What is Trotskyism? | Ideology explained

This video is an explanation of the ideology of Trotskyism. I go into all major aspects of the ideology while remaining as brief as possible. I explain Marxism and Leninism along with concepts like proletarian internationalism, the permanent revolution and the vanguardist belief.
Patreon: / viki1999
Subreddit: / viki1999
Twitter: / viki1999yt
E-Mail Address: [e-mail]
The song in the outro was produced by 08 (who gave me no way to credit them), you can listen to the whole remix on my second channel: • Video
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
0:33 Marxism and Leninism
1:43 History
2:39 Trotskyism
11:48 Outro
Transcript:
Hello everybody, what is Trotskyism? A complicated question but I’ll try my best to give you an overview of the important parts. Essentially Trotskyism is the ideology of Leon Trotsky who was one of the leaders of the Russian revolution in 1917 and one of the two most likely candidates to succeed Lenin, the other one being Stalin who ended up ruling the USSR.
To understand Trotskyism, you need to understand what it builds on and that is both Marxism and Leninism. I went over this in that video already but for the sake of making this video be understandable on it’s own I will briefly go over both of them again.
Marxism essentially says that for a variety of reasons our capitalist industrialized society is divided among class lines, with the working class being exploited and oppressed by the capitalist class. When the economy and society become industrialized enough the workers will begin to overthrow the capitalists in a French revolution style takeover. After which they share everything and establish socialism.
Leninism on the other hand recognised the fact that in the country they were in, Russia in 1917, there was no large industrial worker’s army to lead a revolution. So, Lenin adapted Marxism to the reality he was experiencing. Now a party would be formed with all people who are educated on Marx and they would lead a revolution and take over the state on behalf of the working class. They would then keep the revolution safe and develop the industry until the workers were educated enough to take over and reach socialism.
Trotsky was a revolutionary along with other Bolsheviks. He was a strong supporter of Lenin and not a fan of Stalin. When Stalin came to power in the Soviet Union Trotsky began to criticise everything Stalin was doing. Eventually Stalin would exile Trotsky who ended up on Mexico were his ideas cemented and he formulated his beliefs in the ideology of Trotskyism. Trotsky was also assassinated on the order of Stalin a few years later.
Also, there are people who say Lenin wanted Trotsky to take over instead of Stalin, but this is based on the Lenin testament of which historians aren’t even sure if it’s real. Either way because Trotsky was still a socialist revolutionary while living outside of the USSR, he handily held a lot of speeches talking to people, so he made a 5-step explanation of what his ideology is supposed to be.
Trotskyism is an evolution of Leninism which itself is an evolution of Marxism. That’s why I summed both of those systems up before. Trotskyism keeps the belief in a vanguard party. The logic is that the people in non-industrial countries can’t lead their own revolution because they lack the experiences of an industrialized working class and the understanding of Marxist theory, so the party does it instead.
Trotsky supported the council system of the early USSR. Essentially all workers in one job and one region would form a council, called soviet which would send representatives to the parliament .I have a video that goes in depth about the democratic system of the USSR and how it changed over time.
This is of course a democratic system but the people who stood for election had to be members of the communist party. The idea was that this way only workers and educated Marxists could be elected, because if they allowed the people to vote for capitalist populist parties then they may lose the one socialist country in the world. This was justified as dictatorship of the proletariat.
According to Trotsky these are the 5 points which set his ideology apart from other Marxist theories. Let’s go over them and what they mean one by one.
Support for the strategy of permanent revolution, in opposition to the two-stage theory of his opponents.
So, the two-stage theory says that to achieve communism you need a lot of industry, famers can’t reach communism because the productivity is too low to create superabundance in which there is so much of everything that nobody has to work.

[@kingoftheskies34]

Half the comments are “something serious” The other half are “hee hee icepick go brrr”

[@comontista3124]

Memes about trotsky: -icepick -newspaper -split

[@kevinhuang8916]

also invading every country that you dislike but it's socialist

[@blendbajrami8114]

-letter to wife

[@anarchistpoops161]

Nothing about killing anarchists? Oh well

[@anarcookie7496]

I know 2 trotskyists and one actually writes for a trotskyist newspaper and they caused the group i was in to split because they kept bullying people who disagreed with them mostly the anarchists

[@cosmicmusicreynolds3266]

@@kevinhuang8916 invading like the white army

[@smhsophie]

trotskyists: * furiously typing 900 word comment * marxist-leninists: hehe ice pick ⛏

[@christopherbolshevik6395]

Hehe ice pick

[@outlander1924]

Hehe ice pick

[@Paloma73013]

**stalinists**

[@christopherbolshevik6395]

@@Paloma73013 you're right there bud!

[@Paloma73013]

@@christopherbolshevik6395 nxnxnxn yeah, leninist is not same thing.

[@KeganTheTowel]

Doing "the exact same thing but in a different way" is, in fact, doing something different.

[@jeffreyherrera5069]

So much for "bad news in a good way".

[@grayson0916]

I think achieving the same goal but by different means would have been a better phrasing but I think that could be from not being a native English speaker.

[@RedShocktrooperRST]

Yeah, the bulk of what I can gather about trotsky is he had a distinctive possibility of making a martyr out of Nazi Germany to the rest of the west. the Soviet Union was in no state to go liberating/conquering other nations in the 1930s, but they probably could've taken Germany in the economic and political turmoil.

[@rahulingle8806]

@@grayson0916 👌

[@JohnDolehi]

You can shoot someone in the head or chest, either way it usually falls under the umbrella of shooting someone, often to death

[@bahman6035]

That trotsky in the thumbnail must ve had his photo taken after he got the pickaxe

[@daseapickleofjustice7231]

I'm thinking more mid-piclaxe Trotsky when he realises he was just a counter revolutionary

[@fawful94]

Wrong weapon.

[@hatinmyselfiscool2879]

To be fair he always looks like that.

[@bustamousegaming4423]

Make sure you're taking care of yourself Viki. Your comrades care about you. Thank you for being an educated voice in these trying times. Du bist großartig

[@carlos_herrera]

I just wanted to second this.

[@veejayroth]

I third this... =oD

[@wales2815]

Ich vierte das

[@kanutahytomka4542]

uufff nummer fünf

[@bonkedwoofy4240]

I cringed on this.

[@theremapping3840]

ahh yes Viki, the Anarcho-Tankie Internationalist of the 7th variant

[@1homelander179]

The 4th internationale, posadism. 💥🐬👽🛰️🚀

[@DITOGaming]

This was pretty based. As a Trot I'll acknowledge that if Stalin took a shit Trotsky would have claimed to have sat backwards on the toilet. For your ending people are Trotskyists now because his ideas have become more relevant over time. With the global reach of capitalism and massive alliances of imperialist nations who are all anti-communist the theory of permanent international revolution is more important now than it was in Trotskys day.

[@gymcelsocialism]

opposition to the stalinist method of overt bureaucracy is also really poggers, with an emphasis on the 4th international's popular front rather than the overt soviet control which the 3rd held

[@DITOGaming]

@@gymcelsocialism every Trotskyist party or org in my experience follows the 4th international method.

[@BelleDividends]

I find it strange to hear a self-proclaimed Trotskyist say that the permanent revolution back then wasn't as important, or at least wasn't as important as nowadays. It certainly was extremely important in China 1925-1927, from which Stalin's two-stages theory advocated 'collaboration with the Chinese nationalists' which a little while later caused a massive massacre among Chinese communists and revolutionaries. This heavy blow to the Chinese revolution undermined the support for the Left Opposition in the USSR itself, which enabled Stalin to deal the final blow to the Left Opposition and to drive Trotsky in banishment. It also laid the basis for the split between the Third International and the Chinese communists, which existed de facto already in the '30s, even before Mao became their leader. Had the Permanent Revolution strategy been followed, it is quite likely we would have witnessed the Chinese revolution in the '20s instead of in 1949. This in turn would have invigorated the Left Opposition in the USSR and the Third International.

[@BelleDividends]

@@gymcelsocialism Actually the Popular Front (collaboration with bourgeois forces against the fascists) is a Third International thing. The 4th International advocated the "United Front", which advocated unity in action between various working class forces, but without bourgeois elements.

[@jumpinjohnnyruss]

"to have sat backwards on the toilet" This practice is known as "Slatering", an homage to the popular early 1990s American situational comedy "Saved By The Bell", in which a particular character would typically sit on a chair backwards, his legs straddling the seat back. The character's name was A.C. Slater.

[@albertsovenskiy6140]

Stalinists: hate Trotsky because he opposed Stalin to a petty degree and even tried to undermine the Soviet state Anarchists: wtf man you killed Makhnovia :(((

[@zhitchcresttail3387]

Dude, thank you for introducing me to this, I never knew about Makhnovia and I think I'm simultaneously in love with it and heartbroken it's gone.

[@ssg9offical]

I hate and depise Trotsky because of that.

[@RozinaErnieShaw-hv8ow]

8​@@zhitchcresttail3387

[@papichulo4171]

ICEPICK BOTTOM TEXT

[@vezja]

I'm crying

[@dihainthegreat]

@@vezja me too :(

[@comontista3124]

What about newspapers...

[@Digitaaliklosetti]

lmao

[@ray9081]

⛏⛏

[@kenshin4113]

“SHUT THE FUCK UP, N E W S P A P E R S A L E S M A N”-Stalin probably

[@davidwuhrer6704]

No. For one thing, Stalin was the editor-in-chief of the party newspaper. For another, he was a surprisingly humble man who held respect for his fellow workers.

[@imme6372]

Comrade Stalin would never disrespect a Newspaper salesman or something like that

[@leonmesquita1690]

I am named after him.

[@LumiNyte]

That's actually quite cool!

[@Tantibus9]

Based

[@gabrieljames7998]

Check out my cool new pick axe

[@hyperion3145]

@@gabrieljames7998 Check out this dude's original meme, guys, he did the funny let's laugh at it

[@furrywarriors]

Trotsky was also hugely opposed to Stalin’s bureaucratic government style and implementation of economic planning, which Trotsky viewed as imposing demands on the proletariat, rather than representing their needs. Trotsky was also a proponent of using “experts” in fields, especially in military, industry, and economics and even used former Tsarist nobility military officers and bureaucrats to build the Red Army and state systems, which Stalin greatly opposed and would have rather purged

[@NMahon]

Tbf Stalin also hated the bureaucracy, it had in many ways become bigger than him and he never solved that issue in his lifetime

[@alberto372]

@@NMahon Stalin didn't "hate" the bureaucracy because he was part of it, and that caste gave him support and basis for its position. Trotsky explained this phenomenon in its theory of bonapartism

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

No he wasn't, that's why he helped destroy soviet democracy in the worker councils of both Russia and the free territories of Ukraine

[@Tantibus9]

Even as a Trotskyist, I don't think Trotsky would have necessarily been better at leading the USSR. The development of the bureaucracy was inevitable based on the material conditions in Russia at the time. Edit: Also yes the ussr was a DWS but I'd rather that than a capitalist one any day.

[@MrNoobomnenie]

I personally believe that if Stalin didn't came to power, Bukharin would have been actually a more likely candidate to lead the party, than Trotsky. And Bukharin was basically a "Stalin-lite": he supported socialism in one country, collectivization and industrialization, but was against the political purges.

[@LuizAlexPhoenix]

@@MrNoobomnenie Everyone is against purges until they are sit in the Politburo listening to people saying that they could do better all the time, when the conditions are what they are. /half s

[@Azeratos]

It's funny, cause even though I'm an ML, I kiiiind of agree with the assessment that the USSR was a DWS. It was by no means a classless society, and there was indeed a technocratic/nepotistic party sub-class that formed by the end of the USSR period. I just don't think that means we shouldn't support the USSR in its effort to build socialism, especially against the Imperialist Powers.

[@sameccleston8673]

What's a DWS?

[@KomradeKlonopin]

@@sameccleston8673 degenerated workers state, what trots call the USSR or other actually existing socialism.

[@noandno9573]

I've been wondering about this

[@KatieTheDev]

Me too

[@kingofstars102]

Me three

[@1homelander179]

Trotsky: i would do it better. Stalin: alright, what's your plan? Trotsky: well, i would do it better.

[@tcyr8561]

Actually he did say how to do it better... While he was still in congress. Then Stalin booted him out. Then Stalin did what he suggested anyway, but a few years later.

[@1homelander179]

@@tcyr8561 his "solutions" weren't much different from stalin's.

[@MalleusImperiorum]

​@@tcyr8561 Well, and then Trotsky critisized Stalin for doing all those things anyway. A more funny thing is that Trotsky critisized other people from Stalin's circle for the same "unbolshevik" things - but when Stalin executed them, those suddenly became "the Old Guard" and "true Lenin's bolsheviks".

[@smalbeaste]

​@@MalleusImperiorum I dont know what argument you even tried to make here. Critisizing your party comrades while still being friends with them is way worse than murdering said party comrades? Are you delusional?

[@MalleusImperiorum]

@@smalbeaste They were not murdered. They were sentenced to death according to the Soviet law during public trials.

[@Hardcore_Ant]

11:18 Mao also criticized Stalin and every chair of the CPSU afterward. It's not unique to criticize Stalin, but it is unique to make constructive criticism.

[@deletemymind565]

constructive criticism like "The Soviet Union today is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, a dictatorship of the grand bourgeoisie, a fascist German dictatorship, and a Hitlerite dictatorship. They are a bunch of rascals worse than De Gaulle."

[@Hardcore_Ant]

@@deletemymind565 sounds like old timey speak for "communists and nazis are literally the same"

[@deletemymind565]

@@Hardcore_Ant exactly. mao was really cringe

[@Hardcore_Ant]

@@deletemymind565 I'm not claiming mao's perfect, but there's alot to learn from maoist criticisms of the soviet union.

[@davidulanovsky8943]

Trotsky did make constructive criticism and till his death he always supported the Soviet Union over its capitalist and fascist enemies. He just pointed out the failures of Stalinism.

[@timothymythic7736]

Great video, I personally enjoyed it. What's next?

[@ray9081]

⛏

[@thatoneguy6578]

Congrats on 33k subs only need to mulitply this number by 3 to get 100K ! Go viki

[@thatoneguy6578]

just in time to influence the 2024 US election with socialist ideas :)

[@dstinnettmusic]

Trotskyism historically: Marxism-Leninism with some hot takes about the role of the peasantry Trotskyism in 2021: basically Marxism-Leninism but furiously trying to differentiate themselves from other forms of Marxism-Leninism with a materialist basis for the distinction

[@magnuskallas]

That LGBT-BLM-ANTIFA and neo-liberal (neo-commie) flag poster really speaks volumes... Saving it for archival purposes.

[@soulplexis]

This topic was a nICE pick

[@yulin84]

thank youuuuu i've been needing an explanation of this

[@deeem9500]

Thanks for the video Viki, I always look forward to your content

[@jamesciosek9365]

In a perfect world. The party would have been split between a Stalinist and Trotskyist faction. The clashing of ideas would have prevented the state from taking to much power and would have lead to more options for leaders.

[@davidmartinez688]

It wouldn't, we experienced the aftermath of the Stalinist faction winning control of the mainstream socialist current and purging the Trotskyists from the party, and look where that got the left and international revolution at. Modern China capitulated to the Capitalist system in all but their government structure and some sector of their state-owned economy remain (the only redeeming factor is that they still financially bailout and support remaining Socialist and anti-imperialist countries today and didn't get involved in Russia's fiasco), Cuba is in an almost permanent economic siege by the US (I say almost in the hope that revolution disolves the U.S. or the loss of U.S. power projection in the future forces it to revert to some form of isolationism with the ascension of a rival power like China or of multipolar powers making it anyone's game and the U.S.'s allies not wanting to serve as a U.S. military bases or implement their one-sided, neoliberal, capitalist structure anymore), the Soviet Union is gone, majority of the post-soviet countries have turned sharply to Reaction, Capitalism, and NATO and EU imperialism, Yugoslavia was balkanized by reaction and xenophobia, majority of the third world socialist nations like South Yemen, Ethiopia, Somali, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Angola, Afghanistan, and so on are all gone and subject to an impoverished, war-torn, financially and economically colonized, plutocratic version of themselves, or governed by theocratic reactionary forces like the case of Afghanistan. The remaining Stalinist parties have all capitulated to the bourgeois popular front and abandoned revolutionary principles for social democratic betrayal as mainstream "socialist" or "communist" parties or dead as a result of their failed or long-drawn, stagnant guerrilla wars as the case in places like the MLs in Colombia, or the Maoists in India, and the Philippines.

[@zake64]

@@davidmartinez688 It's almost like Communism is not a feasable economic system at all lol

[@CIMAmotor]

@@zake64 What a shock!

[@weltgeistzupferd]

Another banger. Thank you viki 1999

[@watoski]

The only thing missing now is his view of the tradition of the Communist Left in Russia with Gavriil Myasnikov, the Dutch-German with Anton Pannekoek, Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, the Italian in Bordiga and the French of Marc Chiric, all these groups that emerged during or after the revolutionary wave of 1917-1923 opened by the October Revolution.

[@ghostontheohio]

I would disagree with the statement "Trotskyists never achieved anything." There is more to socialism than just taking over the governments of various countries. Obviously, a political revolution is the goal. But there is so much work that needs to be done immediately, and trots are doing that work. Like Trotsky said, the point of the transitional program is not only to work toward revolution but to help workers in the day to day struggle for basic rights. Trotskyists were very important for example in the U.S. labor movement. The Minneapolis Teamsters strike was lead by trots. This doesn't mean trots are reformists. We want to see revolution just as much marxist-leninist do. But we trots are filling a niche that desperately needs filling.

[@camaradamanuel5025]

Hugo Chávez claimed to be a trotskyist🤣

[@davidmartinez688]

@@camaradamanuel5025 He can call himself that all he wants, his policies don't reflect that beyond his support for a united Latin American economic alliance and allegedly having supported Colombian rebels.

[@18booma]

@@camaradamanuel5025 And North Korea claims to be democratic. Your point?

[@mazscsu]

If only you leftists worked together, maybe the left would be successful somewhere.

[@DeXyClarke]

Holy shit I was trying to search up if you've made a video on trotskyism a few days ago. Sad to see you hadn't. Looks like you answered my prayers

[@Dsonsee]

Two things: 1. This general narrative of "who was in charge and what would change" falls into the narrative favoured by liberals of the "great men who make history", and while those people certainly influence it, Trotsky was clear in his writings on the more structural problems of the developing USSR that went beyond who was in charge. I really recommend people read at least a little of his most important works where he touches on the topic, as what you know about him is probably a mix of anticommunist, antisemitic and Stalinist propaganda. 2. The idea of one person in charge is a horrible distortion of what Bolshevism was supposed to be about, as Lenin was not "in charge", to give an example. He had influence but only a vote and no way to violently enforce his will upon other party members, like Stalin did afterwards.

[@swastik4302]

Exactly Comrade

[@carlos_herrera]

How about all the times Stalin supposedly tried to resign, his objections to the cult of personality, etc.

[@My-nl6sg]

@@carlos_herrera Litarally the same argument could be made about Mao, who was against much of the bullshit that happened in his name. This might suggest that beurocratism was a runaway train way before either leaders even noticed it. Luckily, we comrades know this history very well now and would hopefully learn from it without having to experience this all over again.

[@private2809]

What specific works of Trotsky point to this?

[@Dsonsee]

@@private2809 Try "Revolution Betrayed". But it's also scattered here and there in many works

[@sphenodon2016]

one for the algorithm. love you viki, just subbed on patreon and happy to contribute to great content like this!

[@isaklindelov7566]

thank god this video came! been waiting on it

[@InDefenseOfToucans]

There is a lot of disinformation on Trotskyism on a whole, so I applaud you for attempting to take it on, however I think there is a lot wrong here saying this as a Trotskyist. Both a misunderstanding of vanguardism as well as how permanent revolution functions as a rejection of the two stage theory. It is on the basis of Russia's combined and uneven development of modern capitalist systems in the major cities while also the very underdeveloped country side that cause Trotsky to conclude that socialist revolution is possible because of the linkage of the Russian state with the international capitalist class, the Russian bourgeoisie was incapable of acting as a revolutionary class, and any attempt at a bourgeois revolution could not complete it leaving the peasants angry and this is what permits the workers to act as the leadership of the peasantry and to have a proletarian revolution that completes the tasks of the bourgeois revolution. You also repeat some myths that I have debunked with some of my videos like the comparison between Trotsky and Stalin's industrialization plans. Did Stalin "Steal" Trotsky's Economic Program? kzbin.info/www/bejne/ppWboHukbN6Bpck A Response To AlternativeHistoryHub's "What if Trotsky Came To Power Instead Of Stalin?" kzbin.info/www/bejne/o4G1XmOioNxrptU The scripts for both videos with the full citations(I cite all of my claims as a history channel" can be found here if you would rather read then listen to a video indefenseoftoucans.gitlab.io/

[@Dsonsee]

This is one comment that I think should be pinned. Thanks for your valuable work and research, comrade fellow bird

[@thechekist2044]

Did you actually link an Alternativehistory Hub video as an argument?

[@thechekist2044]

@@Dsonsee it really shouldn't

[@InDefenseOfToucans]

@@thechekist2044 No I didn't I did a long form response video I did to althistoryhub that touches on some of the same stuff Vikki brought up.

[@jacobsarvathayaparan2337]

@@thechekist2044 You didn't read his comment, he was referring ppl to his own videos that touch and expand on similar ideas.

[@formlessuk]

This is the first of your videos I have watched. I really enjoyed your delivery.

[@Deadpool021]

Just a small correction. You didn’t have to be a member of the communist party to be elected. You could run as an independent and independents consistently won seats throughout the USSR’s existence. The communist party always held a majority though so independents would usually be between 10-20% of the seats depending on the year. P.S. I am a marxist-Leninist and I really like your videos. A lot of other youtubers just insult us but you actually give a fair hearing to our view even if you don’t agree with a lot of it. I think this should be the standard on the left.

[@sinanbirol1053]

another video that slaps! keep it up viki

[@TempleOfUtopia]

Ohhh I was waiting for this, thanks for the video

[@712dal]

Respect to you for taking on what has been at times a controversial and divisive subject

[@justinwatson1510]

Excellent video. Hope lots of people find your channel.

[@daveyjones81]

Loved this, keep it up!

[@elijahweaver6397]

wow, so informational! thanks so much for all that you do.

[@elijahweaver6397]

i really liked when you said "wow so pog (could you tell I'm a zoomer?)"! Very funny XD

[@emanuele1107]

Thank you for the video, comrade 💕

[@charlizechurcher443]

Your videos are so informative! thx!

[@awesomecraftstudio]

I am a trotskyist and this Video was quite alright. Though trotzkism doesn't say that only members of the communist party can be elected. The first soviet government was a multi-party gov. Only parties (and their members) which had fought against the revolution were disallowed from participating in the elections.

[@GhoulishAdventure]

The Transitional Program is worth a read, and it’s a mistake to hand-wave the eventual assassination or imprisonment of every remaining original Bolshevik Party leader. Sometimes “doing the same thing differently” can avoid genocide. Maybe give The Revolution Betrayed a read if you like the Transitional Program. Just saying - this glossed over a very nuanced and complex moment in history and politics and I urge everyone to just read books and decide for themselves what these men stood for.

[@GhoulishAdventure]

As you implied, Trotskyism is essentially Leninism without Stalinist censorship (used to justify state oppression as socialist).

[@moofoogee]

Yet another great video witch taught me much. Not that you have an inkling to do this but I would love a t-shirt/hoodie with the slogan “Hello Everybody” with your avatar right next to it. 😀

[@AgulaDracula]

Thanks for the video, I like the series as it helps to systematise my knowledge on the topic. Btw, I know its irrelevant, but you look great!

[@jahsiahbowie1120]

Love the thumbnail...

[@LibertarianLeninistRants]

"I'm gonna do my own Internationale!"

[@vasilisioannou5794]

The internet one

[@danielzylberkan1587]

With blackjack and hookers!

[@tokevarvaspolvi8999]

@@danielzylberkan1587 in fact, forget about the Internationale! EDIT: and the blackjack!

[@56bluegold]

Good information Thanks for posting it!

[@dhrubaintisher8169]

The best explanation! Thank you my bro 🖤

[@k1ngeo805]

nice vid mate keep it up!

[@josephgodfrey8468]

Thumbs up for the treatment of the history. It's about the right length for my span of attention...

[@F100cTomas]

Thanks for keeping the picture

[@zukes6517]

Thanks for the video!

[@Cay30]

Very well made and concise video. Thank u

[@luc6284]

When I first started properly learning about Marxism I was surprised that Trotsky wasn't very well liked by ML's because at school Animal Farm told me that he was actually a cute little piggy or something Eh liberal education is so fucked

[@My-nl6sg]

the more you think about it the more liberal education is cRiNgE

[@lepidus2918]

Animal Farm is cringe

[@lepidus2918]

@@ManiacMayhem7256 1984 was an excellent one, yes

[@ghostninja5035]

The school wants you to read Animal Farm so you don't become a socialist, but they fail to tell you that Orwell was literally a socialist.

[@smokyondagrass2353]

@@ghostninja5035 And animal farm literally says the Bolshevik revolution was good. It's just that due to Stalin it went bad.

[@bigforestband]

Very informative. Thank you.

[@brandypride2942]

I love your voice. It’s so soothing

[@AnotherChampagneSocialist]

All my favorite Lenin quotes express his contempt for Trotsky lol

[@AnotherChampagneSocialist]

@@ManiacMayhem7256 Yeah but everyone knows about those and even self proclaimed Stalinists are usually more aware of his flaws than liberals.

[@AnotherChampagneSocialist]

@@ManiacMayhem7256 Well how about Universal Basic Housing? No other nation had ever done anything like that, and sure there were some serious flaws especially with Stalin's ideas for housing, but it was the first time in history a state organized workers to build housing for the public on a massive scale like that.

[@AnotherChampagneSocialist]

I think one of the reasons the 'Evil Communist Dictator' narrative is so pervasive, despite western leaders generally being equally as bad if not worse, is because talking about how evil Stalin was is a way to keep us from talking about whether or it's a government's duty to meet the basic needs of it's citizens. If a nation as poor and backwards as Russia could freely feed and house pretty much everyone what excuse does any other nation have for not doing so? We're meant to focus on the bad things Stalin did so that we don't recognize the good things we could be doing.

[@AnotherChampagneSocialist]

​@@ManiacMayhem7256 If that we true we'd give the same level of scrutiny to Winston Churchill, but let's face it, capitalists wrote the narrative and they decided to frame it like Stalin was uniquely evil and use the invocation of his name as a *thought terminating cliche* to limit discussion of the policies we could learn from. But the truth is for all the horrid things he did, he did a lot of really based things too, for each bad policy there are good policies we could learn a lot from if we were looking to rework and improve upon what the Soviet Union got right. Establishing a state workforce that doesn't answer to the private sector and is capable of mass infrastructure and construction projects might be worth considering. It might be worth considering that money isn't real and that arbitrary concerns about currency values don't accurately reflect what can actually be done with the resources we have available. It might be worth considering that if the poorest most backwards country in europe could somehow manage to feed and house and educate everyone and provide everyone with health care, any richer and more developed country should be able to do the same. And if we can't do the same, to ask "What's stopping us" We're meant to focus on Stalin being evil so we never ask "What's stopping us from achieving what the Soviet Union achieved with so much less?" If we start asking that we start coming up with answers that scare the people that think they benefit from the current system.

[@slenin8088]

Half true with some over simplified parts, like Trotsky didnt oppose Stalins ends but the way he did it. This is wrong because Stalin imposed somethings Trotsky originally wanted like mass industrialization, but with cooperation of peasants which Stalin Ignored with dekulakization.

[@slenin8088]

also the 3rd international summation and the 4th international summaries are completely wrong, this is basically a Wikipedia analysis of Trotskyism

[@hatinmyselfiscool2879]

Rich farmers that own land are peasants? You gotta explain that to me. Also, that‘s literally what he said.

[@slenin8088]

@@hatinmyselfiscool2879 Yes peasants were anyone who worked the land, the land owners (kulaks) hired workers to work the land but both were peasantry. And no I was saying the opposite of what they said.

[@hatinmyselfiscool2879]

@@slenin8088 i‘m pretty sure he mentioned multiple times in the video that stalin and trotsky‘s goals and programs were very similar.

[@slenin8088]

@@hatinmyselfiscool2879 and thats what I'm saying is wrong lol

[@Afrobriit]

Great video

[@dbdist1]

For whatever reason KZbin keeps recomending me this video even though I've already watched it twice.

[@merbst]

I would follow that handsome drawing anywhere!

[@transisomer5589]

Very cool video hope you are doing best comrade

[@StateoftheWorld]

Hey I just found your channel and I’m a fan, do you have a discord or something I could reach out to you on? I’d be interested in collabing

[@GrantWitherspoon]

1:48 “Trotsky was a strong supporter of Lenin” For a very long time, he was not. Trotsky was not a Bolshevik with Lenin until 1917- for more than a decade he was ideologically much closer to the opposed Menshevik party. The term Leninism, I believe *originated* with Trotsky and his circle way before the revolution- calling Lenin’s politics Leninism to attack it. (I may be confusing this with Rosa Luxemburg, if you have the deets feel free to correct me) His anti “socialism in one country” line went counter to what Lenin believed. Lenin hoped for other countries in Europe such as Germany to follow Russia in revolution, but he had to face reality when for a variety of reasons this simply didn’t happen.

[@BelleDividends]

Trotsky was only very briefly associated with the Mensheviks, like 1 or 2 years. He really struck out on his own and developed his own ideas. Where Trotsky developed the Permanent Revolution, in which the revolution would be made by an alliance of workers and peasant, but the workers would constitute ideologically the dominant part and would make a push for socialist take-over, the Mensheviks stayed with the classical Two-Stages theory. Lenin was literally in between those two: recognising the Russian capitalist class would not support a revolution like happened in France 1789, he broke from the two-stages theory and believed the revolution would be made by an alliance of workers and peasants, just like Trotsky believed, only Lenin remained very open to where the revolution would lead to. After the Februari Revolution of 1917, Lenin modified his ideas and developed his theory of the "Uninterrupted Revolution", which actually came very close to the Permanent Revolution of Trotsky.

[@geekyradical4985]

"Trotsky long ago said that unification (between the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks) is impossible. Trotsky understood this and from that time on there has been no better Bolshevik." -Vladimir Lenin, 1917. "The complete victory of the socialist revolution is unthinkable in one country, but demands the most active co-operation at least of several advanced countries." -Vladimir Lenin, 1918. "The first role occupied by the proletariat of Russia in the world labour movement is explained not by the industrial development of the country-just the opposite by the backwardness of Russia...the Russian proletariat is clearly aware that the necessary condition and fundamental premise of its victory is the united action of the workers of the whole world, or of several countries advanced in capitalist relations." -Vladimir Lenin, 1918. www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/ssf/sf08.htm Sorry you don't like the truth. LOL.

[@EmperorSephirothII]

One correction I would make, when you said, "running a country is probably harder than it looks." that's not even the half of it. Try running a country that is also despised and loathed by essentially everyone on the other side of the iron curtain....That's a lot of hostile people, and some of them have nuclear weapons too, have fun. :D

[@CIMAmotor]

The country was also despised by others on their side of the iron curtain too.

[@EmperorSephirothII]

@@CIMAmotor Yes, but I was referring more to the Russian Civil War and its immediate aftermath where capitalist countries tried to gangbang Soviet Russia.

[@leonidasperez]

Great video 👍

[@Jackzay90]

I've learned so much from your videos.

[@marcofrank6542]

Love it!

[@-xphobia]

Third bullet point "Soviets are based" and all tankies nod furiously in unison.

[@julianjanssen5499]

I'm not sure if I ever saw Viki until this video.

[@robertjensen501]

Thanks!

[@johnpurser2798]

Thank you so much for your work in this field. I came late to communism as I started off as a (USA) two time Reagan voter. To put things mildly, I had a way to go to get to where I am today. I just watched your videos on Marxism, Leninism, and now Trotskyism in sequence and for the first time I think I understand the difference. For a while I've been wondering why some Communist absolutely HATE "Trotskyists" when in fact none of them could tell me what MADE a Trotskyist. I think I get it now. Again, much appreciated and I'll be working my way through your videos. Your one on how the USSR worked was the first time anyone EVER explained that to me. Well done!

[@Crucial47]

What would you consider yourself now?

[@comradefreedom8275]

I also heard that Trotsky was also very fanatical and annoyed other socialists with his fanaticism, even in his own party. I heard that most of the people in his party didn't like him much. Anyway, good video.

[@DITOGaming]

Apparently true yes. He was a fanatical communist, believed strongly in the ideas etc. I think it's important to remove the person from their ideas a lot of the time, theory of permanent revolution has merit some of Trotskys actions were.... Questionable

[@comradefreedom8275]

@@DITOGaming I'm not surprised. Well, I'm an anarchist.

[@DITOGaming]

@@comradefreedom8275 then you'll be well aware of his actions against anarchists which were less than ideal, a compromise could have been reached there which was mutually beneficial. I'm a Trotskyist but I'd support left unity over sectarianism.

[@comradefreedom8275]

@@DITOGaming I understand. Yeah, I heard both Trotsky and Lenin committed acts against anarchists that weren't exactly kind. Though I'm hoping they don't reflect the Leninists and Trotskyists of today.

[@DITOGaming]

@@comradefreedom8275 they don't as far as I've seen. We've all got the same goals just different ways of achieving them.

[@Vivacious_Lenin]

Thanks Vikki

[@johnnysalter7072]

Thank you.

[@brentoneccles]

Even that initial painting of October, putting Stalin behind Lenin, in front of Trotsky, is a lie.

[@delve_]

Trotsky walked so J. Posadas could run (out of the nuclear silo carrying five nukes on his back).

[@fenceyhen4249]

"I have no idea what I'm talking about but here's my video explanation anyway" 😭 thanks comrade

[@Brunogriffin96]

Based AF, Viki, you're awesome!

[@Thatshaneboy]

I would be curious to hear you explain Marxist-De Leonism, based on the theories and movement of Daniel De Leon in the United States, which was rather prominent in the early 1900s. His socialism was a Marxist Syndicalism of sorts.

[@fenceyhen4249]

Uhhh

[@cs.flippz9152]

dead ideology

[@Kriegerdammerung]

As a Trotskyist myself, this video is good, but Trotsky was more than simply a critique, he was founder and first commander of the Red Army. He led troops in situ, and apparently was competent in this regard.

[@MalleusImperiorum]

He was not a commander, he was in charge of organization stuff. Nor was he a founder, as when the Army was actually founded, he was in Brest, negotiating with Germans. At that time he was a commissar of foreign affairs. The "first" guy was actually Nikolai Podvoisky.

[@orionlavinmartinez3186]

I'm actually curious now about whether KZbin automatically puts ads in videos now, because at about the 10 minute mark I think I got an ad, but at the end she said that she doesn't do ads?

[@CleanupKrew7]

Ohhhhhh shiiiiiiiit. ITS HERE!!!!!!!!!

[@ThreatGirlAlexandra]

"My videos don't have ads because I don't like ads" Absolutely world class ideals

[@asantexaba533]

Talk about the trotskyist to neocon pipeline

[@peternyc]

Thank you so much. You videos are so valuable. We are starved for education. Your topics consistently hit the "target" issues that we have questions about. You have an excellent feel for what others need. Thank you again.

[@sumsarsiranen]

Had no idea what Trotskyism was about, thanks.

[@eancycler1112]

Your voice sounds really pretty in this video!

[@emilpiesold7]

great vid. Do you have a particular ideology you prescribe to viki?

[@carlos_herrera]

She has made a 'vikism' video

[@T--T]

these are really good educational vids, keep up the good work!

[@DanteM-um6fe]

instant sub

[@AlbertSirup]

thanks for the video - I'm a bit torn about what you said about Lenin's testament - could you share some sources about that? as far as i understand, Lenin's opinion on Stalin changed in his last year, possibly due to the Georgian affair. But would be great to read some proper historical research on that.

[@asdqwe8837]

gooood one comrade. i always forget why there is a split! haha i think trotskyists and stalinists should just kiss and hug.

[@mauricecooper8786]

I’m a trot and I literally agree. We’re more similar than we’d like to admit I think.

[@fenceyhen4249]

No fauk stalinism and fauk stalinists

[@namydad6547]

as a Trotskyist i love this Video chefs kiss goodjob you're channel is a godsent

[@jonathaslopes8038]

I onow that your Profile pic is a nime charcter, but what is his(or her) name?

[@edward9862]

Bravo New sub!

[@MrCram]

Good video

[@muslimsocialist9310]

I'm a fan of both Trotsky and Stalin to a degree. Both had good points. Both had their mistakes. In the end both were great Communists. And its a shame Leftists fight over it. Let's work and achieve Socialism in our lifetime today. Great video comrade..If I had money I'd donate..

[@bradpaynedesigns]

Yes, I agree comrade, Stalin should have killed more people.