spectre [he/him]

  • 5 Posts
  • 230 Comments
Joined 5 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 25th, 2020

help-circle







  • To put it one way (oversimplified): Lenin died sooner than anyone would have hoped. Both Trotsky and Stalin had a claim that they would be the successor to Lenin. Stalin ended up winning out.

    Trotsky and Stalin had some political disagreements that were relevant to the development of the ussr in the 1920s/30s, but (imo) are hardly relevant outside of that scope. Their disagreement eventually ended up with Trotsky being exiled. Trotsky and his backers were critical of a lot of Stalin’s decisions as the leader of the ussr, generally claiming that Trotsky and co would have been more capable (and in some ways less “authortarian”).

    From what I understand, most modern interpretations are something loke “if Trotsky were in charge instead of Stalin, it probably wouldn’t not have made as much of a difference as Trotskyists claim. They would have faced some tough decisions, and not everything was left up to the whims of Stalin all the time. Easy to be critical of power when you don’t have power, though”.

    If you want to learn more about what Trotsky/Trotskyists thought on a more theoretical le el, I’d leave that up to someone else, but you can ask you’ll LLM of choice or read the wiki about “permanent revolution” to get some basic info on where they diverge.








  • Now, yes, but previously it was Christianity with feudal/monarchist characteristics (thinking church of England and such), and before that it was Christianity with early enlightenment characteristics (Martin Luther).

    Because there’s not a central authority it is now adaptable to the social structures around it. In the modern day it is predominantly [settler] colonial flavored.

    Since it is prone to splintering you see denominations like the Quakers adapting to pacifism and and simple lifestyle/spiritual practice. You see black churches that have a liberationary message. Ofc they are in the minority.