Recently reading “How the Steel Was Tempered,” I saw the contradiction between Pavel and Dubov, and I learned that this is a contradiction between Trotskyism and Stalinism. I looked up Trotskyism on Baidu and pasted below:
“The theory of continuous revolution” is the core of this ideological trend. Its basic view is that it does not recognize the revolutionary potential of the peasantry and the possibility of establishing a worker-peasant alliance. During the democratic revolution, it ignores the democratic revolutionary demands of the peasants, denies the bourgeois nature of the revolution, and advocates skipping the democratic revolution stage to directly carry out the socialist revolution; on the issue of socialist revolution, it opposes Lenin’s theory that the socialist revolution can be victorious in one country, and advocates that the socialist revolution can only be victorious in the main countries of Europe (Britain, Russia, Germany, etc.) forming a European federation; otherwise, the victory of socialism is completely impossible. Even if the proletariat in one country wins the revolution and establishes its own government, without direct support from the European proletarian revolution, it will be isolated and helpless, and the dictatorship of the proletariat will inevitably perish.
And the Stalinist view is:
The socialist revolution can start in one country, proceed in various countries, and be completed on a global scale, but it does not believe that the socialist revolution can end because it is built in one country.
I would like to ask, why are Trotskyist theories wrong? Why is a world revolution impossible?
Trotsky’s theory of continuous revolution, which includes the “continuity” of democratic revolution, socialist revolution, and international revolution. The characteristic of Trotsky’s theory is "left"ist, aiming to achieve the abolition of revolution by pushing things to extremes.
The so-called continuity of democratic revolution means that during the democratic revolution stage, one must complete the task in one go, claiming that democratic revolution and socialist revolution can be accomplished simultaneously. Without uniting the peasants, uniting the national bourgeoisie, or concentrating efforts to fight feudal compradors and imperialism, the ultimate result will only be the proletariat being eliminated in isolation. Mao Zedong said that during the bourgeois revolution stage, the revolutionary leading class is the working class, the main force of revolution is the peasantry, and the main issue is land.
The so-called continuity of socialist revolution means that during the socialist period, not only must the bourgeoisie’s ownership be infringed upon, but also the petty private ownership must be more deeply attacked. Trotsky denied the revolutionary nature of the peasants, especially the broad masses of poor and lower-middle peasants, claiming they would inevitably be in conflict with the working class, so they must be deprived of all their property. But this would destroy the worker-peasant alliance, placing peasants and workers in opposition, and with the incitement of the bourgeoisie, they could easily overthrow the proletarian dictatorship.
The so-called continuity of international revolution states that because the proletariat cannot establish an alliance with the peasantry, in order not to be isolated, the proletariat in one country must rely on the international stage, especially on the proletariat in economically developed regions of Europe, to launch simultaneous revolutions for socialist success. If they cannot be launched simultaneously, then there should be no revolution at all. This denies Lenin’s assertion in “Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism” that political and economic development among imperialist countries is unbalanced, leading to weak links, and that socialism can first triumph in one country.
Furthermore, he claimed that even if socialist countries succeed in revolution, they must immediately and continuously launch world revolutions, which is completely nonsense. First, in countries where revolution has just succeeded, the counterattack by the bourgeoisie is very fierce. Without ongoing struggle, the regime will soon be lost. Also, revolutions cannot be imported or exported; the victory of revolutions in other countries can only rely on the vanguard of other nations, awakening the political consciousness of the proletariat, and uniting the major classes of society for success.
There is also no such thing as “Spartacism”; this was fabricated by Trotskyists. We only speak of revolutionary and opportunist factions.
Thank you, I feel it is somewhat similar to gatekeepingism, both are about not uniting with those who can be united, resorting to extremism, which ultimately leads to oneself being isolated and eliminated.
They did it on purpose, deliberately sabotaging the revolution. The Trotskyist faction’s bad deeds are obvious in China; after Chen Duxiu, they fell into Trotskyism. During the Japanese invasion of China, they engaged in helping Japan invade China, inciting people’s awareness, which became the most shameless traitorous act. At that time, they even tried to sway Lu Xun, who mocked them and exposed that they were accepting Japanese yen.
Qu Qiubai also did this; he proposed burning farmers’ houses, pushing them toward revolution, which was completely sabotage.
Trotskyism is about deliberately causing destruction; they aim to escalate conflicts to make the revolution fail. The so-called “world revolution” advocated by Trotskyists is actually about forcing socialist regimes to violate objective conditions and the principle of national self-determination of the world’s people, blindly provoking the still-powerful capitalist world, enticing socialist regimes into a joint encirclement by imperialist forces, and then seizing power when socialist regimes are overthrown by internal and external counterrevolutionary forces, usurping the party and government. Trotskyists are such insidious, treacherous, two-faced counterrevolutionaries and traitors.
Historically, there have been many such actions, all quite classic. For example, during the French Revolution, the Girondins, in pursuit of their own external expansion and the colonization of other countries, advocated “export of revolution” and the establishment of so-called “sister republics” plans, relying on France as a single nation to oppose the feudal forces of Europe. At this time, Louis XVI and other feudal landlords still occupying France bizarrely declared support for the Girondins’ “export of revolution,” and Louis XVI personally declared war on the feudal states of Europe. The reason why these feudal landlords supported the revolution so unusually was to incite capitalist France to provoke European feudal forces, providing Europe’s feudal states with an excuse to jointly suppress the French bourgeois revolution, thereby overthrowing the bourgeois regime established during the French Revolution, and using bayonets to support Louis XVI’s restoration of feudal forces and the re-establishment of feudal rule in France.
In fact, what resulted from this was Cixi, and the next imperial decree of declaring war on all nations was actually a way to borrow foreign imperialist help to suppress the Boxers. In the end, it was only under the joint suppression of Chinese and foreign reactionaries that the Boxer Movement failed.
It’s not that the world revolution is impossible, but that Trotskyism’s world revolution is impossible. They demand a world revolution that challenges imperialism worldwide when Soviet Russia is just emerging and still very weak, without considering the relative strength of both sides. Moreover, a country’s liberation ultimately depends on its own people initiating the uprising; socialist regimes are not established through the bayonets of great powers. The mistake of excluding peasants is even more obvious; Marx pointed out that if workers’ struggles lack support from peasants, then “it will inevitably turn into a solo lament in all peasant countries.” Socialist countries can only succeed by uniting the majority of the masses; excluding peasants is equivalent to strengthening the enemy and weakening oneself. Therefore, Trotskyism’s theory is flawed.