Same here 🫡 unfortunately back in the day my high school used to have a very large na*i cu*t not just in the school but in the neighbourhood where my school is situated (and parents were also involved) so nowadays a lot of people in my school identify as “capitalist” which is stupid cuz these kids don’t even own capital ☠️ but doesnt surprise me these people go from “fascist” to “capitalist” Needs to be a change in the curriculum, way too liberalised at least from what my experience has been, Paulo Freire’s view on this especially in his Pedagogy of the oppressed (which is a good book) explains this well by saying a lot on how education works out to be (he describes teachers like bank clerks, and states that oppression comes with things like a very uncritical educational model) but I do recommend this book to any young socialist, ML/MLM… I got it recommended to by my dad and also glad that my family on his side are leftists/socialists too, so W’s for that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Young Communists...bravo..armed with a different way of looking at life and society. Some hope for future generation to break free of stale and failed stereotype thinking.
This was me with Lenin because I read him before Marx LOL, I had zero clue what he was talking abt in like State and Revolution or Imperialism highest stage of capitalism… was just nodding my head to absolutely everything 😭
Great episode. It's especially nice to hear as someone who joined back in high school a few years ago and build the first branch in my city together with class mates that joined after discussing Communism and Marxism.
That’s based, I’m still in high school, and I’m one to be surrounded by many kids who consider themselves “capitalists”, even though they own no capital ☠️ like most other schools though they teach about these sorts of stuff from a very liberal/shilling for capitalism sort of way.. which only makes these people think more onto the mainstream fabricated path that the system wants them to believe in.
O young communist, you are doing good. But I want to say something about the need of present. What to be done ? Now in US n world going to high to high in technology. Now the surplus value grow more and more.So its need of now a strong international Communist organisation. Now there must be slogan of working class short working day, 6 hours beside 8 hours. It may be 4 hours demand because there is huge unemployment n exploitation of proletarian class.
Communism v. capitalism is not the final dialectic, and nor is it the best narrative to combat capitalism. Much has changed since Marx. Remember kids, be open to new ideas always.
Oh sweet summer child. I acknowledge that the current governing and economic systems are not perfect, just as no economic nor governing system is, and although I applaud all of you for attempting to manufacture change rather than letting current troubles persist, I feel compelled to respectfully pose a few questions and present a few counter points, just as some food for thought. My questions will be predicated on the assumption that you, the reader, have actually done your research on the topic and are not just nodding your head and agreeing to whoever sounds the most relatable or persuasive, that is not only the communist manifesto, but also historical examples of these ideals in practice as no true intellectual supports an idea without first subjecting it to as much scrutiny from outside perspectives as humanly possible to see if it hold up. Firstly, it seems that the opinions in this video seem to confuse the ramifications of capitalism, which is an economic mode of operandi, versus the ramifications of democracy or democratic republics, which are a form of government. Understandable, as they are not entirely divorced concepts in practice, but an important distinction nonetheless as the effects of one does not strictly reflect on the other, as communism does. Reason I bring this up is because several of the grievances pointed out in the video were related to political failing, such as foreign wars and domestic civil rioting, rather than shortcomings of free market trade. These political issues, as described by the speakers, seem to stem from either corruption or administrative incompetence in one form or another, as although democratic representatives are given the autonomy to act on our behave, their actions must still remain in line with the desires of their constituency, that being us as the governed body. Their failure to act accordingly and their persistence in perpetuating unpopular policy for so long thusly shows their corruption and/or incompetence. Now, having so stipulated that a consolidation of power into designated representatives perpetuates unpopular actions to the detriment of the governed body, my question is this: why do you believe that a further consolidation of power, which is how communism historically has always played out by design, would alleviate this issue instead of worsen it? Although in theory, the letter of the text dictates that power is decentralized across all the people evenly, this has never worked in practice as the monarchy, oligarchy, republic, etc. is replaced by the party representatives, who even if they are elected, are usually not fairly elected, such as in the DPRK, who even though they have elections, never have more than one option to choose from. Personally, although I share no love for the anarchists either, having seen government corruption and incompetence destroy the home countries of my parents, so much so that they both fled for economic and political reasons, I don’t see how putting more power in the hands of the government is a worthwhile solution, even on that claims to be by and for the working class. Secondly, as far as I understand it from my own studies, communism dictates the forceful removal of personal property and governmental control over manufacturing and industry, then assumes that because of this centralized control that all industries will suddenly become hyper productive, enough so to outpace the efficiency of the free market so that everyone’s needs are met and no one goes hungry. My question: in the absence of competition within the market, as well as the removal of monetary incentive to promote innovation and efficiency, how do you propose to make said industry hyper productive? While a free market promotes competition which forces innovation and efficiency by necessity, otherwise they be bankrupted by competitors offering more affordable goods, bureaucracy holds no such initiative. While I agree that it’s not a perfect system and sometimes companies sprout up to form monopolies, which is a small scale communistic practice in that it is a consolidation of power within that industry attained by driving out competition, these practices are outlawed and even when the government fails to uphold the law, the power still remains in the consumer as we can choose to boycott and the market retains the freedom to sprout new companies to meet the needs and desires of these disgruntled masses. On the other hand, bureaucracy offers no such alternative, it is either their way or the highway and we just have to hope that they remain honest and continue to serve our best interest. A few examples to illustrate this point: anyone who has ever been to the DMV can agree that they aren’t the most efficient and expedient organization. The postal service was notorious for losing packages until FedEx and UPS entered the scene, and now Amazon is giving all of them a run for their money with its speed and efficiency. Every time I go to the VA clinic, I have to wait 2 hours just to have my blood drawn, I have to clear my schedule for the day just to have a check up. Hundreds of millions have died across the former Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Latin America, and Southeast Asia due to starvation because the communist controlled agricultural industry couldn’t keep up with the needs of the people. I could keep going with examples, but the point I make is that so far, the free markets of capitalism is doing more to combat issues like poverty and climate change through promoting innovation such as wealth creation through investment capital, drones that clean trash from our waterways autonomously, mushrooms that eat plastic in landfills, etc., than communism could ever hope to achieve. Not to diminish the honest efforts of state run organizations, like the military, which facilitated the creation of things like cellphones and the internet, an empirical side by side comparison would suggest that capitalism is the path to achievement, while the only notable accomplishment of communism is acquiring a body count big enough to put Mother Nature to shame. Finally, to whomever has read to this point, I congratulate you for having retained an open mind enough to hear me out. I do not intend to dissuade you from your current philosophy, as that is a journey we must all contend with on our own, but I leave you with a little anecdote. My father grew up in Guatemala during their civil war against the communist guerrillas, this was back when the Cold War was indeed very hot. He grew up poor, and despite being a talented soccer player, he answered his patriotic duty and enlisted in the Guatemalan Army to serve his country. He was young, angry, and naive enough that he thought he could Rambo his way into bringing peace and prosperity to his country. Eventually, his time was up, and having witnessed the atrocities committed by both sides, having seen the crimes against humanity that neighbor could do to neighbor, brother tearing apart brother, all in the name differing ideologies, he took his papers and walked. Growing up, hearing his stories from those times, he never disparaged the communists he fought, nor supported them either, not an ounce of hate lays on that man’s heart, despite having lost friends and family. He only ever warned me of how horrible people can act against each other when they think they are on the right side of history, until it is too late to realize that no one is. To this day he lives with that guilt over the things he did, the shame over the man he used to be, when he was young and dumb enough to think he knew everything, arrogant and foolish enough to think he could save the world. I hope his cautionary tale guides you toward temperance and wisdom as it guides me. The reason I bring up this unfortunate bit of history is because as far as I can decipher, this is exactly what the communist manifesto demands, a call to arms for violent revolution. This is step 1 in the proverbial 3 step plan. Romantic notions of revolution and rebellion sound inspiring in the moment, but when you’re standing over a mass grave, left with only a shell of who you were before, unable to even look yourself in the mirror anymore while you drink to forget, you start to contemplate whether it was really worth it, suddenly you wonder if we couldn’t just talk it out instead. Anyways, just some food for thought. Hope y’all stay safe and have a good one nonetheless.
My mother, aeons ago, told me that communism was such that you were told what you are going to be in the vocational sense. It was decided for you as to what you are going to do.
Real Socialism, the fight for a Communist society, requires it to be an international effort. If the Socialist Revolution becomes isolated, as it has happened all along the past century in Russia, Cuba, Venezuela etc... it is doomed to fail. World Socialist Revolution will unleash the means of production and, after the defeat of the bourgeoisie in each and every single state, the road to Communism will become free to follow. It will be the society of the super-abundance. Planned economy. Production for consumption of the people, not profit.
Almost all of your points are simply wrong. I'll try to elaborate but keep in mind that english is not my mother tongue. 1) You simply cannot seperate the economic basis of a society from its political superstructure. In our case, the bourgeois republics and their electorial, representational, parliamentary democracies can not be seperated from capitalism as their economic basis. That is not only because of todays constitutions of those republics, which defend the property relations, private property, free markets etc. and set them as the essential, unchangeable basis for society. To say that it was just by coincidence that this form of democracy came to be (and still is) while at the same time capitalism began to manifest itself as the economic system of society, would be more than laughable. For this we need a short history lesson. The differences in feudalist societies were based on legal formulas, where the nobles had more rights than peasants and Bürgers. The law was the primary factor for the hierarchical organisation of society and property. As the economy developed, markets came to be and became supraregional, the Bürgers (small to large property owners) became the strongest societal force not in the sense of size, although the Bürgertum grew, but mainly because of economic power. These became the owners of private property and in the revolutions of the late 18th and 19th century the Bürgers didn't want a monarch or someone else that was, by law, above them but rather take their "righteous" place as the ruling class based on their real property ownership. Division by law was abolished, the people were guaranteed to be treated the same in a legislative sense and the real property relations became the primary factor of the hierarchical formation of society - the class society was born. This being said, the republic is not just a form of governance but the form of capitalist governance. All forms of corruption etc. and especially unpopular governance, are not problems of this system or of "power" (whatever this even means), but natural developments of this system of private property. I will not further discuss your understanding of governance and economic systems as you don't make much sense. 2) Communism is not the "removal of personal property", that statement could not be more wrong. It is the abolition of private property. Private property is the property which is used for a society's production. In capitalism that is concentrated in the hand of the few which own the production, in socialism it is owned by the workers that use it themselves. Your point of "monetary incentive to promote innovation" is not even a point at all. I hope you know that most innovations in capitalism do not stem from market competition but from state funded year-long research that is completely detached from any market. A short example for that would be the innovations for almost all components for your smartphone, computer etc. Innovation does not stem from market competition. The USSR turned from semi-feudal to the first human beings exploring space - all that through socialist innovation and in less than half a century. Furthermore it is not that "sometimes companies sprout up to become monopolies" it is an economic law of capitalism and right now monopolies are literally ruling all of the world markets and fighting for market dominance. Your point about amazon is even more hillarious, not even worth of debunking. Monopolies always become worse and less consumer centered. Smaller businesses in the same sector cannot compete - if they would become a threat, they would be bought up and we see this happening every time. This hinders innovation. "Hundreds of millions" is so funny. You have zero historical literacy and make up incredibly ahistorical and unrealistic numbers. You don't even care about who died and why, they are merely numbers for your twisted ideological purpose. To even say the capitalist free markets are combating poverty and helping fight climate change is disgusting. You are praising the creation of poverty, the death through starvationd and the economic force that is driving climate change. Your whole comment reads like what is told by capitalist propaganda everyday but with even less basis in reality. I'm sorry, but if this is supposed to be food for thought, then it is the equivalent to junk food. I do however not assume that you are a huge property owner but rather a brainwashed worker. And for that matter, you also don't seem stupid but rather unknowing. Maybe read some books, educate yourself and don't forget to look at reality.
![Diggy Graves - Red Vineyard [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Ro085T0mnQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Capitalism have destroyed my childhood! No more misery! Embrace communist self-improvement and revolutionary optimism!
Kids intuitively know how to solve a mess their parents made. Good job. Good luck.
✊️🚩
Youth, join the communists!
Right with you my friend! 🚩 ✊
theyre arent communists, theyre trotskyites
@@jakusama8397 your previous revolutions failed due to bureaucracy.
🤢🤮
@@jakusama8397 Trotsky rocks
Communism in our lifetime! 🚩🚩🚩
THAT'S ME I'M ONE OF THOSE!!!
SAAAAAMMMEEE
me too
Same here 🫡 unfortunately back in the day my high school used to have a very large na*i cu*t not just in the school but in the neighbourhood where my school is situated (and parents were also involved) so nowadays a lot of people in my school identify as “capitalist” which is stupid cuz these kids don’t even own capital ☠️ but doesnt surprise me these people go from “fascist” to “capitalist”
Needs to be a change in the curriculum, way too liberalised at least from what my experience has been, Paulo Freire’s view on this especially in his Pedagogy of the oppressed (which is a good book) explains this well by saying a lot on how education works out to be (he describes teachers like bank clerks, and states that oppression comes with things like a very uncritical educational model) but I do recommend this book to any young socialist, ML/MLM… I got it recommended to by my dad and also glad that my family on his side are leftists/socialists too, so W’s for that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yes, comrade!
@@flintinsects🤢🤮
Young Communists...bravo..armed with a different way of looking at life and society.
Some hope for future generation to break free of stale and failed stereotype thinking.
I graduated from high school in 1999, but I do like RCA.
Not a problem! There are many comrades older than that who are major members of our party. Join today!
Indeed. I hope this group grows in numbers.
As an over 40 comrade it is thrilling to see so many kids realizing they don't have to be black-pilled
😂 has to be parody
"I totally agreed with everything Marx had written, even though I didn't understand all of it"
Priceless 🤣🤣
This was me with Lenin because I read him before Marx LOL, I had zero clue what he was talking abt in like State and Revolution or Imperialism highest stage of capitalism… was just nodding my head to absolutely everything 😭
it's a very hard academic read, and professors don't automatically understand it either. Tough read like Ford-Tough tough.👷♂️
Great episode.
It's especially nice to hear as someone who joined back in high school a few years ago and build the first branch in my city together with class mates that joined after discussing Communism and Marxism.
That’s based, I’m still in high school, and I’m one to be surrounded by many kids who consider themselves “capitalists”, even though they own no capital ☠️ like most other schools though they teach about these sorts of stuff from a very liberal/shilling for capitalism sort of way.. which only makes these people think more onto the mainstream fabricated path that the system wants them to believe in.
Aye, aye!
O young communist, you are doing good.
But I want to say something about the need of present.
What to be done ?
Now in US n world going to high to high in technology. Now the surplus value grow more and more.So its need of now a strong international Communist organisation. Now there must be slogan of working class short working day, 6 hours beside 8 hours. It may be 4 hours demand because there is huge unemployment n exploitation of proletarian class.
I cant understand the reason why you the comments in US are not taking the reading crisis?
you have a writing crisis
fax
Communism v. capitalism is not the final dialectic, and nor is it the best narrative to combat capitalism. Much has changed since Marx. Remember kids, be open to new ideas always.
Oh sweet summer child. I acknowledge that the current governing and economic systems are not perfect, just as no economic nor governing system is, and although I applaud all of you for attempting to manufacture change rather than letting current troubles persist, I feel compelled to respectfully pose a few questions and present a few counter points, just as some food for thought. My questions will be predicated on the assumption that you, the reader, have actually done your research on the topic and are not just nodding your head and agreeing to whoever sounds the most relatable or persuasive, that is not only the communist manifesto, but also historical examples of these ideals in practice as no true intellectual supports an idea without first subjecting it to as much scrutiny from outside perspectives as humanly possible to see if it hold up.
Firstly, it seems that the opinions in this video seem to confuse the ramifications of capitalism, which is an economic mode of operandi, versus the ramifications of democracy or democratic republics, which are a form of government. Understandable, as they are not entirely divorced concepts in practice, but an important distinction nonetheless as the effects of one does not strictly reflect on the other, as communism does. Reason I bring this up is because several of the grievances pointed out in the video were related to political failing, such as foreign wars and domestic civil rioting, rather than shortcomings of free market trade. These political issues, as described by the speakers, seem to stem from either corruption or administrative incompetence in one form or another, as although democratic representatives are given the autonomy to act on our behave, their actions must still remain in line with the desires of their constituency, that being us as the governed body. Their failure to act accordingly and their persistence in perpetuating unpopular policy for so long thusly shows their corruption and/or incompetence. Now, having so stipulated that a consolidation of power into designated representatives perpetuates unpopular actions to the detriment of the governed body, my question is this: why do you believe that a further consolidation of power, which is how communism historically has always played out by design, would alleviate this issue instead of worsen it? Although in theory, the letter of the text dictates that power is decentralized across all the people evenly, this has never worked in practice as the monarchy, oligarchy, republic, etc. is replaced by the party representatives, who even if they are elected, are usually not fairly elected, such as in the DPRK, who even though they have elections, never have more than one option to choose from. Personally, although I share no love for the anarchists either, having seen government corruption and incompetence destroy the home countries of my parents, so much so that they both fled for economic and political reasons, I don’t see how putting more power in the hands of the government is a worthwhile solution, even on that claims to be by and for the working class.
Secondly, as far as I understand it from my own studies, communism dictates the forceful removal of personal property and governmental control over manufacturing and industry, then assumes that because of this centralized control that all industries will suddenly become hyper productive, enough so to outpace the efficiency of the free market so that everyone’s needs are met and no one goes hungry. My question: in the absence of competition within the market, as well as the removal of monetary incentive to promote innovation and efficiency, how do you propose to make said industry hyper productive? While a free market promotes competition which forces innovation and efficiency by necessity, otherwise they be bankrupted by competitors offering more affordable goods, bureaucracy holds no such initiative. While I agree that it’s not a perfect system and sometimes companies sprout up to form monopolies, which is a small scale communistic practice in that it is a consolidation of power within that industry attained by driving out competition, these practices are outlawed and even when the government fails to uphold the law, the power still remains in the consumer as we can choose to boycott and the market retains the freedom to sprout new companies to meet the needs and desires of these disgruntled masses. On the other hand, bureaucracy offers no such alternative, it is either their way or the highway and we just have to hope that they remain honest and continue to serve our best interest. A few examples to illustrate this point: anyone who has ever been to the DMV can agree that they aren’t the most efficient and expedient organization. The postal service was notorious for losing packages until FedEx and UPS entered the scene, and now Amazon is giving all of them a run for their money with its speed and efficiency. Every time I go to the VA clinic, I have to wait 2 hours just to have my blood drawn, I have to clear my schedule for the day just to have a check up. Hundreds of millions have died across the former Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Latin America, and Southeast Asia due to starvation because the communist controlled agricultural industry couldn’t keep up with the needs of the people. I could keep going with examples, but the point I make is that so far, the free markets of capitalism is doing more to combat issues like poverty and climate change through promoting innovation such as wealth creation through investment capital, drones that clean trash from our waterways autonomously, mushrooms that eat plastic in landfills, etc., than communism could ever hope to achieve. Not to diminish the honest efforts of state run organizations, like the military, which facilitated the creation of things like cellphones and the internet, an empirical side by side comparison would suggest that capitalism is the path to achievement, while the only notable accomplishment of communism is acquiring a body count big enough to put Mother Nature to shame.
Finally, to whomever has read to this point, I congratulate you for having retained an open mind enough to hear me out. I do not intend to dissuade you from your current philosophy, as that is a journey we must all contend with on our own, but I leave you with a little anecdote. My father grew up in Guatemala during their civil war against the communist guerrillas, this was back when the Cold War was indeed very hot. He grew up poor, and despite being a talented soccer player, he answered his patriotic duty and enlisted in the Guatemalan Army to serve his country. He was young, angry, and naive enough that he thought he could Rambo his way into bringing peace and prosperity to his country. Eventually, his time was up, and having witnessed the atrocities committed by both sides, having seen the crimes against humanity that neighbor could do to neighbor, brother tearing apart brother, all in the name differing ideologies, he took his papers and walked. Growing up, hearing his stories from those times, he never disparaged the communists he fought, nor supported them either, not an ounce of hate lays on that man’s heart, despite having lost friends and family. He only ever warned me of how horrible people can act against each other when they think they are on the right side of history, until it is too late to realize that no one is. To this day he lives with that guilt over the things he did, the shame over the man he used to be, when he was young and dumb enough to think he knew everything, arrogant and foolish enough to think he could save the world. I hope his cautionary tale guides you toward temperance and wisdom as it guides me. The reason I bring up this unfortunate bit of history is because as far as I can decipher, this is exactly what the communist manifesto demands, a call to arms for violent revolution. This is step 1 in the proverbial 3 step plan. Romantic notions of revolution and rebellion sound inspiring in the moment, but when you’re standing over a mass grave, left with only a shell of who you were before, unable to even look yourself in the mirror anymore while you drink to forget, you start to contemplate whether it was really worth it, suddenly you wonder if we couldn’t just talk it out instead.
Anyways, just some food for thought. Hope y’all stay safe and have a good one nonetheless.
this comment is getting deleted because you cannot question the glory of communism.
screen capping your comment for future uses though
My mother, aeons ago, told me that communism was such that you were told what you are going to be in the vocational sense. It was decided for you as to what you are going to do.
Real Socialism, the fight for a Communist society, requires it to be an international effort. If the Socialist Revolution becomes isolated, as it has happened all along the past century in Russia, Cuba, Venezuela etc... it is doomed to fail. World Socialist Revolution will unleash the means of production and, after the defeat of the bourgeoisie in each and every single state, the road to Communism will become free to follow. It will be the society of the super-abundance. Planned economy. Production for consumption of the people, not profit.
You can't possibly believe all the tired b.s. you puked out
Almost all of your points are simply wrong. I'll try to elaborate but keep in mind that english is not my mother tongue.
1) You simply cannot seperate the economic basis of a society from its political superstructure. In our case, the bourgeois republics and their electorial, representational, parliamentary democracies can not be seperated from capitalism as their economic basis. That is not only because of todays constitutions of those republics, which defend the property relations, private property, free markets etc. and set them as the essential, unchangeable basis for society. To say that it was just by coincidence that this form of democracy came to be (and still is) while at the same time capitalism began to manifest itself as the economic system of society, would be more than laughable. For this we need a short history lesson. The differences in feudalist societies were based on legal formulas, where the nobles had more rights than peasants and Bürgers. The law was the primary factor for the hierarchical organisation of society and property. As the economy developed, markets came to be and became supraregional, the Bürgers (small to large property owners) became the strongest societal force not in the sense of size, although the Bürgertum grew, but mainly because of economic power. These became the owners of private property and in the revolutions of the late 18th and 19th century the Bürgers didn't want a monarch or someone else that was, by law, above them but rather take their "righteous" place as the ruling class based on their real property ownership. Division by law was abolished, the people were guaranteed to be treated the same in a legislative sense and the real property relations became the primary factor of the hierarchical formation of society - the class society was born. This being said, the republic is not just a form of governance but the form of capitalist governance. All forms of corruption etc. and especially unpopular governance, are not problems of this system or of "power" (whatever this even means), but natural developments of this system of private property. I will not further discuss your understanding of governance and economic systems as you don't make much sense.
2) Communism is not the "removal of personal property", that statement could not be more wrong. It is the abolition of private property. Private property is the property which is used for a society's production. In capitalism that is concentrated in the hand of the few which own the production, in socialism it is owned by the workers that use it themselves. Your point of "monetary incentive to promote innovation" is not even a point at all. I hope you know that most innovations in capitalism do not stem from market competition but from state funded year-long research that is completely detached from any market. A short example for that would be the innovations for almost all components for your smartphone, computer etc. Innovation does not stem from market competition. The USSR turned from semi-feudal to the first human beings exploring space - all that through socialist innovation and in less than half a century. Furthermore it is not that "sometimes companies sprout up to become monopolies" it is an economic law of capitalism and right now monopolies are literally ruling all of the world markets and fighting for market dominance. Your point about amazon is even more hillarious, not even worth of debunking. Monopolies always become worse and less consumer centered. Smaller businesses in the same sector cannot compete - if they would become a threat, they would be bought up and we see this happening every time. This hinders innovation. "Hundreds of millions" is so funny. You have zero historical literacy and make up incredibly ahistorical and unrealistic numbers. You don't even care about who died and why, they are merely numbers for your twisted ideological purpose. To even say the capitalist free markets are combating poverty and helping fight climate change is disgusting. You are praising the creation of poverty, the death through starvationd and the economic force that is driving climate change.
Your whole comment reads like what is told by capitalist propaganda everyday but with even less basis in reality. I'm sorry, but if this is supposed to be food for thought, then it is the equivalent to junk food. I do however not assume that you are a huge property owner but rather a brainwashed worker. And for that matter, you also don't seem stupid but rather unknowing. Maybe read some books, educate yourself and don't forget to look at reality.
Laughs in food
Correction limited world view
trotskyites arent communists
Meanwhile: Non-trotskyist USSR failed.
Go back to your content creators
Yeah they are.
"Trotskyism" is the only logical conclusion if you actually read Marx, Engels and Lenin.
Trotskyist! NO.