Prior to the Indonesian genocide of the 1960s, where the CIA installed a military dictatorship that the lives of millions, the country’s communist party technically did warn about the peril. The problem was that this warning had been made in a reactive way, and therefore wasn’t nearly enough to prepare the people to fight back.
Trotskyism in the US is defined by rhetorically supporting the idea of world proletarian revolution while materially supporting US attempts to overthrow every actually existing proletarian revolution in the world. The Trots I know in real life were all about the idea of ending the terror war, but against any specific action that might threaten the “unified working class effort” to “free” the people of Iraq, Libya, and Syria with American bombs. They were all about ending America’s new cold war right up until it was “necessary” for them to support NATO to “fight Russian imperialism and stand with Ukraine’s working class”. They were all in favor of liberating Palestine, right up until the “brutal Oct 7 Hamas terrorist attack” made it “necessary” for them to “stand with Israeli leftists in calling for a 2 state solution”. Trotskyism is popular in the empire and nowhere else because it allows imperial citizens to adopt a counter-cultural self-image while maintaining the exploitation of the periphery that they materially benefit from.
Isn’t that entirely contradictory to the ideas of an international proletariat and permanent revolution?
Seriously, all the “Trotskyists” you guys talk about just sound like libs.
It’s annoying