Saturday, September 23, 2006

Trotskyism, a defeatist path

This post entails the text of my discussion against the counter-revolutionary ideology of Trotskyism.

Trotskyism, a defeatist path

Is the inherent defeatism in the above theory not clear to you? Permanent revolution would say that if a revolution occurs in Pakistan, and doesn't spread to India, and other countries, it will be dead, revolution will fail. It must also be clear, according to law of uneven development of capitalism, that it is not objectively necessary that revolution in Pakistan will cause a simultaneous revolution in India.

If the revolution didn't occur in Germany in the first quarter of the last century, inspite of a vibrant revolutionary workers' movement present there, what could Lenin have done? Should the leadership of USSR had announced that the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, the heroic struggle of workers and peasants of USSR, has failed and there is no point in building a better lifestyle?

We, CMKP, reject defeatism. If workers and peasants can defeat the forces of capitalism and imperialism in their country, then very well, they can also build socialism in their country.

Nevertheless, the final victory of socialism, that is the ultimate defeat of capitalism and imperialism all over the world, is possible only with the world revolution. However, that doesn't mean that revolution can't exist on one country.

Lalbadhsha (trotskyite) wrote, "i want to suggest the upper leadership of CMKP please guide your comrades in better way and Not just idealists but also be a little more practical, Leave luxury rooms and come between people then tell whats going on and that time ur Stalian Theory will see how it effective ."

My Reply:

Writing out it in bold will not make it correct. The leadership of CMKP has facilitated a detailed study of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and other great Marxist-Leninist. Therefore, the members of CMKP have the ability to impart correct and accurate understanding of Marxism-Leninism to the working masses.

Let me ask you a question? If the members of CMKP have never left their "luxury rooms", then how are they able to form an alliance with All Pakistan Trade Union Federation, the largest trade union front in Pakistan; Working Women's Organization, one of the very few women workers' front; Anjuman Mazareen Punjab, the militant landless peasant organization of Okara; and Bhutta Mazdoor Ittehad, the brick kiln labour front that has been fighting for their rights since 1967.

In additing to this, those members of CMKP who are living in "luxury rooms" have been conducting study circles among industrial workers for years.

Moreover, I must warn you that personal remarks don't suit a Marxist. If you want to launch personal slanders, then stop calling yourself a Marxist.


Che Guevara

"It is very clear for anyone who has even touched the economic works of Che Guevara that he took a very clear anti-Trotskyite position:"In Cuba there is nothing published, if one excludes the Soviet bricks, which bring inconvenience that they do not let you think, the party did it for you and you should digest it.It would be necessary to publish that complete works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and other great Marxists.Here would come to the great revisionists (if you want you can add here Khurschez), well analyzed, more professionally than any other and also your friend Trotsky, who existed and apparently wrote something."

(Che Guevara, Letter to Armando Hart Davalos published in Contracorriente, Havana, September 1997, N9; quoted by Bruce Mellado, Che Guevara and Political Economy of Socialism, Revolutionary Democracy, Vol. XI, No. 1, p. 94)


Leninist Internatinalism

"There is one, and only one, kind of real internationalism, and that is -- working whole-heartedly for the development of the revolutionary movement and the revolutionary struggle in one's own country, and supporting (by propaganda, sympathy, and material aid) this struggle, this, and only this, line, in every country without exception."-Lenin


I would ask the Trotskyites present on this forum, while hoping against hope, to answer my following question in lucid and clear terms:

The proletarian revoltionary movement didn't succeed in Germany after the World War One, depite of the vibrant struggle of workers led by remarkable figures like Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. October revolution was not followed by a revolution in Germany or over-throw of capitalists in any other Western European country. This, as we know, is history. Now, what could Lenin have done after the failure of German revolution, if at all, merely for the sake of arugment, socialism can not develop in one country?


Renegade Eye said...

"The complete victory of the socialist revolution is unthinkable in one country, for it requires the most active cooperation, of atleast several advanced countries, which Russia cannot be classed". Lenin Sochineya Vol xxviii (1950 edition) P.150

The most honest answer is that Lenin didn't live long enough, to know the extent of Russia's isolation. He really didn't have an opinion that mattered, because the full debate occured after he died.

Umer A. Chaudhry said...

The quotation provided by Lenin is correct, and I am in full agreement with him on this issue. Had you read my essay more carefully, you would have noticed the following lines:

"Nevertheless, the final victory of socialism, that is the ultimate defeat of capitalism and imperialism all over the world, is possible only with the world revolution. However, that doesn't mean that revolution can't exist on one country."

It should become clear that defenders of 'Socialism in one country' don't discount that the complete victory of socialism can only be secured by the world revolution.

Furthermore, Lenin had a very clear stance on the question of socialism in one country. His position is clear from his writings on this subject. It would be grossly erroneous to state that the debate occured after his death. This debate was existant much before 1917, though it became a focal issue after the October revolution. The failure of much anticipated German revolution multiplied the relevance of a discourse dealing with the question of 'socialism on one country.'

Umer A. Chaudhry said...


Here is a webpage which entertains the position taken by Lenin on the question of 'socialism in one country':

It also has a brief reply to the Lenin's quotation posted by you:

"Anyone who tries to use this quote to prove Lenin supported Trotsky's Permanent Revolution theory is being deceptive and dishonest because he or she is failing to state what follows these comments. The above quote used by Trots is a typical example of taking words out of context."

You can read the detail on the website.

After reading this webpage, you must realize that your proposition that Lenin "really didn't have an opinion that mattered" is completely ill-founded and inaccurate.

For the cause,