It’s not that they believe that’s how it was but that they believe that’s how it should have been.

They believe that Lenin should have had the king-like right to appoint his successor and they are furious that instead it was the party collectively deciding who the best person for the job was.

Nevermind the evidence that the so-called “Lenin’s testament” was a forgery, even arguing about that is a distraction from the main issue, which is that anyone who brings up this argument about Lenin having somehow anointed Trotsky to be the next leader is thinking fundamentally un-democratically. Lenin was a great man but he was still just one man. He still got only one vote, and i would argue his vote should not count after his death anyway, you don’t get to vote posthumously.