Imagine if said country had in its constitution that an specific ethnicity and specific religion were hegemonic in that specific country, where most of the people that fit in that specific criteria lived outside the territory and had to migrate to it, and the indigenous inhabitants of that specific country did not fit into that category and had to leave that country, or be constrained to very small territories?

This is not simply a matter of morals. Israel was created from a land grab, making enemies on all sides. And Israel was created to be a nation-state of Jews both in religion and also in ethnicity. Israels own existence as a project depends on creating an ethno-religious hegemony in the region and they can’t tolerate the existence of other peoples being the majority in the land. Not only that, but they can’t even rely on the birthrate of the current Israeli population, they need to bring migrants to become settlers until they become a majority. Settlers want land and jobs

Imagine if Germany had a ethno-nationalist project where they had to guarantee an ethnical superiority with very strict national values, and they had to deal with a bunch of different ethnicities in their own territory and in the neighborhood of their territory, what would have happened? What destiny would take the Jews, Romani, Polish, Czech, Slavs, Communists, Socialists, and other religious minorities?

Agreed. This is just flame bait so people fighting each other. Capitalism is a monster big enough for all us to fight, we don’t need to help it even more by fighting amongst ourselves.

Yeah, but I think the country with the biggest Trot orgs is Argentina. But I don’t know if Trotsky himself went there.

LATAM Marxists aren’t a classification, what I mean is Marxist orgs that exist in LATAM. Regarding the specific lines, we have MLs, trots, maoists, hoxhaists, postmodern marxists, liberation theologians, and others.

A curiosity about some LATAM currents, the Posadist tendency is originally from a Trot org based on Argentina.

But LATAM has been an intense battlefield of Marxists orgs/tendencies vs reactionary forces and we had guerrillas and civil wars basically everywhere in the 20th century. The PC do B from Brazil took part in the “Guerrilha do Araguaia”, MR8 and other armed resistance movements. Dilma Rousseff, ex president, was also a guerrilla fighter. Gustavo Petro, recent president of Colombia, also participated in the M-19 guerrilla. Argentina had the Montoneros and Uruguay the Tupamaros. However, not all guerrillas were Marxist, and there were many other liberal tendencies in those as well.

Edit: but the problem is that, after the fall of the USSR, many parties split, many parties and leaders became revisionist, and the remaining ML/Trot parties became insignificant, dogmatic or sectarian.

Then we need to apply this to some LATAM Marxists too, specially Trots (but some MLs too, unfortunately).

Even funnier fact. The alpha, beta nomenclature initially appeared from a study related to chicken pecking order. And there’s no alpha rooster, but an alpha hen.