@Deleted User If there is one thing they are good at, it is preventing a civil war.

Which details *FUCKING MOWING PEOPLE DOWN*

No they don't @Deleted User

Maoism is revisionist

"failed to bring communism to china"

That's not how it works

@gay#2771 That's exactly how it works, they were socialists who ultimate goal is to bring communism to china? Did they succeed in doing that in any way? Not at all.

There is always room for improvement in Marxism. First worldism is a valuable critique of the shortcomings of 'Socialism in One Country'. Stalin later abandoned the idea of revolution in other nations.

Communism is a historical phase

You can't have it within the borders of a single country, especially not one in a world dominated by capitalism

and especially not one that is peasant based

I'm not sure what your point is.

@Deleted User But the thing is that, whenever it is tried, it has to be abandoned or totally changed from the core to prevent total collapse and civil war.

@gay#2771 What?

You probably have little understanding of marxism

@Deleted User Well, in Marxist Leninist theory, Socialism comes first, not Communism.

I don't think either of you know what you're talking about

And Stalin's Socialism was pretty effective.

>stalins socialism

You mean commodity production and law of value socialism?

right

Depends on your definition.

It is an important historical precedent though.

North korea had to totally rework it to the point where it is no longer identifyable as socialism or communism, all of the south asian countries that attempted it went back to capitalism, cuba is capitalist again, and the USSR spectacularly collapsed after every single one of their european and asian occupied countries declared independance in the span of a few years.

The USSR had market reforms in the late 1980s, it wasn't an instant transition

That's actually not unexpected in Marxist theory. Lenin said Socialism was a tendency, not an instant global transformation.

And capitalism reacts with more and more monopolisation.

And state-capitalism.

@Deleted User *Trotsky becomes enraged as he hears this*

I am talking from the Soviet perspective. Trotsky is a footnote of history.

Trotsky never advocated for an instant global revolution

Footnote? He was set to become leader after lenin until stalin came in and fucked his shit up.

Just that the revolution cannot continue within a single nation

If Trotsky was right, another one like him will return.

No, he was not set to become leader

Neither was stalin

That's not how it worked

@gay#2771 Except he kind of did, he publically stated many times that he wanted the revolution to spread globally as fast as possible and did so by funding socialist uprisings in places like germany.

They weren't heirs to a throne

@Deleted User We will see about that.

Indeed.