Source: Sputnik News
Now, almost a hundred years on the Soviet state is gone, but Trotskyist policy has grown into a global threat that has never existed before.
“Trotsky” might be the code word for understanding the nature of chaos in the Middle East and beyond. The 1917 October revolution in Russia shook the world spreading horror of “communist atrocities” and “red terror”. Now, almost a hundred years on the Soviet state is gone, but Trotskyist policy has grown into a global threat that has never existed before.
Says Dr. Mateusz Piskorski, Director of European Centre of Geopolitical Analysis:
I think that most of the former American Trotskyists turned to neoconservative ideas. Those are the people like Irving Kristol and his song, people like Robert Kagan and all those elites who are forming the agenda of the contemporary American politics, regardless of which party is in power now. I mean, we had the neoconservative agenda during the administration of George W. Bush, of course. It was very open at that time.
But it is still continuing. We have people like Victoria Nuland, who was actually very active when it comes to the Ukrainian crisis. And she is the wife of Mr. Kagan who is one of the leaders of the neoconservative movement. Which means that the idea that lies behind the American policy, the American way of interfering in the foreign affairs, in the affairs of other countries is actually the same or it is quite similar.
Of course, during the Bush administration we had some voices which stated it more openly, which more openly claimed that they are going to interfere with the so-called hard power, which means military interference. And now we have more focus on the so-called soft power, but anyway, the final goals of the Obama administration and of the former Bush administration are quite similar.
Do you think we could remind our listeners of what the Trotsky theory is all about? Is it something dealing with permanent revolution?
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: First, it is something dealing with the permanent revolution, but, second, this is an idea which claims that there is one universal political system, one universal civilization which should be spread all over the world, regardless of the local traditions, of local history of several nations. This is quite the way the Americans do their international politics since many years.
[Please click below to continue reading]
I mean, on the one hand, they are claiming that they are a unique state which is the only one in the world. But, on the other hand, they try to impose all their values and also their way of thinking about the political system and the organization of the public life onto the other countries, doing it, of course, by force. And this is the ideological basis. Of course, we cannot forget about the interests which lie behind all those interventions in different places.
But, anyway, from the ideological point of view, that claim that the American system and the American system of values is the only one which is of universal importance, is quite characteristic of the Trotskyists’ way of thinking and which is continued by the neoconservatives in the US. And this is the most important, I would say, basis of the American foreign policy ideology in the contemporary times.
I suppose everyone knows that Russia has had some experience with Trotsky’s theory and practices. And something we do remember is that they are all associated with the outmost cruelties, something that would now be described as crimes against humanity. Do I get it right that this is also the case right now?
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: Yes, of course. According to the idea of Trotsky’s permanent revolution the end justifies the means, all the means, which means that all kinds of bloody terror revolutions might be organized just to bring the final goal, which is the world revolution – the change that would embrace all the countries of the world. And secondly, of course, to control the power in different countries, the Americans are also using another idea of Trotsky – the idea of a permanent revolution.
This means that during a revolution, if you bring to power one political force, it should feel all the time the threat of being overthrown by another political force, which is already prepared and ready. And this makes it very obedient to those who are organizing all the so-called fake revolution processes. In this particular case it is the US.
Of course, the instrumentalisation of the ideas of Trotsky, including the idea of the terror of permanent revolution embracing all the world, are used or, perhaps, some contemporary Trotskyists would say that they are abused by the American neoconservatives since several years.
So, is there anything in common with something more known as the controlled chaos theory? Any relations?
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: Yes, of course, the modified Trotskism is behind all the activities of the US authorities all over the world. And the way of thinking which was presented by Trotsky in the past is still alive in the minds of the American political elites. And this is quite interesting, concerning that, on the one hand, the US is still rejecting all the leftist ideas of the 20th century, regarding them as communist or dangerous left-wing revolutionary ideas, but on the other hand, it uses very successfully the methods which were invested by Trotsky and other Trotskyists. So, in this case, it is just using the left-wing, perhaps, not ideology but methodology of revolutionary activities to achieve its own goals.
It is interesting that, I suppose, it is precisely what we are witnessing in Ukraine right now.
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: Yes, I think that the Americans, after having their successful –let’s say – test of these methods during the overthrow of President Victor Yanukovych earlier this year, are thinking that any president of Ukraine in the future who would dare not to obey the orders from Washington and who would dare to build the bridges between Ukraine and Russia, he will be threatened by another Maidan or EuroMainda.
Perhaps, it will be called in another way, but there will be a new Maidan with the new ideas voiced during it. But anyway, all the Ukrainian politicians and leaders must feel that the fate of President Yanukovych is an example for them to be obedient to their masters who brought them to power when Yanukovych fell.
And that might explain why the US administration has been congratulating the Kiev authorities with this election, though the Rada has largely become ultra-nationalistic, not to say neo-Nazi.
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: Yes, the US are legitimizing the only political force now, which could be capable of organizing another Maidan, as we have seen in the last months, several times during the different protests which were organized by the ultra-nationalist camp. We could notice that this is the only power which is still able to bring the people out in the streets in Kiev, to organize a brutal and aggressive protests and actions. Like the one near the Parliament, when they were throwing people into the trash bins and so on.
So, the Americans realize perfectly well that this is the only force which could mobilize the people and which could possibly organize another so-called revolution, for instance, if President Poroshenko would try to be more compromising with his Russian partners. So, he must feel the threat all the time. The threat that if he will not be obedient, he might have problems similar to those of President Yanukovych.
And I think that President Poroshenko is actually aware of that, and that is why he tries to appease all those ultra-nationalist forces. He tries to symbolically support several ideas, like the idea of building a new historical identity of Ukraine. Here, he is fulfilling the wishes of the ultra-nationalists, by glorifying the Nazi collaborators from the times of the WW II.
So, as long as Poroshenko understands this, he will have the support of the US. If he would try to somehow, let’s say, sincerely negotiate with Russia and try to get a compromise with Russia, he might have real troubles with his former supporters from the US.
Mr. Trotsky used to say that real revolutionaries are located in the Wall Street. Which might imply that he is pointing to the financial companies and financial system. Now, we see that the EU financial system of governance is drawing a lot of criticism from inside the EU and Hungary is the latest example. So, do you think that the situation we have witnessed in Ukraine might be somehow extrapolated to the EU and the old world at large?
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: Well, when it comes to the EU, it is another discussion about the extent of sovereignty of the EU as the subject of the international law, and the extent of the American influence on the EU. If you look at Hungary, their real problems started when Prime Minister Viktor Orbán tried to, let’s say, build bridges and the possibilities of cooperation with those global superpowers which are not very friendly to the US – Russia, in the first place, but then also China.
So, he tried to play a role of a country which has a pragmatic foreign policy and which tries to cooperate with different centers of power in this world. And the consequence was that, first, there was a campaign within the EU against Viktor Orbán and his party. And this campaign was organized mostly by the pro-American forces and pro-American political leaders in the EU. And second, we had the sanctions, the black list of those people who are not allowed to enter the US published officially by the Department of State just a few weeks ago.
So, this is a kind of pressure exerted on a small country which still tries to have partly independent and sovereign foreign policy. And of course, the Hungarians are a good example of that. If the Hungarians would succeed in the diversification of their foreign and economic relations, that would be an example for other European countries, perhaps, including also Ukraine. I mean, for the Ukrainians who are still talking about their European dream, as they call it, Hungary might be a good example, that within these existing European financial structures the so-called troika which decides on the economical transformation of the EU countries, that even inside the EU it is not that ideally and every country should try to build and create different options for their external policy not depending on only one center of power.
But could the financial institutions start to react in a more decisive manner, shall we put it that way?
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: When it comes to Hungary, we have to remember the situation of the year 2012, when after introducing some political reforms the Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his cabinet were refused the financial support and the credits from different banks which are representing the EU. Like the European Bank of Development and Reconstruction. So, this is the kind of financial influence exerted on those countries which are not obedient.
So, jut to round up our interview, do I get it right that Trotsky’s kind of revolutions are still going on in the world, with the world not much aware of that?
Dr. Mateusz Piskorski: Yes, Trotsky’s kind of revolutions are organized now in the name of the corporate interests, which of course is a paradox, that the ideas and the methods proposed by one of the far-left thinkers are actually used to strengthen the control and strengthen the grip of the international capital which is politically represented by the US in the contemporary world. So, this is a paradox from the ideological point of view, but this is how the things are now.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Oceania Saker.