Ask Lemmygrad

I've always viewed it more as a difference in methodology not philosophy, with a bit of ego thrown into the mix. Stalin represents the domino theory of one state at a time expansion, Trotsky more of a shotgun approach of hitting as many targets at once, and Mao switching from an urban vanguard to planting revolutionary roots in rural areas first. Critiquing movements and revolutions that have established some form of socialist government is healthy, as long as its not just an attack for attack sake. Unfortunately, there are so few examples to analyze, that critique often ends up looking like infighting. We all have the common end goal of destroying the imperialist bourgeoisie.