Jump to content

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q44,36: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From LithoGraphica
← Older editNewer edit →
Reversedragon (talk | contribs)
Bureaucrats, Conference pass, Interface administrators, Arts-aligned editors, Crimson-aligned editors, Violet-aligned editors, Administrators
17,080 edits
m Their Morals and Ours
Reversedragon (talk | contribs)
Bureaucrats, Conference pass, Interface administrators, Arts-aligned editors, Crimson-aligned editors, Violet-aligned editors, Administrators
17,080 edits
Trotskyist trolley problem
Line 5: Line 5:
{{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=44,36|Q2=4436|h4= Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov }}
{{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=44,36|Q2=4436|h4= Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov }}
{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / No laws apply to Lev Sedov / Trotsky has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin<ref group="error" name="a"/>, {{em|as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it}}; Trotsky or any other member of <del>the 1930s Trotskyite conspiracy</del><ref group="error" name="b"/> the Left Opposition and its allies is {{em|radically}} innocent until proven guilty, to the point that as long as enough people subjectively think he's innocent<ref group="error" name="c"/> he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism<ref group="error" name="a"/> as long as nobody notices before he's finished / You are exempt from all laws and moral dictates if your name is [[E:Trotsky changed his name to Sedov for citizenship reasons|Lev Sedov]]  -><br/>
{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / No laws apply to Lev Sedov / Trotsky has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin<ref group="error" name="a"/>, {{em|as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it}}; Trotsky or any other member of <del>the 1930s Trotskyite conspiracy</del><ref group="error" name="b"/> the Left Opposition and its allies is {{em|radically}} innocent until proven guilty, to the point that as long as enough people subjectively think he's innocent<ref group="error" name="c"/> he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism<ref group="error" name="a"/> as long as nobody notices before he's finished / You are exempt from all laws and moral dictates if your name is [[E:Trotsky changed his name to Sedov for citizenship reasons|Lev Sedov]]  -><br/>
it really disturbs me to what extent everything that happens in the United States is all about morality and holding every single individual to the same standards even across situations that really should be different, and yet somehow, Trotsky is the only exception to all of it, and he gets to do whatever he wants as long as most people across the world agree he never did it. that makes absolutely no logical sense in any way and the last tiny fragment of me that can comprehend Enlightenment rationalism on any level at all is furious about it.
it really disturbs me to what extent everything that happens in the United States is all about morality and holding every single individual to the same standards even across situations that really should be different, and yet somehow, Trotsky is the only exception to all of it [within the United States], and he gets to do whatever he wants as long as most people across the world agree he never did it. that makes absolutely no logical sense in any way <ins>[specifically within the bounds of the United States where nobody is a Communist]</ins> and the last tiny fragment of me that can comprehend Enlightenment rationalism on any level at all is furious about it.


{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov  ->  okay let's try this again. I think I was legitimately trying to describe something but, yeah, I totally fumbled what the actual claims of Trotskyism were.
{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov  ->  okay let's try this again. I think I was legitimately trying to describe something but, yeah, I totally fumbled what the actual claims of Trotskyism were.


{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / If Trotsky can build a case within his group of allies that they are the real Communist party and Stalin's party is not, then a [[E:political revolution (Menshevism onto Marxism)|political revolution]] begins at him effective immediately and he has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin, which are active specifically {{em|as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it}}; Trotsky or any other member of the Left Opposition and its allies — Grigori Zinoviev, Lev Sedov, whoever may or may not be contributing — is {{em|radically}} innocent until proven guilty, to the point that as long as enough people subjectively think that Stalin's claim to being a valid Communist party with a valid state cannot be proven he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism as long as nobody notices before he's finished  -><br/>
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / If Trotsky can build a case within his group of allies that they are the real Communist party and Stalin's party is not, then a [[E:political revolution (Menshevism onto Marxism)|political revolution]] begins at him effective immediately and he has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin, which are active specifically {{em|as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it}}; Trotsky or any other member of the Left Opposition and its allies — Grigori Zinoviev, Lev Sedov, whoever may or may not be contributing — is {{em|radically}} innocent until proven guilty, to the point that as long as enough people think that Stalin's claim to being a valid Communist party with a valid state cannot be proven he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism as long as nobody notices before he's finished  -><br/>
the idea here was supposed to be that early Trotskyism is taking a huge leap in declaring itself the only valid government, and it's worth asking how they can possibly know that. this isn't to say there aren't answers to the question. as well, if he successfully lands the argument that he {{em|is}} the only valid proletarian revolution, well, as shocking as this claim might sound it's not even bad.
the idea here was supposed to be that early Trotskyism is taking a huge leap in declaring itself the only valid government, and it's worth asking how they can possibly know that. this isn't to say there aren't answers to the question. as well, if he successfully lands the argument that he {{em|is}} the only valid proletarian revolution, well, as shocking as this claim might sound it's not even bad.


</li></ol>
</li></ol>
 
== Background ==
== Related ==
<ol class="hue clean  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}}">
<ol class="hue clean  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}}">


Line 22: Line 21:
yeah, no.... this proposition is {{em|so}} important I'm putting it in the first 1,000 where usually only basic stuff like physics and mathematics went.
yeah, no.... this proposition is {{em|so}} important I'm putting it in the first 1,000 where usually only basic stuff like physics and mathematics went.


{{li|I=Z1/IV|Q=19,04|Q2=1904}}{{article|Their Morals and Ours}} (Trotsky 1938) / ({{9k|RD/Q19,04}})  ->  a key article to look back on when discussing or explaining this proposition.
</li></ol>
== Their Morals and Ours ==
<ol class="hue clean  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}}">
 
{{li|start=y|I=Z1/IV|Q=19,04|Q2=1904}}{{article|Their Morals and Ours}} (Trotsky 1938) / ({{9k|RD/Q19,04}})  ->  a key article to look back on when discussing or explaining this proposition.


{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=436|Q2=436}}Stalin arrests and shoots the children of his opponents after these opponents have been themselves executed under false accusations / ({{9k|RD/Q19,04}})  -><br/>
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=436|Q2=436}}Stalin arrests and shoots the children of his opponents after these opponents have been themselves executed under false accusations / ({{9k|RD/Q19,04}})  -><br/>
Line 39: Line 42:


{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Permissible and obligatory are those and only those means which unite the revolutionary proletariat, fill their hearts with irreconcilable hostility to oppression, teach them contempt for official morality and its democratic echoers, imbue them with consciousness of their own historic mission, raise their courage and spirit of self-sacrifice in the struggle ... the great revolutionary end spurns those base means and ways which set one part of the working class against other parts, or attempt to make the masses happy without their participation; or lower the faith of the masses in themselves and their organization, replacing it by worship for the "leaders"
{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}Permissible and obligatory are those and only those means which unite the revolutionary proletariat, fill their hearts with irreconcilable hostility to oppression, teach them contempt for official morality and its democratic echoers, imbue them with consciousness of their own historic mission, raise their courage and spirit of self-sacrifice in the struggle ... the great revolutionary end spurns those base means and ways which set one part of the working class against other parts, or attempt to make the masses happy without their participation; or lower the faith of the masses in themselves and their organization, replacing it by worship for the "leaders"
{{li|I=S2/IV|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}The solidarity of workers, especially of strikers or barricade fighters, is incomparably more "categoric" than human solidarity in general
</li></ol>
== "Laws and Lev Sedov" ==
<ol class="hue clean  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}}">
{{li|start=y|I=S2/MX|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / If Trotsky can build a case within his group of allies that they are the real Communist party and Stalin's party is not, then a [[E:political revolution (Menshevism onto Marxism)|political revolution]] begins at him effective immediately ...  ->  this is the "big if". everything else rests on them showing that Stalinists are a counterrevolution. if they show that Stalin's Marxism A) doesn't exist as a form of Marxism, and B) is doomed to tear itself apart in the way a new top-level sociophilosophy would not, they're good to go.
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / ... he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism as long as nobody notices before he's finished  ->  if he can show that Stalin's government is a class society while Trotskyism is a Communist party, then unironically, he is.
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / ... he has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin, which are active specifically {{em|as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it}}  ->  this one is not a matter of logic, it's a matter of what is materially accurate. Trotskyists having to hide the one true revolution that will change {{em|the whole world}} is a little weird, but the reason is simply that there is no other way they can physically achieve it. they will physically fail their task if they're caught, and they have no control over the central party.
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / Trotsky or any other member of the Left Opposition and its allies ... is {{em|radically}} innocent until proven guilty ...  ->  here we get into the concept of entire sociophilosophies fighting and trying to make one or the other subordinate to their laws but not the other way around. this is really easy to understand when it comes to capitalism. capitalists will try to make a big deal out of small violations or things that shouldn't even be violations. at a certain point you stop caring if the workers manage to erupt outward and stop the capitalists, even if a few people in the capitalist security force get hurt. (that's not a euphemism. these days people wouldn't even want to kill them.)<br/>
what gets hard to understand is what was going on in the Soviet Union. the question to ask is, is there a point where fighting off the bureaucrats or killing one to save Trotskyists is worth it? and I have to admit — I'd probably be scared if I was there, staring down this big opaque country that may well contain more bureaucrats than it does Trotskyists. but the ultimate question is... are Trotskyists Leninists? are they capable on any timeframe at all of turning their allies into Leninists? are there more Leninists in the world if you save them? can Trotskyists unite workers? are Stalinists Leninists? are bureaucrats Leninists? no. we know at the very least that the bureaucrats are not Leninists; they have a possibility to be Leninists approaching zero. in the beginning it's confusing, but it turns into a trolley problem once you have enough information. you have a decent Leninist organizer and 100 workers and 5 permanent bureaucrats, you don't take the bureaucrats. so the only problem that remains is whether Stalinists are Marxists. and in 1930 that isn't looking particularly good. it seems to me like if two Trotskyists and 200 workers take out 10 bureaucrats the Stalinists in the central party are going to be fairly upset, and they're not going to try to go a peaceful route and reconcile with the workers or Trotskyists in order to contain things. the bureaucrats are just going to immediately respond and send in what amount to more bureaucrats to lock up the Trotskyists, and the central party is probably going to say nothing about it, maybe an angry remark about the Trotskyists. but the bureaucrats are a big problem that basically everyone has noticed some amount; a bunch of people who left the Soviet Union and don't understand Marxism will mention the bureaucrats. and Stalin can't do anything to defeat the bureaucrats. it's pretty much only Trotskyists that can defeat the bureaucrats. the bureaucrats eventually turn into bourgeoisie and dissolve the Soviet Union. so who has the power to save the Soviet people from being forcibly scattered? I've gotten this trolley problem wrong before. but expressing it as a trolley problem really wasn't a bad idea.
{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=44,36|Q2=4436}}Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / ... as long as enough people think that Stalin's claim to being a valid Communist party with a valid state cannot be proven he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems ...  ->  here the question is, why would people "think" that? would they be thinking that because Stalin's party is materially ineffective and Trotskyist analysis is correct? or would they be thinking that on some kind of inadequate "coin-flip" epistemology that might not reliably be able to tell the effectiveness of either party? the latter thing would be concerning, and would pretty much lead to a counterrevolution as millions of people destroy the central party for no real reason. but if early Trotskyism has a correct material analysis of both Stalin's party and itself, it basically can't go wrong, in that it will almost inevitably be {{em|more}} capable of A) solving the graph theory problem of revolution and B) rebuilding society without the bureaucrats than Stalin is. the more "molecularized" the Trotskyist party or international cluster of Trotskyist parties is in terms of its theories the more justified it becomes. it's always a little scary to think you can go through a revolution and not know if the country will fall apart, or that some day it might have to happen again. but that isn't really what this proposition is, it's whether you can defend the Trotskyists at all costs. and the answer to that lies in whether the Trotskyists are Marxists and are able to spread a correct "meta-Marxist" method for physically analyzing the collapse of central parties. if the Trotskyists achieve violet Trotskyism, collect them. add trotskyist to deck, remove bureaucrat from game.
</li></ol>
== Related ==
<ol class="hue clean  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}}">
{{li|start=y|I=S1/ML|Q=643|Q2=643}}ethics problem involving workers' states
{{li|I=S1/ML|Q=658|Q2=658}}Communist trolley problem
{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=654|Q2=654}}Trotskyist trolley problem
{{li|I=S1/IV|Q=43,92|Q2=4392|h4= permanent revolution }} (Trotskyism) / ({{9k|RD/Q43,92}})
{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=41,84|Q2=4184|h4= Stalinists were a counterrevolution }} / Stalinism begins when older forms of society crush the proletarian revolution; this is to imply it is similar to when the Jacobins were defeated in the French Revolution / ({{9k|RD/Q4000}})


</li></ol>
</li></ol>
Line 48: Line 83:
{{li|I=Z1/ML |Q=40,01|Q2=4001}}{{TTS|ML|M-L}} / [[EC:9k/RD/Q4000|Stalinism]] (Soviet Union)
{{li|I=Z1/ML |Q=40,01|Q2=4001}}{{TTS|ML|M-L}} / [[EC:9k/RD/Q4000|Stalinism]] (Soviet Union)
{{li|I=Z1/ML |Q=41,03|Q2=4103}}{{TTS|ML|M-L}} / Stalin's Marxism (2020s)
{{li|I=Z1/ML |Q=41,03|Q2=4103}}{{TTS|ML|M-L}} / Stalin's Marxism (2020s)
{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=92|Q2=92}}{{TTS|MX|M.X.}} / meta-Marxism
{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=44,44|Q2=4444}}{{TTS|IV|Fourth}} / Trotskyism as meta-Marxism
</li></ol>
</li></ol>
<!--
<!--
Line 56: Line 93:


</dl> -->
</dl> -->
 
<!--
== Subpages or related scraps ==
== Subpages or related scraps ==
<!--
=== Nickels ===
=== Nickels ===
* {{nickel/silent}} [[Research talk:5c/|]]
* {{nickel/silent}} [[Research talk:5c/|]]
-->
-->
== Errors ==
== Errors ==
<references group="error">
<references group="error">
Line 70: Line 105:
</references><!--
</references><!--
<ref group="error" name="a"/> -->
<ref group="error" name="a"/> -->


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]  <!-- page ends here.  TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]  <!-- page ends here.  TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
redirects or titles:  [[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q4436]]
redirects or titles:  [[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q4436]]
duplication hint:  copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN|Q44,36]] -->
duplication hint:  copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN|Q44,36]] -->

Revision as of 09:51, 20 August 2026

Main entry

  1. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov

  2. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / No laws apply to Lev Sedov / Trotsky has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin[error 1], as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it; Trotsky or any other member of the 1930s Trotskyite conspiracy[error 2] the Left Opposition and its allies is radically innocent until proven guilty, to the point that as long as enough people subjectively think he's innocent[error 3] he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism[error 1] as long as nobody notices before he's finished / You are exempt from all laws and moral dictates if your name is Lev Sedov ->
    it really disturbs me to what extent everything that happens in the United States is all about morality and holding every single individual to the same standards even across situations that really should be different, and yet somehow, Trotsky is the only exception to all of it [within the United States], and he gets to do whatever he wants as long as most people across the world agree he never did it. that makes absolutely no logical sense in any way [specifically within the bounds of the United States where nobody is a Communist] and the last tiny fragment of me that can comprehend Enlightenment rationalism on any level at all is furious about it.
  3. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov -> okay let's try this again. I think I was legitimately trying to describe something but, yeah, I totally fumbled what the actual claims of Trotskyism were.
  4. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / If Trotsky can build a case within his group of allies that they are the real Communist party and Stalin's party is not, then a political revolution begins at him effective immediately and he has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin, which are active specifically as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it; Trotsky or any other member of the Left Opposition and its allies — Grigori Zinoviev, Lev Sedov, whoever may or may not be contributing — is radically innocent until proven guilty, to the point that as long as enough people think that Stalin's claim to being a valid Communist party with a valid state cannot be proven he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism as long as nobody notices before he's finished ->
    the idea here was supposed to be that early Trotskyism is taking a huge leap in declaring itself the only valid government, and it's worth asking how they can possibly know that. this isn't to say there aren't answers to the question. as well, if he successfully lands the argument that he is the only valid proletarian revolution, well, as shocking as this claim might sound it's not even bad.

Background

  1. Trotsky changed his name to Sedov for citizenship reasons [1] [2] -> mostly just a funny little bit of trivia about the notoriously bad Russian passport system that remained notoriously bad into the time of the Soviet Union. (quite literally, the Bolsheviks took advantage of the bad passport system of the Russian Empire, and then the Trotskyite conspirators Trotskyist allies that came out of Germany etc. did it again.) but sometimes it comes up when pondering the weird little question of whether Trotsky and his son Lev Sedov technically have the exact same name. I just cannot get over that, that he would always act like it doesn't matter if he's arrogant if he's correct, but he and his son have the same name.

  2. Trotsky was framed

    / The 1930s Trotskyite conspiracy never happened / Trotsky was framed / Lev Sedov was framed / Zinoviev was framed / Emmanuel Goldstein was framed (fiction) / Snowball was framed (fiction) -> this is one of those statements that's so centrally important to world history that it's fine for the main sense of the Item to be in the negative instead of the positive.

    yeah, no.... this proposition is so important I'm putting it in the first 1,000 where usually only basic stuff like physics and mathematics went.

Their Morals and Ours

  1. Their Morals and Ours (Trotsky 1938) / (9k) -> a key article to look back on when discussing or explaining this proposition.
  2. Stalin arrests and shoots the children of his opponents after these opponents have been themselves executed under false accusations / (9k) ->
    Trotsky, you are not slick putting this directly after a section about how lies are a necessary weapon of war. that is like the biggest freudian slip ever.
    the specific charges might be wrong, but if Stalin got them they probably did something. you know, as part of the underground Trotskyist operation. the potential revolution. I don't call it a conspiracy any more. but now that we're past about 1953, I do think people need to stop lying about it.
  3. The very conception of truth and lie was born of social contradictions / (9k) -> yeah this is it. ... society dividing into groups of people including physical tribes, factions, clusters of businesses, and finally class populations are the real roots of the entire discussion about truth versus lies in the age of capitalism
  4. It is impossible to create a revolutionary party of the proletariat without complete independence from the bourgeoisie and their morality / Whoever fawns before precepts established by the enemy will never vanquish that enemy! (Trotsky) / (9k)
  5. The lies and the violence of war will go away in proportion to how much class conflicts have vanished from society / (9k)
  6. Intentions alone cannot make you Progressive or Reactionary / The ends are not accessible without control over the effects of the means / Show not the goal but show also the path (Lassalle) / (9k)
  7. Deceive unions when necessary / "Maneuvers and subterfuge" are in this case only methods of valid self-defense against a perfidious reformist bureaucracy (trade union bureaucracy; Soviet bureaucracy) (Lenin, Trotsky) -> he specifically refers to the trade union bureaucracy here but the context makes it amply obvious he does mean either one
  8. Permissible and obligatory are those and only those means which unite the revolutionary proletariat, fill their hearts with irreconcilable hostility to oppression, teach them contempt for official morality and its democratic echoers, imbue them with consciousness of their own historic mission, raise their courage and spirit of self-sacrifice in the struggle ... the great revolutionary end spurns those base means and ways which set one part of the working class against other parts, or attempt to make the masses happy without their participation; or lower the faith of the masses in themselves and their organization, replacing it by worship for the "leaders"
  9. The solidarity of workers, especially of strikers or barricade fighters, is incomparably more "categoric" than human solidarity in general

"Laws and Lev Sedov"

  1. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / If Trotsky can build a case within his group of allies that they are the real Communist party and Stalin's party is not, then a political revolution begins at him effective immediately ... -> this is the "big if". everything else rests on them showing that Stalinists are a counterrevolution. if they show that Stalin's Marxism A) doesn't exist as a form of Marxism, and B) is doomed to tear itself apart in the way a new top-level sociophilosophy would not, they're good to go.
  2. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / ... he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems and governments and definitions of treason and definitions of terrorism as long as nobody notices before he's finished -> if he can show that Stalin's government is a class society while Trotskyism is a Communist party, then unironically, he is.
  3. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / ... he has exclusive privileges to kill people that nobody else has including Stalin, which are active specifically as long as nobody else ever finds out he did it -> this one is not a matter of logic, it's a matter of what is materially accurate. Trotskyists having to hide the one true revolution that will change the whole world is a little weird, but the reason is simply that there is no other way they can physically achieve it. they will physically fail their task if they're caught, and they have no control over the central party.
  4. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / Trotsky or any other member of the Left Opposition and its allies ... is radically innocent until proven guilty ... -> here we get into the concept of entire sociophilosophies fighting and trying to make one or the other subordinate to their laws but not the other way around. this is really easy to understand when it comes to capitalism. capitalists will try to make a big deal out of small violations or things that shouldn't even be violations. at a certain point you stop caring if the workers manage to erupt outward and stop the capitalists, even if a few people in the capitalist security force get hurt. (that's not a euphemism. these days people wouldn't even want to kill them.)
    what gets hard to understand is what was going on in the Soviet Union. the question to ask is, is there a point where fighting off the bureaucrats or killing one to save Trotskyists is worth it? and I have to admit — I'd probably be scared if I was there, staring down this big opaque country that may well contain more bureaucrats than it does Trotskyists. but the ultimate question is... are Trotskyists Leninists? are they capable on any timeframe at all of turning their allies into Leninists? are there more Leninists in the world if you save them? can Trotskyists unite workers? are Stalinists Leninists? are bureaucrats Leninists? no. we know at the very least that the bureaucrats are not Leninists; they have a possibility to be Leninists approaching zero. in the beginning it's confusing, but it turns into a trolley problem once you have enough information. you have a decent Leninist organizer and 100 workers and 5 permanent bureaucrats, you don't take the bureaucrats. so the only problem that remains is whether Stalinists are Marxists. and in 1930 that isn't looking particularly good. it seems to me like if two Trotskyists and 200 workers take out 10 bureaucrats the Stalinists in the central party are going to be fairly upset, and they're not going to try to go a peaceful route and reconcile with the workers or Trotskyists in order to contain things. the bureaucrats are just going to immediately respond and send in what amount to more bureaucrats to lock up the Trotskyists, and the central party is probably going to say nothing about it, maybe an angry remark about the Trotskyists. but the bureaucrats are a big problem that basically everyone has noticed some amount; a bunch of people who left the Soviet Union and don't understand Marxism will mention the bureaucrats. and Stalin can't do anything to defeat the bureaucrats. it's pretty much only Trotskyists that can defeat the bureaucrats. the bureaucrats eventually turn into bourgeoisie and dissolve the Soviet Union. so who has the power to save the Soviet people from being forcibly scattered? I've gotten this trolley problem wrong before. but expressing it as a trolley problem really wasn't a bad idea.
  5. Laws don't apply to Lev Sedov / ... as long as enough people think that Stalin's claim to being a valid Communist party with a valid state cannot be proven he is entitled to dismantle entire legal systems ... -> here the question is, why would people "think" that? would they be thinking that because Stalin's party is materially ineffective and Trotskyist analysis is correct? or would they be thinking that on some kind of inadequate "coin-flip" epistemology that might not reliably be able to tell the effectiveness of either party? the latter thing would be concerning, and would pretty much lead to a counterrevolution as millions of people destroy the central party for no real reason. but if early Trotskyism has a correct material analysis of both Stalin's party and itself, it basically can't go wrong, in that it will almost inevitably be more capable of A) solving the graph theory problem of revolution and B) rebuilding society without the bureaucrats than Stalin is. the more "molecularized" the Trotskyist party or international cluster of Trotskyist parties is in terms of its theories the more justified it becomes. it's always a little scary to think you can go through a revolution and not know if the country will fall apart, or that some day it might have to happen again. but that isn't really what this proposition is, it's whether you can defend the Trotskyists at all costs. and the answer to that lies in whether the Trotskyists are Marxists and are able to spread a correct "meta-Marxist" method for physically analyzing the collapse of central parties. if the Trotskyists achieve violet Trotskyism, collect them. add trotskyist to deck, remove bureaucrat from game.

Related

  1. ethics problem involving workers' states
  2. Communist trolley problem
  3. Trotskyist trolley problem

  4. permanent revolution

    (Trotskyism) / (9k)

  5. Stalinists were a counterrevolution

    / Stalinism begins when older forms of society crush the proletarian revolution; this is to imply it is similar to when the Jacobins were defeated in the French Revolution / (9k)

Ideologies or fields

  1. pronounced Fourth / Trotskyism
  2. pronounced M-L / Stalinism (Soviet Union)
  3. pronounced M-L / Stalin's Marxism (2020s)
  4. pronounced M.X. / meta-Marxism
  5. pronounced Fourth / Trotskyism as meta-Marxism

Errors

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Note: in the situation that it can be proved that Trotskyists are leading a coherent revolution against older forms of society this goes from being an "error in Trotskyism" to just an interesting observation and a casual description of what revolution is.
  2. ↑ "Trotskyite conspiracy" implies that the Left Opposition had no unique new political content. In actuality, it had the theory of permanent revolution.
  3. ↑ Trotsky was relatively unpopular in the Soviet Union. This, ironically, actually stands against the model that he was leading a popular movement of non-proletarians who didn't understand Marxism, and leaves open the possibility that he was unpopular because he defended correct models that nobody understood.
Retrieved from "https://research.moraleconomy.au/index.php?title=Ontology_talk:9k/RD/Q44,36&oldid=45334"