Ontology:Q28,94: Difference between revisions
m prototype notes |
Usage notes |
||
| 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> | ||
== | == Usage notes == | ||
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. | ||
* 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. | |||
Latest revision as of 10:26, 13 August 2025
- pronounced [MX] the only good form of Trotskyism 1-1-1
Core characteristics[edit]
- pronounced [P] alias (en) [string]
- non-revisionist Trotskyism (hypothetical possibility which has seemingly never been observed in real life; motif, meta-Marxism or mainstream Marxism-Leninism)
- shares thematic block [Item] (BB) 1-1-1
- pronounced [S0] meta-Marxist hypothesis (C) 1-1-1
- field, scope, or group [Item]
- pronounced Z–617 pronounced [MX] [Z] meta-Marxism 1-1-1
- associated Term [Lexeme]
- --
- sub-case of [Item]
- named Marxism substantiated by history / non-revisionist Marxism
- case of [Item]
- meta-Marxist motif
- super-case of [Item]
- --
- appears in work [Item]
- --
Wavebuilder combinations[edit]
- pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]
- --
- along with [Item]
- --
Wavebuilder characterizations[edit]
- pronounced Wavebuilder: route [Item]
- pronounced [MX] the only good form of Trotskyism 1-1-1
- along with [Item]
- pronounced Z–617 pronounced [IV] [Z] Trotskyism (top-level category) 1-1-1
- forming from [Item]
- pronounced Z–617 pronounced [IV] [Z] Trotskyism (top-level category) 1-1-1
- self-criticism (proposed; ML) 1-1-1
- pronounced [MX] the only good form of Trotskyism 1-1-1
- pronounced Wavebuilder: route [Item]
- pronounced [MX] the only good form of Trotskyism 1-1-1
- along with [Item]
- pronounced Z–617 pronounced [IV] [Z] Leon Trotsky 1-1-1
- forming from [Item]
- pronounced Z–617 pronounced [IV] [Z] Leon Trotsky 1-1-1
- socialism in one country (proposed; ML) 1-1-1
- pronounced [MX] the only good form of Trotskyism 1-1-1
Usage notes[edit]
This is the motif of a hypothetical variation of Marxism which falls within 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 MDem text and the LithoGraphIca 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.
- Trotskyism would be acceptable if it reinvented itself as 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 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 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 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 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 countable culture capable of having its own 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 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 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.