What if Trotsky came to power?

[Ulysses]

How different would the world look today? Would the Soviet farmers have been killed to form collective farms? Would the purges in the 1930s have taken place? How would the Soviet Union have fared in WWII?

[Batukhan]

Originally posted by Ulysses
How different would the world look today? Would the Soviet farmers have been killed to form collective farms? Would the purges in the 1930s have taken place? How would the Soviet Union have fared in WWII?

If Trosky got the power and control of SU ,I do not think so SU could last too long .It could fall.More likley he could not implement terror like Stalin did .I know he was not angel but he might not be able to do it.And without terror you could not keep all these piss off people in one country .I could be wrong but these is my 5 cents .
Batu

[mishaaverko]

Trotsky was a bit of an idiotlogue in that he believed in the idea of "world revolution," whereas Stalin took the more prudent line of building socialism in one country. The latter more recognized the weaknesses facing the young Soviet state.

Trotsky gets too much credit for "organizing" the Red Army. He was an appointed political hack with no military background. He was put in charge of the military to serve as a spy for the the non-military politicos. The Red Army success had more to do with the Imperial Russian military training of its officers.

Pilsudski also helped the Red Army when he invaded Russia in 1919. Some whites like General Brusilov went to the Red side upon seeing that Denikin was unable to form an alliance with the Poland from sea to sea dreamer Pilsudski.

[mishaaverko]

Kathy

Trotsky was more a theorist, whereas Stalin was more of a practical implementer of policy. This in part explains why Stalin won out.

The point is that Stalin saw the weaknesses facing the Soviet Union and explains why Soviet foreign policy under his regime wasn't so aggressive in his early years in power.

The winter war with Finland in '38 was waged AFTER the Finns refused his offer to exchange territory. Granted, the Finns didn't have to accept. However, Stalin saw the strategic significance of having the border with Finland changed.

The pact with Hitler was payback for the West trying to use Hitler against the USSR. I refer to the Polish-Nazi non-aggression pact of '34 and the West allowing Soviet friendly CzechoSlovakia to go under in '38. Had Stalin refused a pact with Hitler, the Nazis would have taken all of the Polish Empire.

Of course, Stalin's purging of the Red Army officer corps was sheer stupidity, along with not being more on guard to the Nazi attack in June of '41. The way the war with Finland was waged was also sheer stupidity. In comparison, the Red Army beat the crap out of a comparatively stronger adversary in Japan during the same time period. That was because the Red Army in the FarEast didn't suffer the brunt of the purges.

I consider Stalin and Trotsky to be the scum of the earth. One can find thoughts in Trotsky's works which indicate that he was a brute himself. Pre-Stalin ruled USSR wasn't as brutal as when Stalin took over. However, it was brutal nevertheless. On this point, I agree with the anti-Russian Harvard historian Richard Pipes.

Bakhunin and Kirov appeared to be the best hopes for an efficient pre WW II Soviet leadership that would possibly have some traits of humanity.

As for your perception of me, I'm American born and bred and will be 42 this July.