Pretty much now an argument between pro-Putin communists (Which sounds like a fucking oxymoron to me) and anti-Putin communists (which I thought was the fucking norm).

  • T34 [they/them]
    link
    fedilink
    123 years ago

    Here’s that one Trotsky quote I agree with:

    In Brazil there now reigns a semifascist regime that every revolutionary can only view with hatred. Let us assume, however, that on the morrow England enters into a military conflict with Brazil. I ask you on whose side of the conflict will the working class be? I will answer for myself personally—in this case I will be on the side of “fascist” Brazil against “democratic” Great Britain. Why? Because in the conflict between them it will not be a question of democracy or fascism. If England should be victorious, she will put another fascist in Rio de Janeiro and will place double chains on Brazil. If Brazil on the contrary should be victorious, it will give a mighty impulse to national and democratic consciousness of the country and will lead to the overthrow of the Vargas dictatorship. The defeat of England will at the same time deliver a blow to British imperialism and will give an impulse to the revolutionary movement of the British proletariat.

    The point is not that Putin is a communist. He is a liberal nationalist. But his nationalism is a self-defense against what imperialism did to his country under Yeltsin. Self-defensive nationalism, even when it’s liberal, is worth our support as a blow against capitalist imperialism.

    • Muad'Dibber
      link
      fedilink
      73 years ago

      That’s a pretty rad quote. So strange how trotsky vacillates between euro-centrism (“Revolution can only happen in western europe!”), and genuine anti-imperialist / national self-determination here.