In English please? I have no idea what the hell you just said :-)
[why Trotskyism in particular has been selected for inclusion in this conspiracy theory..] Because this group-while communist was independent. They were outside of mainstream movement headed in Moscow. Not belonging to an organized communist party, these Trotskyists were able to eventually question communism (some became Maoists but that did not last) without the party getting involved and keeping the members in line. Pretty soon criticism of Stalin led to criticism of communism and then the movement-while keeping the goal alive - dropped the communist economic ideology. They attached themselves to democracy and free markets and see those as an instrument of world wide revolution. The goals of said revolution are stated above.
Actually they are not stated above unless I really misread your post (which is possible). Anyhow that is a nice thumbnail sketch of some (non-specific) aspects of "Trotskyism" I suppose but I have no idea what the hell any of that has to do with "neocons".
For the record my original question was and remains: (a) What exactly is "Trotskyism" and (b) what supposedly "Trotskyist" views are held by so-called "neocons". Funny how no one can answer this. It should be pretty easy.
If you think that my conclusion is wrong please pont out what and why?
I can't do that. I have no real idea what your "conclusion" is, if you have one. If it involves linking "Trotskyists" with "neocons" then I would have problems on several levels, including but not limited to:
-there's no real such thing as a "neocon", it's a label without a precise definition. As far as I can tell there are about three or four historical figures who would embrace the term for themselves; as for the rest of the people who get called "neocon", it seems to be in the eye of the beholder. One can't expect a theory about "neocons" to be taken seriously if one can't define the term in a consistent, agreed-upon way. (For example in recent discussion Christopher Hitchens seems to have been drafted into the ranks of "neocons", which is ridiculous since he would likely describe himself as a "Liberal" and/or "man of the Left".)
-a theory intended to link someone to "Trotskyists" had better actually describe some ideas unique to "Trotskyism" and then establish that that person holds to those ideas while others don't. All I've seen here is "Trotskyists aren't pacifists... neither are neocons". Or equally ridiculous "links".
Until at least the two things above are remedied I'm afraid I haven't seen any "conclusions" worth giving the time of day in this thread, in the first place.
Trotsky was also a great military leader, and Schwartz finds support for the idea of pre-emptive war in the old Bolshevik's writings. "Nobody who is a Trotskyist can really be a pacifist," Schwartz notes. "Trotskyism is a militaristic disposition. When you are Trotskyist, we don't refer to him as a great literary critic, we refer to him as the founder of the Red Army."
Paul Berman agrees with Schwartz that Trotskyists are by definition internationalists who are willing to go to war when necessary. "The Left Opposition and the non-Communist left comes out of classic socialism, so it's not a pacifist tradition," Berman observes. "It's an internationalist tradition. It has a natural ability to sympathize or feel solidarity for people in places that might strike other Americans or Canadians as extremely remote."