Leon Trotsky would've done more good than harm had he succeeded Lenin.

Here are a few changes to the rules of the debate that we mutually agree on.1. We are now debating Trotsky's net benefit to the well being of the human race in general. Well being defined as - the state of being happy, healthy, or prosperous.2. We have allocated an additional 1000 characters to the final round. I'd finally like to say that we must only present arguments that fully reflect Trotsky's own personal views and use those to predict what his actions would be. We can't make unsupported assumptions on either side. I. Assured and steadfast Allied victory in European centered WW2, if WW2 occured at all. Trotsky, throughout Hitler's rise to power, interacted with the German Communist party and worked to create a fighting force to stop the swaying of the German people by the hands of the National Socialists. Defense of the German Communists was a difficult endeavor for Trotsky, and as we all know the National Socialists won through the systematic demonization of the Communists by means of propaganda, purges, and a wrongly blamed fire. If Trotsky had obtained democratic power in the Soviet Union, he certainly would've more fervently worked to prevent the rise of Fascism in Germany, to prevent the rise of another Italy. His disgust of the Fascist ideology is most evident in his novel "Fascism and How to Fight It. " He would've reached out to the Weimar Republic in order to prevent Hitler's rise to power and to protect the dignity of the Communist Party of Germany. If these measures alone were not sufficient in stopping the National Socialists, Trotsky would've taken other measures. These include the slandering of Nazi Germany to prevent the public in Germany (at a time where freedom of press exists to an extent) from submitting themselves completely to the possibility of a fascist regime. Other measures may include an all out invasion of Germany before their economy was reinvigorated enough to wage warfare themselves. The advantages of such an invasion? The prevention of the holocaust, the prevention of the largest European war in history that killed over a hundred million, prevention of the rise of violent anti-semitism in Germany, and the keeping of the European economy intact until their absorption by the USSR. Finally, if all of this didn't stop the Nazis or simply didn't occur, Trotsky would never have made the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Hitler as Stalin did, and would be fully prepared for a Nazi invasion, if he didn't immediately align himself with the Allies to defeat the Germans. II. A Strong Fascist Opposition throughout EuropeThrough Trotsky's theory of Permanent Revolution and his hatred of Fascism, we can predict that Trotsky would've acted boldly to prevent the spread of Fascist sentiments in Europe and the world. We can assume he would go out of his way to quell the fascist side of any revolution and support the Communists. Support from a nation such as the USSR would lead Communist revolutionaries to victory over the Fascists without question. In addition, Trotsky would've sped the fall of the regime under Benito Mussolini, an oppressive regime that was "the father of European fascism. " As I've already demonstrated, Trotsky would've stopped the rise of Hitler or at least prevented WW2 from having a major impact on parts of Europe other than Germany. III. Would have Prevented the Corruption of the Marxist Movement by Bureacracy and TotalitarianismI quote Leon Trotsky "Socialism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen. " I will also quote Karl Marx. "Democracy is the road to Socialism. " Clearly, Leon Trotsky represented the reality of the Communist movement - that one of democracy and the power of people, NOT one of totalitarianism, or fascism with a command economy masked as communism. Leon Trotsky would've defended the rights of the voter in the Soviet Union, as his own personal philosophy of democratic socialism suggests. He would not have supported the bureacracy under Stalin, and clearly would've been much more of a humanitarian to the people of Russia by allowing them to vote. This would've prevented the rise of a misconception of Communism by the West as "a totalitarian dictatorship" as these terms do not in any universe match the description of Marxism. Trotsky valued human life and the average worker, unlike Stalin, who represented the threat of bureacracy in Russia at the time, who was simply a dictator waiting to happen, who never truly believed in Communism rhetoric as exemplified by his actions. IV. Created the Perfect Command Economy Model, Attaining A Higher State of Living for the Slavs and Any Other Country that Incorporates Itself Within USSR. Permanent Revolution, in the mind of Trotsky, is the only means of creating a working Command economy. To begin with a Communist society requires near universal acceptance of the regulations by the state. Socialism in one country is what prevented Russia from reaching a state of prosperity, as the USSR needed to absorb other nations' economies. Collectivization solely in Russia, or Socialism in one country failed because of the harsh terrain of Russia being not fit for agriculture in areas other than rivers, and the anti-collectivism of the farmers. Taking these things out of the equation, Russia's economy would have floundered anyway because statistics show that in short term, Communist industry is inferior to Capitalist industry. Russia being cut off from the rest of the world allowed to run solely on its own fruits would not work. While Trotsky was against trading with the west, he was for the absorption of other Nations into the USSR through permanent revolution, which would've strengthened Russia and the Communist world's economy far more than trading with the west in the long run. This would negate the bread lines under Stalin and later leaders among other things, and would've created a true "Socialist Utopia. " Eventually with the success of permanent revolution, the entire world would be living under this socialist utopia, an ideal model of a command economy. To Summarize My Arguments: Leon Trotsky would've affected the world positively by creating a strong command economy and preventing long term poverty under Communism, would've prevented the rise of totalitarian communism, would've held a strong opposition to the fascist movement in Europe, and could've possibly prevented the rise of Hitler and definitely could've made WW2 a lot easier to win for the allies. I believe that the positives resulting from his leadership would definitely impact the general well being of the human race more positively than negatively. Furthermore, although irrelevant to the resolution, Animal Farm would be a LOT different. I reserve the right to add more arguments in the 3rd round as I have to go to see Django Unchained at this time. I await my opponent's response.