Trotsky’s expectation that World War II would lead to the toppling of Stalin and the restoration of a true workers’ state in the U.S.S.R. never, of course, materialized. Guess handing over half of Poland and millions of Polish Jews into the waiting maw of Nazism isn't collaborating with fascism, nor is sharing important military technology with them.Ultimately it comes down to this: What is more easy to believe? They were all devout Communists. It offers similarities with Trotsky or even more with Lenin. I am going to focus on the second claim, but to debunk the first claim that Trotsky would have been for Stalin being overthrown by Hitler. Also if you liked this post you can find more things dunking and going over various historical misconceptions.
Under these conditions, partisans of the Fourth International, without changing in any way their attitude toward the Kremlin oligarchy, will advance to the forefront as the most urgent task of the hour, the military resistance against Hitler. Now if you have never heard of him you without a doubt have talked to citing his information or positions. Lenin had 3 people who he absolutely trusted: Yakov Sverdlov, Josef Stalin and Leon Trotsky. The weirdest thing with all of this and what blows my mind, is that Furr admits he had no evidence but claims that proves the conspiracy or something. Lenin may have made an agreement with Germany, Stalin made an agreement with Hitler. I suppose that Lenin took this Jew only because he had no one else. That a Jewish Marxist who played a key role in the only successful workers revolution in history and openly and consistently opposed fascism was actually a secret Nazi, or that the dictator who sent him into exile, purged him from the historical record, and then had him assassinated was quite possibly lying?Why would a Jewish Marxist ever collaborate with rabid antisemites, and why would they ever collaborate with someone who they consider the literal fountain of all evil?
The Lenin-Trotsky problem is not quite clear to me yet. So first some background context, many biographers of Stalin spend a lot of time debating his ethnicity and parentage, so Trotsky opens with discussing this. "On March 21, 1929: "Yesterday evening I was awake for a long time reading Trotsky's The Real Situation in Russia. There is, therefore, no greater crime than deceiving the masses, palming off defeats as victories, friends as enemies, bribing workers’ leaders, fabricating legends, staging false trials, in a word, doing I am sure many of you are not ignorant of this claim, that Trotsky, worked with the Nazis to overthrow the Soviet Union. During the military struggle against Hitler, the revolutionary workers will strive to enter into the closest possible comradely relations with the rank and file fighters of the Red Army. Citing this far too cursory opinion, Elisée Reclus expressed the altogether sound surmise that the difference might he due not to nationality but rather to social causes—the f act that the Georgian students came from backward villages while the Armenians were the children of the city bourgeoisie. '"8 He cites in his favor the lack of documentation for "the successful conspiracy against Lavrentii Beria," which "must have involved at least half a dozen men." Therefore it would be unjustified to account for the absence of oratorical ability in Stalin by citing his national origin. A book very interesting and all the more instructive that here this vain and destitute Jew tells half of the truth. For instance, historians and scholars have been working in the archives of Nazi Germany for decades and found nothing to prove the existence of a vast conspiracy. I also want to point out that Trotsky mostly does not write in English, and so was not even using that word when he was quoting someone else. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We believe that the single most likely reason is simply that no one should expect a conspiracy like this to be documented anywhere, ever, much less “in archives.” The demands of secrecy and security require that such information be exchanged only by word of mouth.”4 In my opinion, this does not hold water for the following reason:Every conspiracy that has existed has left behind a paper trail of one sort or another (ex. It operates in Trotsky’s name, and is causing Stalin plenty of trouble””Now we work with three clandestine radio stations in Russia: first Trotskyist, the second separatist, third Russian-nationalists, all criticise Stalinism. The Wannsee Conference which organized the Holocaust, Watergate, Iran-contra, etc), despite their best efforts to remain secret, with various types of documentation which prove their existence (memos, receipts, reports, etc.).
"Trotsky says its unjustified to claim Stalin is bad at speaking by talking of his national origin. Visit our © 2020 National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved.
I am going to quote from Trotsky's Biography of Stalin what he actually says, you should not take my word for this please got read it, if anyone had read this section this whole myth never would have came about. However, no evidence has come to light from the archives of any of these countries to substantiate these extraordinary claims. Grover Furr is an Medieval English Professor who is an amateur historian, nothing inherently wrong with being that. For the world revolution! He relies on a sympathetic ear and an unwillingness to actually follow up on sources to be taken seriously by anybody." Please try againPostmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles.