Trotsky vs Stalin or Lenin vs Trotksy ?

Antonio Mota antonio_mota at geocities.com
Thu Oct 3 10:00:19 MDT 1996


Hugh Rodwell wrote:
>
> Antonio thinks:
>
> >It seems all the antagonism between those two lines goes back to the
> >antagonism between the "internationalist" and the "socialism in one
> >country" approach of the revolution. However, this  antagonism had begun
> >not with Trotsky vs Stalin but precisely with Lenin vs Trotsky, and goes
> >back, at least, to the Brest-Litovsk peace treat (tratado?)(3 March
> >1918).
>
> There is no way the treaty Brest-Litovsk marks any special turning point in
> the development of internationalist or one-country positions in the
> Bolshevik leadership.
>

Hi Hugh.

Thanks for your reply. What I was trying to say is that the
Brest-Litovsk treaty implies the recognition of the *inexistence of
material conditions* for a internationalization of a revolution based on
the self strenght of the Russian new regime. Thus, a choice have to be
made. To unsuccessful try to export the revolution or go ahead in the
way of socialism where it can be achieved, namelly in Russia.

The antagonism here is not between "internalitionalism" vs "one
country". If you ask any marxist if he/she like to see a global
socialism, he/she certanly say yes. The question is, given the
*inexistence of material conditions* for a internationalization of a
revolution, should we or should we not support the development of
socialism *where there is such conditions*, beeing in one country, or
two what whatsoever.

The afirmative was the choice of Lenin, followed by Stalin. It was not
the one of Trotsy. I suppose it is not yours too.

Regards.
Antonio Mota

P.S. Again, excuse my bad english.




     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---




More information about the Marxism mailing list