taking immediate action together does not mean they care about each other (Trotskyism onto existential materialism) / ({{9k\|RD/Q42,11}})		{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Two movements taking immediate action together does not mean they care about each other (Trotskyism onto existential materialism) / ({{9k\|RD/Q42,11}})

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Stalin cannot tell the Communist Party of China to trust the Kuomintang (Trotsky) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/cliff/works/1991/trotsky3/09-chirev.html#p3]

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 38:		Line 40:
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{book\|The Revolution Betrayed}} [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html] [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/foundations-us/16.html]		{{li\|start=y\|I=Z1/IV/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|27 Reasons Why the International Committee Should Be Buried Forthwith and the Fourth International Built}} (Banda 1986) [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/heritage/33.html] [https://www.marxists.org/history/etol//newspape/sn/Fourth%20Internationalist%20inc%20Socialist%20Newsletter%20Special%20Bulletin%20Feb%2086.pdf] / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-BandasManyReasons}})

			{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{book\|The Revolution Betrayed}} [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html] [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/foundations-us/16.html]

	{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|Stalinism and Bolshevism}} (1937) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/stal-o20.html]		{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|Stalinism and Bolshevism}} (1937) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/stal-o20.html]

	{{li\|I=Z1/IV/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|27 Reasons Why the International Committee Should Be Buried Forthwith and the Fourth International Built}} (Banda 1986) [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/heritage/33.html] [https://www.marxists.org/history/etol//newspape/sn/Fourth%20Internationalist%20inc%20Socialist%20Newsletter%20Special%20Bulletin%20Feb%2086.pdf] / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-BandasManyReasons}})		{{li\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=40,02\|Q2=4002-LB\|h4= [[E:Q4002\|Stalinists were not Marxists]] }} / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory

	{{li\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~\|h4= [[E:Q4002\|~~Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism~~]] }} / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory

	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Trotsky had a predictive theory of Stalin's Marxism / 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 [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/09/15/xvps-s15.html] -> there is one thing I can say for this. Trotskyists technically know to some extent what violet Marxism is. they think it should be used to tear apart other Marxisms assuming they aren't Marxism. but if you ask them to merely describe how Stalin's Marxism functioned and why it supposedly fell apart starting in its early stages, they will definitely try.		{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Trotsky had a predictive theory of Stalin's Marxism / 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 [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/09/15/xvps-s15.html] -> there is one thing I can say for this. Trotskyists technically know to some extent what violet Marxism is. they think it should be used to tear apart other Marxisms assuming they aren't Marxism. but if you ask them to merely describe how Stalin's Marxism functioned and why it supposedly fell apart starting in its early stages, they will definitely try.
Line 56:		Line 58:
	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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\|I=M3/ML\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= Where's the class analysis? }} / Why didn't you use class analysis? -> another 'greatest hit' of Materialism, after "Why is your hypothesis wrong" and "Why isn't your theory forbidden"		{{li\|I=M3/IV\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= Where's the class analysis? }} / Why didn't you use class analysis? -> another 'greatest hit' of Materialism, after "Why is your hypothesis wrong" and "Why isn't your theory forbidden"

	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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
Line 73:		Line 75:
	== Usage notes ==		== Usage notes ==
	* You are allowed to post LLM <strong>prompts</strong> as nickels (the part you wrote), as long as they stay in the <code>Research talk</code> namespace and there are no direct quotes from response text. Concisely describing abstract propositions that turn up several times inside response text is fine.		* You are allowed to post LLM <strong>prompts</strong> as nickels (the part you wrote), as long as they stay in the <code>Research talk</code> namespace and there are no direct quotes from response text. Concisely describing abstract propositions that turn up several times inside response text is fine.
	* It's recommended you include all of the AI's "references", such that each prompt becomes a sort of 'combination nickel'. If any of the pages referenced are already nickels, you should link the nickel page.		* It's recommended you include all of the AI's "references", such that each prompt becomes a sort of 'combination nickel' that happens to cover twenty links instead of one. If any of the pages referenced are already nickels, you should link the nickel page.

	== Links given in AI response ==		== Links given in AI response ==

Reversedragon: Trotsky had a predictive theory of Stalin's Marxism

2026-05-27T10:18:19Z

Trotsky had a predictive theory of Stalin's Marxism

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:18, 27 May 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:
	Is it really true that Marxist movements have no interest outside the interests of the workers if there will always be a moment within the process of revolution when Marxist parties must fight any other movement attempting to become a central party up to and including each other? If every Marxist party is a material object inasmuch as it and all its connected allies are a finite group of people, then it would seem every Marxist party has an inherent interest of bringing itself into reality in the specific shape it predicts its population and possibly other populations to form, which cannot be resolved by appealing to two Marxist parties both attempting to lead workers, and can only be resolved by reconciling the two future arrangements of people associated with two different parties until the "physics" of those two superimposed arrangements somehow collapses into just one; the programs of two Marxist parties would be in a superposition, and the highest interest of the two parties that most strongly directs their behavior would be predicting reality and theoretically or actually collapsing the superposition. (Here I would be comparing the Hegelian dialectic to quantum physics, and the way the principle of least action shows the way several different possible ways to achieve something in physics generally collapse into the simplest path to the future and not into other unnecessarily complicated material explanations.)		Is it really true that Marxist movements have no interest outside the interests of the workers if there will always be a moment within the process of revolution when Marxist parties must fight any other movement attempting to become a central party up to and including each other? If every Marxist party is a material object inasmuch as it and all its connected allies are a finite group of people, then it would seem every Marxist party has an inherent interest of bringing itself into reality in the specific shape it predicts its population and possibly other populations to form, which cannot be resolved by appealing to two Marxist parties both attempting to lead workers, and can only be resolved by reconciling the two future arrangements of people associated with two different parties until the "physics" of those two superimposed arrangements somehow collapses into just one; the programs of two Marxist parties would be in a superposition, and the highest interest of the two parties that most strongly directs their behavior would be predicting reality and theoretically or actually collapsing the superposition. (Here I would be comparing the Hegelian dialectic to quantum physics, and the way the principle of least action shows the way several different possible ways to achieve something in physics generally collapse into the simplest path to the future and not into other unnecessarily complicated material explanations.)
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>
			== Motifs or claims in prompt (no AI) ==
	== Motifs or claims in prompt ==
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/MX\|Q=86\|Q2=86\|h4 = existential materialism }} / exmat / ({{9k\|RD/Q86}})		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/MX\|Q=86\|Q2=86\|h4 = existential materialism }} / exmat / ({{9k\|RD/Q86}})

			{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}March separately, strike together / March separately, act together

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Two movements taking immediate action together does not mean they care about each other (Trotskyism onto existential materialism) / ({{9k\|RD/Q42,11}})		{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Two movements taking immediate action together does not mean they care about each other (Trotskyism onto existential materialism) / ({{9k\|RD/Q42,11}})
Line 37:		Line 38:
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{book\|The Revolution Betrayed}} [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html]		{{li\|start=y\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{book\|The Revolution Betrayed}} [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html] [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/foundations-us/16.html]

	{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|Stalinism and Bolshevism}} (1937)		{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|Stalinism and Bolshevism}} (1937) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/stal-o20.html]

			{{li\|I=Z1/IV/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|27 Reasons Why the International Committee Should Be Buried Forthwith and the Fourth International Built}} (Banda 1986) [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/heritage/33.html] [https://www.marxists.org/history/etol//newspape/sn/Fourth%20Internationalist%20inc%20Socialist%20Newsletter%20Special%20Bulletin%20Feb%2086.pdf] / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-BandasManyReasons}})

	{{li\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= [[E:Q4002\|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] }} / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory		{{li\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= [[E:Q4002\|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] }} / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory

	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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]		{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Trotsky had a predictive theory of Stalin's Marxism / 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 [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/09/15/xvps-s15.html] -> there is one thing I can say for this. Trotskyists technically know to some extent what violet Marxism is. they think it should be used to tear apart other Marxisms assuming they aren't Marxism. but if you ask them to merely describe how Stalin's Marxism functioned and why it supposedly fell apart starting in its early stages, they will definitely try.

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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
Line 49:		Line 54:
	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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\|I=M3/IV\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= Where's the class analysis? }} / Why didn't you use class analysis? -> another 'greatest hit' of Materialism, after "Why is your hypothesis wrong" and "Why isn't your theory forbidden"		{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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\|I=M3/ML\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= Where's the class analysis? }} / Why didn't you use class analysis? -> another 'greatest hit' of Materialism, after "Why is your hypothesis wrong" and "Why isn't your theory forbidden"

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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></ol>		</li></ol>

	== Subjective themes (~~zero~~ AI) ==		== Subjective themes (no AI) ==
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}The Hegelian dialectic involves fine-grained forms of social structure winning / The way that Hegel applies to Communist revolution is that fine-grained forms of social structure are in general the thing that wins, not the vanguard party itself; a sheer series of small islands with "blue" structure or a sheer network of people with "red" structure is what overcomes other Social-Philosophical Systems if and when two "competing Marxist movements" fight each other and resolve into a single central party; this is to imply that central parties really are just an artifact of the activities of the overall movement		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}The Hegelian dialectic involves fine-grained forms of social structure winning / The way that Hegel applies to Communist revolution is that fine-grained forms of social structure are in general the thing that wins, not the vanguard party itself; a sheer series of small islands with "blue" structure or a sheer network of people with "red" structure is what overcomes other Social-Philosophical Systems if and when two "competing Marxist movements" fight each other and resolve into a single central party; this is to imply that central parties really are just an artifact of the activities of the overall movement

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/PT\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}March separately, colonize together / "March separately, act together" applies to empires -> this honestly explains a lot. I really had no good explanation for "why" imperialist countries really love to form temporary Filament-axes to squash some particular enemy and then refuse to operate together. but, wow.... this is only making me more convinced there actually was something to the idea in my prompt

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 62:		Line 73:
	== Usage notes ==		== Usage notes ==
	* You are allowed to post LLM <strong>prompts</strong> as nickels (the part you wrote), as long as they stay in the <code>Research talk</code> namespace and there are no direct quotes from response text. Concisely describing abstract propositions that turn up several times inside response text is fine.		* You are allowed to post LLM <strong>prompts</strong> as nickels (the part you wrote), as long as they stay in the <code>Research talk</code> namespace and there are no direct quotes from response text. Concisely describing abstract propositions that turn up several times inside response text is fine.
			* It's recommended you include all of the AI's "references", such that each prompt becomes a sort of 'combination nickel'. If any of the pages referenced are already nickels, you should link the nickel page.

			== Links given in AI response ==

			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/foundations-us/08.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2026/05/05/foxk-m05.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/what-next-vital-questions/06.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/09/hist-s30.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/09/02/xtta-s02.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/12/bgnl-d27.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2026/05/13/wbtj-m13.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/06/20/gens-j20.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/09/fran-s04.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/06/02/fra5-j02.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/foundations-turkey/04.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/09/15/xvps-s15.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/08/25/trot-a25.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-17-12/01.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/trotskyism-versus-stalinism/speech.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/what-next-vital-questions/04.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2009/02/rev1-f25.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-15-34/05.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/perestroika-versus-socialism/02.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2000/09/corr-s12.html]
			* [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/heritage/35.html]
			* [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1904/tasks/ch02.htm]
			* [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1904/tasks/ch03.htm]
			* [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1928/3rd/ti10.htm]
			* [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1920/terrcomm/ch07.htm]
			* [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1904/tasks/ch04.htm]
			* [https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1928/3rd/ti14.htm]

Reversedragon: The way Hegel applies to Communist revolution is that fine-grained forms of social structure are the thing that wins

2026-05-26T19:57:05Z

The way Hegel applies to Communist revolution is that fine-grained forms of social structure are the thing that wins

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:57, 26 May 2026
Line 28:		Line 28:
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Two movements taking immediate action together does not mean they care about each other (Trotskyism onto existential materialism) / ({{9k\|RD/Q42,11}})		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/MX\|Q=86\|Q2=86\|h4 = existential materialism }} / exmat / ({{9k\|RD/Q86}})

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Two movements taking immediate action together does not mean they care about each other (Trotskyism onto existential materialism) / ({{9k\|RD/Q42,11}})

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 35:		Line 37:
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

	* The Revolution Betrayed [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html]		{{li\|start=y\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{book\|The Revolution Betrayed}} [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html]
	* "Stalinism and Bolshevism" (1937)
			{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|Stalinism and Bolshevism}} (1937)

	{{li~~\|start=y~~\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}[[E:Q4002\|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory		{{li\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= [[E:Q4002\|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] }} / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory

	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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]		{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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]

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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\|I=M3/IV\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4= Where's the class analysis? }} / Why didn't you use class analysis? -> another 'greatest hit' of Materialism, after "Why is your hypothesis wrong" and "Why isn't your theory forbidden"

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	== Subjective themes (zero AI) ==		== Subjective themes (zero AI) ==
	~~<!--~~
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">
	</li></ol~~> --~~>
			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}The Hegelian dialectic involves fine-grained forms of social structure winning / The way that Hegel applies to Communist revolution is that fine-grained forms of social structure are in general the thing that wins, not the vanguard party itself; a sheer series of small islands with "blue" structure or a sheer network of people with "red" structure is what overcomes other Social-Philosophical Systems if and when two "competing Marxist movements" fight each other and resolve into a single central party; this is to imply that central parties really are just an artifact of the activities of the overall movement

			</li></ol>

	== Usage notes ==		== Usage notes ==
	* You are allowed to post ~~ChatGPT~~ <strong>prompts</strong> as nickels (the part you wrote), as long as they stay in the <code>Research talk</code> namespace and there are no quotes from response text. ~~Describing~~ abstract propositions that turn up inside response text is fine.		* You are allowed to post LLM <strong>prompts</strong> as nickels (the part you wrote), as long as they stay in the <code>Research talk</code> namespace and there are no direct quotes from response text. Concisely describing abstract propositions that turn up several times inside response text is fine.

Reversedragon: The party is not the repository of class interests, but the instrument of class interests

2026-05-26T19:26:43Z

The party is not the repository of class interests, but the instrument of class interests

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:26, 26 May 2026
Line 34:		Line 34:
	== Motifs or claims from response ==		== Motifs or claims from response ==
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

			* The Revolution Betrayed [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html]
			* "Stalinism and Bolshevism" (1937)

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}[[E:Q4002\|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}[[E:Q4002\|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}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]

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism

2026-05-26T19:06:36Z

Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:06, 26 May 2026
Line 34:		Line 34:
	== Motifs or claims from response ==		== Motifs or claims from response ==
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">
	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618}}~~(to be added)~~
			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}[[E:Q4002\|Stalin's Marxism isn't Leninism]] / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: copy markup from trans4mer page

2026-05-26T18:23:43Z

copy markup from trans4mer page

New page

{{NickelBank/x4mer| revolutions and betrayals 
|nickel = MovementsBetrayed01 |Contents=y}}
{{HueCSS}}{{Contents}}
<dl class="wikitable hue">
{{HueRoster|P=engine| {{E:Q46,02|ai.wsws.org}} }} 
{{HueRoster|EP=P34| {{E:Q41,04}} | {{E:Q46,02}} }} 
</dl>

=== Links ===
* Thread ID (for search purposes): {{TTS|html=code|tts=640...4 (see page source)|640c3fa9-6b68-404f-b4bd-2d4f1618cd04}}

=== Nickel usage or significance ===
* (add later)

== Prompt ==
<blockquote>
Trotskyists have a general guideline applying to either movement strategy or modeling movement behavior that when movements take action together they "take action together" separately. As a descriptive model, this has been applied to China and the Kuomintang, reminding people that the KMT was never to be trusted in that acting together with the Communists did not mean it intended to continue to cooperate with the Communists or spare the Communists. As a prescriptive model, this has been applied to say that Trotskyist parties can demonstrate along with other movements that are not Marxist to achieve short-term goals, and it does not mean that Trotskyists are going to change into anarchism or into a Stalinist party.<br/>
The prescriptive model and descriptive model meld together well such that "movements demonstrate together separately" can in effect function as a descriptive model of how other movements can predict Trotskyism to behave (at least at particular points in time, in particular situations).

This leaves open the question: if Trotskyists take "movements demonstrate together separately" to be part of Leninism in general and how Leninism in general describes proletarian revolution, then why were the Trotskyists of the 1930s surprised when Stalin-followers separated from them and continued to carry out a conflicting program afterward, "betraying the revolution"? Haven't Trotskyists established that this is just the way all Marxist movements behave, demonstrating together with other movements but then separating from those movements and trying to exclusively realize their own goals? If it were the case that the Soviet Union between 1900 and 1936 in fact had two Marxist movements — whether those movements successfully got all the way to forming parties or a functioning dictatorship-of-the-proletariat, or not — then wouldn't it be the expected trajectory of events for each of those two movements to assume it is the only valid Marxist movement and for both of them to fight for exclusive control of the Soviet Union and try to eliminate the other? This would not be rational behavior on the part of party leadership as people, but at the same time it would be the expected material consequence of the parties existing as interacting material objects with internal behavior that causes them to disregard each other.

Is it really true that Marxist movements have no interest outside the interests of the workers if there will always be a moment within the process of revolution when Marxist parties must fight any other movement attempting to become a central party up to and including each other? If every Marxist party is a material object inasmuch as it and all its connected allies are a finite group of people, then it would seem every Marxist party has an inherent interest of bringing itself into reality in the specific shape it predicts its population and possibly other populations to form, which cannot be resolved by appealing to two Marxist parties both attempting to lead workers, and can only be resolved by reconciling the two future arrangements of people associated with two different parties until the "physics" of those two superimposed arrangements somehow collapses into just one; the programs of two Marxist parties would be in a superposition, and the highest interest of the two parties that most strongly directs their behavior would be predicting reality and theoretically or actually collapsing the superposition. (Here I would be comparing the Hegelian dialectic to quantum physics, and the way the principle of least action shows the way several different possible ways to achieve something in physics generally collapse into the simplest path to the future and not into other unnecessarily complicated material explanations.)
</blockquote>

== Motifs or claims in prompt ==
<ol class="hue clean reset">

{{li|start=y|I=S2/MX/IV|Q=618|Q2=618}}Two movements taking immediate action together does not mean they care about each other (Trotskyism onto existential materialism) / ({{9k|RD/Q42,11}})

</li></ol>

== Motifs or claims from response ==
<ol class="hue clean reset">
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=618}}(to be added)
</li></ol>

== Subjective themes (zero AI) ==


== Usage notes ==
* You are allowed to post ChatGPT <strong>prompts</strong> as nickels (the part you wrote), as long as they stay in the <code>Research talk</code> namespace and there are no quotes from response text. Describing abstract propositions that turn up inside response text is fine.

[[Category:Nickel links (NickelBank)]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:38, 28 May 2026
Line 42:		Line 42:
	{{li\|start=y\|I=Z1/IV/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|27 Reasons Why the International Committee Should Be Buried Forthwith and the Fourth International Built}} (Banda 1986) [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/heritage/33.html] [https://www.marxists.org/history/etol//newspape/sn/Fourth%20Internationalist%20inc%20Socialist%20Newsletter%20Special%20Bulletin%20Feb%2086.pdf] / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-BandasManyReasons}})		{{li\|start=y\|I=Z1/IV/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|27 Reasons Why the International Committee Should Be Buried Forthwith and the Fourth International Built}} (Banda 1986) [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/heritage/33.html] [https://www.marxists.org/history/etol//newspape/sn/Fourth%20Internationalist%20inc%20Socialist%20Newsletter%20Special%20Bulletin%20Feb%2086.pdf] / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-BandasManyReasons}})

	{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}{{book\|The Revolution Betrayed}} [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html] [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/foundations-us/16.html]		{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=19,36\|Q2=1936}}{{book\|The Revolution Betrayed}} [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/revolution-betrayed/introduction-david-north.html] [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/foundations-us/16.html]

	{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|Stalinism and Bolshevism}} (1937) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/stal-o20.html]		{{li\|I=Z1/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}{{article\|Stalinism and Bolshevism}} (1937) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/stal-o20.html]
Line 48:		Line 48:
	{{li\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=40,02\|Q2=4002-LB\|h4= [[E:Q4002\|Stalinists were not Marxists]] }} / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory		{{li\|I=S2/ML/IV\|Q=40,02\|Q2=4002-LB\|h4= [[E:Q4002\|Stalinists were not Marxists]] }} / Stalin's "Marxism" wasn't Marxism / Stalinists were not a Marxist party / Stalinists were not assembled around a Marxist theory

	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}Trotsky had a predictive theory of Stalin's Marxism / 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 [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/09/15/xvps-s15.html] -> there is one thing I can say for this. Trotskyists technically know to some extent what violet Marxism is. they think it should be used to tear apart other Marxisms assuming they aren't Marxism. but if you ask them to merely describe how Stalin's Marxism functioned and why it supposedly fell apart starting in its early stages, they will definitely try.		{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=40,60\|Q2=4060}}Trotsky had a predictive theory of Stalin's Marxism / 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 [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/09/15/xvps-s15.html] -> there is one thing I can say for this. Trotskyists technically know to some extent what violet Marxism is. they think it should be used to tear apart other Marxisms assuming they aren't Marxism. but if you ask them to merely describe how Stalin's Marxism functioned and why it supposedly fell apart starting in its early stages, they will definitely try.

	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}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=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=S2/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}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=S2/IV\|Q=42,27\|Q2=4227}}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=S2/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}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\|I=S2/IV\|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\|I=S2/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}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\|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\|I=M3/IV\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~\|h4= Where's the class analysis? }} / Why didn't you use class analysis? -> another 'greatest hit' of Materialism, after "Why is your hypothesis wrong" and "Why isn't your theory forbidden"		{{li\|I=M3/IV\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=44,17\|Q2=4417\|h4= Where's the class analysis? }} / Why didn't you use class analysis? -> another 'greatest hit' of Materialism, after "Why is your hypothesis wrong" and "Why isn't your theory forbidden"

	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}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\|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></ol>		</li></ol>