rebuliding communication after a revolution

[Bitter Ashes]

Heyas

Had a bit of a think the other day about the scenario immediatly following the point where the bourgeois cease to be a threat to the working class. What we, as workers, would be aiming to do is to reach a speedy formation of a constitution of some form that it is voted for via direct, not representative, democracy. Am I right so far?

Well, here's the issue I see. The bourgeois will have had thier loyalist reactionaries jam all communications, except thier own, during a revolution and I know from experiance they operate a scorched earth policy when it comes to communications too. What we're probably going to be left with is a large number of workers unable to give thier input towards the constitution as quickly, or practically as hoped.

So, is it going to be important to plan ahead to find a method that the workers can get thier say in the constitution by overcoming these initial communication difficulties? I've had a few thoughts, but so far all of them are less than ideal solutions and some even have the added danger of causing a return to represesentative democracy and even outright dictatorship if we're not careful.

Thoughts please? :)

[Stranger Than Paradise]

So would this be an international constitution. Each community should have the right of autonomy from another so their constitution may vary. I think it would be more democratic and practical this way.

[BogdanV]

Well, in the case of the Revolution, it would be vital for the proletarian class to take control over every vital sector of each country (transport, communications, production).
With the communications sector in hand, there shouldn't be any fears of sabotage.
Of course, all major structures (relay stations, GSM cells, etc.) should be heavily guarded by workers militias.
Apart from this, there should be no worries, unless the State decides beforehand to place all these sectors directly under military control. If this were to happen, things will probably fall in a huge bloodshed.

[Bitter Ashes]

Well, in the case of the Revolution, it would be vital for the proletarian class to take control over every vital sector of each country (transport, communications, production).
With the communications sector in hand, there shouldn't be any fears of sabotage.
Of course, all major structures (relay stations, GSM cells, etc.) should be heavily guarded by workers militias.
Apart from this, there should be no worries, unless the State decides beforehand to place all these sectors directly under military control. If this were to happen, things will probably fall in a huge bloodshed.
I'd definatly argue about the tactics you're suggesting there.
Every antenna and major phoneline centre will be the target of bombardment by air or missile strike should it fall into the hands of the working class. This kind of attack cannot be intercepted, so all you can do is hope that the ruling class surrenders before they destroy too much. Placing a static worker's militia there only gifts the reactionaries with a target that they can claim to be a legitimite military target and also weaken workers' armed forces. If they try to hold these places themselves, they will destroy them as a parting shot.

Transport links are particualy easy to destroy. For example, if Crewe's grand junction was destroyed, you could bring one third of England's industries and mail to a grinding halt. That's just ONE target and you can bet your bottom dollar that they'll have plenty more mapped out ready already as a contingency against revolution. The bourgeois have nothing to lose by destroying thier own infrastructure. It only gives them more work to draw in more dependant wage-slaves who will be deluded more than ever that they are bettering the lives of thier class by collaberating with the bourgeois.

So, accepting that the bourgeois have an intrest in disrupting communications and the capacity to do so in the event of a revolution is undeniable. How we plan to counter these strategies is the important part, not to try to convince ourselves that the ruling class cant, or wont, take extreme actions to stall the formation of a direct democracy.

[Bitter Ashes]

So would this be an international constitution. Each community should have the right of autonomy from another so their constitution may vary. I think it would be more democratic and practical this way.
I do see what you're saying, but at the same time, I'm unsure whether a fractured country-sized community is capable of bieng in a position to act as a catalyst to revolution internationaly. Maybe your suggestion to the constitution would be that when revolution happens elsewhere, that both places work together in forming a revised intenational constituion. But, the suggestions for what we think should go into such a document will have to wait until after revolution in order to preserve the future democracy that we are aiming to build.

[marxistcritic]

About what was said about worker's militias being decimated by airstrikes well trying to guard communications structures...We should prepare unmanned weapons[controlled from afar, I mean] to guard communications from attack. That way, not only will workers not be lost there, but the weapons of this type that exist today tend to be more powerful then a militia. How to get them is the problem...