Why do we draw the lines of good and evil along the lines of class?

[Oktyabr]

A comment by Communist Theory on my profile page really got to me. It went to the effect of "I think all bourgeois scum should be put up against the wall and shot". But how many of you had a say in what class you were born into? Why do we assume that all people born into the proletariat are on our side while all people born into the bourgeois are our enemy? What have we got to gain by assuming that all people who belong to a certain class are against us?

Most of the people on this site are petty bourgeois according to my understanding. If you have the money to buy a computer, you certainly have the money to buy what you need. Thus, by strictly following traditional anarchist and communist beliefs, we are all "enemy's of the people". If Communist Theory is right, then all of us should be shot as "Bourgeois sucm". Please post your thoughts and if you happen to be communist theory, defend yourself

[gorillafuck]

Most of the people on this site are petty bourgeois according to my understanding. If you have the money to buy a computer, you certainly have the money to buy what you need.
1. I don't think you know what petty-bourgeois means
2. Money for a computer =/= Money for everything you need

[Oktyabr]

My thoughts are that if we really decided to shoot everyone who is fairly well off, we'd be killing the vast majority of people who want a proletarian revolution. There are people who are "bourgeois" but whos mode of thought does not vaguely resemble that of traditional bourgeois.

[Oktyabr]

1. I don't think you know what petty-bourgeois means
2. Money for a computer =/= Money for everything you need

1. what does it mean
2. why/how would you buy a computer if you were starving and needed food???

[Stranger Than Paradise]

My thoughts are that if we really decided to shoot everyone who is fairly well off, we'd be killing the vast majority of people who want a proletarian revolution. There are people who are "bourgeois" but whos mode of thought does not vaguely resemble that of traditional bourgeois.

I don't think any of us are advocating to shoot everyone who is from bourgeois background. We understand that you can be a committed class warrior and still be bourgeois.

[gorillafuck]

My thoughts are that if we really decided to shoot everyone who is fairly well off
What in the fuck are you talking about?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

1. what does it mean

Petty Bougeois is the class which is below the bourgeoisie but above the proletariat. This consists of managers of businesses who don't necessarily own the means of production but run a coompany. Professionals also fit into this category.


. why/how would you buy a computer if you were starving and needed food???

First off you don't know everyone on here OWNS a computer and just because you have a computer doesn't mean you aren't struggling to pay rent and just generally get by without trouble.

[Oktyabr]

What in the fuck are you talking about?

stop spamming this thread with useless posts.

[h0m0revolutionary]

I think the main point of this thread isn't a discussion on what constitutes the petty-bourgeoisie but rather discomfort regarding the comments of some Marxists/Anarchos who want to kill members of the bourgeoisie.

Personally I am not a pacifist at all and fully believe in the necessity of an overtly violent revolution which will involve a fight between forces of counter-revolution and reaction. But to claim the whole bourgeoisie will be put to death is a real turn off.

Firstly members of the bourgeoisie can and will be/become revolutionaries and secondly even in a post-revolutionary society the thought of massacring people based upon their former class status smells of retribution and revenge - I think human nature is better than that and we ought to lead by example to show that we have a peaceful, free and equal society to win, showering the streets with the blood of the rich won't help our cause.

[Brother No. 1]

Most of the people on this site are petty bourgeois according to my understanding.

Just because we have a computer doesnt mean we can buy alot of things. Some of us maybe are borrowing a computer from a freind others maybe are paying rent for they bought a computer. like for example I had a computer for 4 years and me and my family were struggling to pay the rent off on our house for we didnt actually pay for the house we were renting it. does having a computer make me petty-bourgeois?
No. it does not.

[HoChiMilo]

First of all, a computer went from being a commodity to a necessity in this country. My ex-girlfriend lived in a trailer park and got freebie cheese and even she had a computer. and she is on our side! being without a computer in the 21st century is like being a caveman in a big city.

You have a highschool history view of what dialectics really is. In order to be bourgeois in the non-prejorative sense, you have to own means of production and capitalize off others labor. That's really what it boils down to. We're proletarian in that we work for wages and someone profits from it. I'm assuming none of us run small businesses or rent out apartments so we're not petty bourgeoisie and there are CERTAINLY no CEO's up in here<3.

[HoChiMilo]

but you're right in the sense that the bourgeoisie may actually be happy to join our ranks. they say armand hammer was red but i don't know how accurate that is. i'm pretty sure it was just a suspicion.

[apathy maybe]

Rather than fuck around with the thread and the first post, which I'm not sure I really want to considering the misconceptions involved, I'll just address the title (which is what drew me to the thread in the first place).

Very few people draw lines at all, let alone lines of "good and evil". Most people don't hate the ruling classes because they are "evil". The reason is rather, that they are the oppressors, they are the cause of so many problems in the world, etc.

Of course, not all of them are like that, and very few people sensible will argue that they are.

[teenagebricks]

Leftists who want a bourgeois holocaust are a very small minority, so I wouldn't let it bother you too much.

[mikelepore]

Petty Bougeois is the class which is below the bourgeoisie but above the proletariat. This consists of managers of businesses who don't necessarily own the means of production but run a coompany. Professionals also fit into this category.

I think that's all wrong.

The bourgeoisie means people who own the businesses or means of production, and they don't have to work in them, because their incomes are derived from dividends or capital gains rather than salaries.

The petty bourgeoisie (French, petit bourgeoisie) means people who own the businesses or means of production, but their assets are small enough that they also have to report to work. It's not economically feasible for them to delegate all of the work to employees. (Synonym: self-employed small business owners.)

Managers of businesses are in whatever class is determined by the assets that they own. Most of them are part of the working class, meaning that they receive more of their income in the form of salaries rather than dividends.

"Professionals" is a term that is so nonspecific as to be meaningless. The word is used variously to indicate "an attitude of taking one's job very seriously", "working at a desk in an office," "having a college diploma or an unusual skill", "having a job that requires a state licence", or "employees who are exempt from the law that guarantees additional pay when required to work overtime." They are in whatever class is determined by the assets that they own. Almost all of them are in the working class, i.e., not the owners, paid salaries.

[#FF0000]

Rather than fuck around with the thread and the first post, which I'm not sure I really want to considering the misconceptions involved, I'll just address the title (which is what drew me to the thread in the first place).

Very few people draw lines at all, let alone lines of "good and evil". Most people don't hate the ruling classes because they are "evil". The reason is rather, that they are the oppressors, they are the cause of so many problems in the world, etc.

Of course, not all of them are like that, and very few people sensible will argue that they are.

This needs the be repeated. People aren't the problem. Class is the problem.

[Communist Theory]

Wow, talk about totally fucking a sentence up.
What I'm pretty sure I posted on his profile was me referring to his former humanist capitalistic ideal and I said on my view of wealth I believe all the corporate fatcats should be lined up shot but before being shot should be forced to watch all the colored paper they "worked" so hard for be burned. Also Oktyabr you should watch the Edukators I think the exec on there was a humanist.

[Oktyabr]

I see. Somehow I misinterpreted the word "petty brougeois" for meaning middle class. I just thought that since it was between the proletariat and the bourgeois it would be middle class.

[Oktyabr]

But the main point of this thread was to discourage bias against the bourgeois as a whole. I admit, most of them are a bunch of wanks, but we cannot shut anyone out of the revolutionary left simply because of the class they were born into. Allowing people who are of bourgeois class but of proletarian thought would be a milestone in the elimination of class struggle, and thus the end of class war.

[Communist Theory]

I don't care if you gave all of your money away, if you were the CEO of Blackwater I would shoot you in front of your family with no remorse.

[Oktyabr]

I don't care if you gave all of your money away, if you were the CEO of Blackwater I would shoot you in front of your family with no remorse.

Of course. But if you were rich, but you hated the bourgeois and were not a business owner, and you were of proletarian mode of thought I would have no trouble with you joining the site or the movement. I think in the aftermath of a revolution, we should try the big businessmen for abuse of worker's rights. I'm not saying we give them a free ticket out of harms way: if they earned punishment, they should get it. But if they believe in what we believe in we should not tell them they cannot join with the movement.

[mykittyhasaboner]

But the main point of this thread was to discourage bias against the bourgeois as a whole. I admit, most of them are a bunch of wanks, but we cannot shut anyone out of the revolutionary left simply because of the class they were born into. Allowing people who are of bourgeois class but of proletarian thought would be a milestone in the elimination of class struggle, and thus the end of class war.

What point would "discouraging the bias against the bourgeoisie" serve?

There's no such thing as "proletarian thought", because selling your labor power to a capitalist is what makes someone proletarian, not their 'thought'. Also, surely someone who earns their living from exploiting workers won't want to overthrow themselves will they? We don't tolerate bourgeois influence in any way, shape, or form; because doing so only compromises the unity of class consciousness and socialist ideology among revolutionary movements.

[Communist Theory]

Of course. But if you were rich, but you hated the bourgeois and were not a business owner, and you were of proletarian mode of thought I would have no trouble with you joining the site or the movement. I think in the aftermath of a revolution, we should try the big businessmen for abuse of worker's rights. I'm not saying we give them a free ticket out of harms way: if they earned punishment, they should get it. But if they believe in what we believe in we should not tell them they cannot join with the movement.
I don't mind the rich if they just happened to have a bourgeoisie granddad. What I was getting at was I want all of the corporate execs to be lined up. As for trying the execs after the revolution, fuck that, we shouldn't have to work harder just to feed their sorry asses because they fucked the workers over I say we minimize what we need to waste on them and simply put a small piece of lead through their skull. . .or of course there is always the ice pick option.
Oh and we can take turns with hammer and sickle switching off ever other exec.
There's alot of things to choose from. :rolleyes:

[el_chavista]

A comment by Communist Theory on my profile page really got to me. It went to the effect of "I think all bourgeois scum should be put up against the wall and shot". But how many of you had a say in what class you were born into? Why do we assume that all people born into the proletariat are on our side while all people born into the bourgeois are our enemy? What have we got to gain by assuming that all people who belong to a certain class are against us?

Most of the people on this site are petty bourgeois according to my understanding. If you have the money to buy a computer, you certainly have the money to buy what you need. Thus, by strictly following traditional anarchist and communist beliefs, we are all "enemy's of the people". If Communist Theory is right, then all of us should be shot as "Bourgeois sucm". Please post your thoughts and if you happen to be communist theory, defend yourself
Actually, the capitalist magnates and their professional politics who rule the world are about 20,000. Your "class analysis" seems to misunderstand who is the real enemy of humanity.

[Oktyabr]

Actually, the capitalist magnates and their professional politics who rule the world are about 20,000. Your "class analysis" seems to misunderstand who is the real enemy of humanity.

Once again, I misused "petty bourgeois". I know that the majority of people on this site are well off, but I did not express it properly.

[Oktyabr]

What point would "discouraging the bias against the bourgeoisie" serve?

There's no such thing as "proletarian thought", because selling your labor power to a capitalist is what makes someone proletarian, not their 'thought'. Also, surely someone who earns their living from exploiting workers won't want to overthrow themselves will they? We don't tolerate bourgeois influence in any way, shape, or form; because doing so only compromises the unity of class consciousness and socialist ideology among revolutionary movements.

There are fascists and monarchists among the proletariat and there are communists and anarchists among the bourgeois. It doesen't matter what class youre born into, it matters what your mode of thought is. And I apologize for incorrect terminology. I just considered that "popular proletarian" style of thinking was socialism and "popular bourgeois" style of thinking was capitalism. But then I just realized that I contradicted myself.

[gorillafuck]

Once again, I misused "petty bourgeois". I know that the majority of people on this site are well off, but I did not express it properly.
While in my life I am getting along fine, how can you say that about this whole site? You don't know everyone on here (chances are you don't know anyone on here). I assure you some of the members of this site are definitely in very tough situations.

[Oktyabr]

While in my life I am getting along fine, how can you say that about this whole site? You don't know everyone on here (chances are you don't know anyone on here). I assure you some of the members of this site are definitely in very tough situations.

Notice I did not say all of them.

[ZeroNowhere]

1. what does it mean
2. why/how would you buy a computer if you were starving and needed food???
1. Small business owners (Hence petit-bourgeoisie). I'm fairly sure most people here aren't.
2. Irrelevant, because class is not defined in terms of income.

Though you do raise a valid point otherwise.
Well, kinda. Sorta. A bit. The whole 'Kill businessmen!', 'Capitalists are selfish, greedy bastards!', 'Capitalists hate you and would eat your babies if they could!' crap is rather annoying.


I think in the aftermath of a revolution, we should try the big businessmen for abuse of worker's rights.
Eh, tbh, I don't think that this would accomplish anything whatsoever. I am also not into schadenfreude that does not involve fictional characters (or those who play false metal).


What I'm pretty sure I posted on his profile was me referring to his former humanist capitalistic ideal and I said on my view of wealth I believe all the corporate fatcats should be lined up shot but before being shot should be forced to watch all the colored paper they "worked" so hard for be burned.Socialist revolutionaries, not Joker wannabes.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I don't care if you gave all of your money away, if you were the CEO of Blackwater I would shoot you in front of your family with no remorse.
Immature much?

[Oktyabr]

I was never pro-capitalist since I became a member of the site, that was just mis-communication, and besides thats in the past, don't bring it up if it means nothing. I meant middle class by "petty bourgeois". Incorrect terminology, but I did not realize it at that time.

[#FF0000]

I know that the majority of people on this site are well off

No you don't

And what "bias against the bourgeoisie" are you talking about? People around here don't hate people just because they're rich. I don't know where you got the idea that they/we did.

[Communist Theory]

Though you do raise a valid point otherwise.
Well, kinda. Sorta. A bit. The whole 'Kill businessmen!', 'Capitalists are selfish, greedy bastards!', 'Capitalists hate you and would eat your babies if they could!' crap is rather annoying.

Socialist revolutionaries, not Joker wannabes.

Well, we don't need to burn it in a pile but it does add nice effect (in my opinion) also if we could have like say umm Donald Trump on top of the pile that would be great. As for the whole you saying the "Capitalist hate you" crap is getting annoying what else are we going to do? Being a Communist I'm under the impression that my whole political ideal revolves around hating Capitalists (or at least complaining constantly about them). As I said I don't want to be working to feed them after the revolution when they won't be working for themselves (if we go with Oktyabr's suggestion we throw them in jail).

[Oktyabr]

Well, we don't need to burn it in a pile but it does add nice effect (in my opinion) also if we could have like say umm Donald Trump on top of the pile that would be great. As for the whole you saying the "Capitalist hate you" crap is getting annoying what else are we going to do? Being a Communist I'm under the impression that my whole political ideal revolves around hating Capitalists (or at least complaining constantly about them). As I said I don't want to be working to feed them after the revolution when they won't be working for themselves (if we go with Oktyabr's suggestion we throw them in jail).

I meant try them for crimes, and if their guilty let the people decide. If he's not, and he was a good and fair businessman (or as fair as they come) as revealed by evidence from his former employees, then he would be free to live his life alongside the rest of the community. I don't want a prison system. If the chains of the government are ever to be broken, we must destroy the institutions that upheld their unjust laws. However, if the people are ever to recognize the legitimacy of our form of society, then we must not come off as oppressors. For the sake of the peace and the good of the common people we should not kill without clear intent or purpose.

[( R )evolution]

My thoughts are that if we really decided to shoot everyone who is fairly well off, we'd be killing the vast majority of people who want a proletarian revolution. There are people who are "bourgeois" but whos mode of thought does not vaguely resemble that of traditional bourgeois.


Well off and petty-bourgeois/bourgeois are not the same thing.

[( R )evolution]

Of course. But if you were rich, but you hated the bourgeois and were not a business owner, and you were of proletarian mode of thought I would have no trouble with you joining the site or the movement. I think in the aftermath of a revolution, we should try the big businessmen for abuse of worker's rights. I'm not saying we give them a free ticket out of harms way: if they earned punishment, they should get it. But if they believe in what we believe in we should not tell them they cannot join with the movement.

I think you may have a misunderstanding of the terms proletariat and bourgeois.


The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labor and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death, whose sole existence depends on the demand for labor -- hence, on the changing state of business, on the vagaries of unbridled competition. The proletariat, or the class of proletarians, is, in a word, the working class of the 19th century.[1]

Its rather simply, if the bourgeois decide to fight us during the revolution you can guarantee we will be fighting them back with the intent to kill. If they, however, give up their arms and recognize the power of the proletariat and the end of their regime in power, we will gladly allow them to live.

[Il Medico]

1. You are right not all bourgeois are our enemy. Che was bourgeois for example.
2. Computer has become a necessity in the 1st world. Most working class people have one, including myself.

[Il Medico]

One more thought, on the whole good vs evil thing.

There is no such thing as good and evil. Only right and wrong. Right is what we can justify and wrong is what we can't.

There is no justification for a class system.

[Oktyabr]

One more thought, on the whole good vs evil thing.

There is no such thing as good and evil. Only right and wrong. Right is what we can justify and wrong is what we can't.

There is no justification for a class system.

I know, I'm just saying that we stereotype the bourgeois and the proletariat too much. Thats the point: I'm trying to get the message out that not all people will act according to their class.

[mykittyhasaboner]

I know, I'm just saying that we stereotype the bourgeois and the proletariat too much. Thats the point: I'm trying to get the message out that not all people will act according to their class.

Who the hell is 'we'? Class analysis isn't stereotypical, neither is implying that those who exploit, kill, divide, and conquer the working class shouldn't be attacked and ultimately abolished.

[Oktyabr]

Who the hell is 'we'? Class analysis isn't stereotypical, neither is implying that those who exploit, kill, divide, and conquer the working class shouldn't be attacked and ultimately abolished.

I find common sense to be lacking in you: about how many times has it been made obvious not just by me that not every proletarian believes in leftism, and not every person of upper class readily or knowably manipulates the proletariat? Some children of rich people grow up to be great revolutionaries and thinkers. Don't forget that Lenin's parents were bourgeois. You think he would have become the man we know today had a bourgeois holocaust wiped him and his family out regardless of their beliefs?

[gorillafuck]

I find common sense to be lacking in you: about how many times has it been made obvious not just by me that not every proletarian believes in leftism, and not every person of upper class readily or knowably manipulates the proletariat? Some children of rich people grow up to be great revolutionaries and thinkers. Don't forget that Lenin's parents were bourgeois. You think he would have become the man we know today had a bourgeois holocaust wiped him and his family out regardless of their beliefs?
This sort of logic makes it seem wrong to kill anyone based on who their children might be. We don't want a mass killing of every single member of the ruling class (well, some of us might) but revolutionary executions are a necessity.

[commyrebel]

I know support purging this world of the bourgeois but only the ones not willing to support communism and care more about money then human life

[Oktyabr]

This sort of logic makes it seem wrong to kill anyone based on who their children might be. We don't want a mass killing of every single member of the ruling class (well, some of us might) but revolutionary executions are a necessity.

Exactly, what I'm saying is though that I was worried that some people on this board wanted to wholly destroy the bourgeois without resorting to common sense to resolve the issues of capitalism. Communist Theory even stated he would have no second thoughts about murdering a business owner, so I feared the spread of this belief. I have no problem with killing, as long as it is justified and furthers a revolutionary goal. Killing just to kill like CT was arguing for is what I cannot stand for. It depends on who you kill and why. Just about the entire bourgeois can suck it, but I'm not just going to machine gun the lot of them to solve the problem. I am not going to murder a small minority of people within the large group of culprits who are potentially innocent. Fair trials to prove that we are not murderous thugs is all I ask for after the revolution concerning the bourgeois.

[gorillafuck]

Communist Theory even stated he would have no second thoughts about murdering a business owner, so I feared the spread of this belief.
That's Blackwater, though.

I'd like to tear the CEO of Blackwater a new asshole, to be honest.

[JimmyJazz]

My thoughts are that if we really decided to shoot everyone who is fairly well off, we'd be killing the vast majority of people who want a proletarian revolution. There are people who are "bourgeois" but whos mode of thought does not vaguely resemble that of traditional bourgeois.


Leftists who want a bourgeois holocaust are a very small minority


People aren't the problem. Class is the problem.

Don't hate the playa, hate the game!


Actually, the capitalist magnates and their professional politics who rule the world are about 20,000. Your "class analysis" seems to misunderstand who is the real enemy of humanity.

Yes (http://www.michaelparenti.org/Superrich.html).

[mykittyhasaboner]

I find common sense to be lacking in you:
:lol: Why thanks, I find your comment very funny and ironic.


about how many times has it been made obvious not just by me that not every proletarian believes in leftism,Err, sooo? Did every proletarian in Russia support/or participate in their revolution? No, but they sure managed to pull off a revolution.

Of course some people are against the working class seizing power this is a widely known fact. Every revolutionary movement has been confronted with great opposition by bourgeois elements, or elements of the working/peasant classes manipulated by the ruling class. My point is you don't need everyone to believe in revolution, just a lot of people, which in the US is hard to come by. But think about situations outside of the US like Nepal or almost anywhere in Europe for example; where there are mass movements dedicated to overthrowing capitalism. It may just make you think outside this little box you've put yourself into, because of this belief that we somehow need to draw lines of "good and evil" along class lines in the first place. Good and evil isn't how reality works.


and not every person of upper class readily or knowably manipulates the proletariat?Now this is really funny, because to pose this suggestion you have to contradict what your saying. Members of the 'upper class' make their living by directly exploiting labor from workers and generating surplus value as a result of it. If you acknowledge this fact, then how can you suggest that not every member of this class is responsible of profiting from exploitation?



Some children of rich people grow up to be great revolutionaries and thinkers. Don't forget that Lenin's parents were bourgeois. You think he would have become the man we know today had a bourgeois holocaust wiped him and his family out regardless of their beliefs?First, I'm quite perturbed by your (blatantly false) suggestion that Lenin's parents were bourgeois. It makes me think your just arguing for the sake of it, without even thinking about what you really think. Second, why does it matter what Lenin's parents where in the first place? While it may be true that in some point in history some revolutionaries had well off parents, it doesn't really matter. Not everyone is as lucky as them.

[Oktyabr]

But think about situations outside of the US like Nepal or almost anywhere in Europe for example; where there are mass movements dedicated to overthrowing capitalism. It may just make you think outside this little box you've put yourself into, because of this belief that we somehow need to draw lines of "good and evil" along class lines in the first place. Good and evil isn't how reality works.

Um? HELLO MR. SENSICAL: THATS EXACTLY WHAT i AM TRYING TO FUCKING SAY. I'M SAYING WE NEED TO GET OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR "LITTLE BOXES", I'M SAYING WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT COUNTRIES OTHER THAN THE U.S., I'M SAYING WE SHOULD NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANYONE WILLING TO JOIN THE REVOLUTION. WAY TO UNDERSTAND THE POINT.

[gorillafuck]

Um? HELLO MR. SENSICAL: THATS EXACTLY WHAT i AM TRYING TO FUCKING SAY. I'M SAYING WE NEED TO GET OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR "LITTLE BOXES", I'M SAYING WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT COUNTRIES OTHER THAN THE U.S., I'M SAYING WE SHOULD NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANYONE WILLING TO JOIN THE REVOLUTION. WAY TO UNDERSTAND THE POINT.
CAP LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!

I'm sure he agrees that we shouldn't shoot everyone in the head that profits off others (though if they actively fight against us then sure, shoot), but to think that more than maybe 3% of the bourgeois would support the revolution is ridiculous. I'm sure the Nazi's didn't like it when Nazi Germany was defeated.

[Oktyabr]

CAP LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!

I'm sure he agrees that we shouldn't shoot everyone in the head that profits off others (though if they actively fight against us then sure, shoot), but to think that more than maybe 3% of the bourgeois would support the revolution is ridiculous. I'm sure the Nazi's didn't like it when Nazi Germany was defeated.

Your critique is incredibly lame. Remember how I said we should put them on trial instead of mindlessly massacring hundreds of people for little social and political gain? If you want blood, you'll get it, but it will be blood on all of our hands, not just yours.

We can shoot most of them afterwards anyways, there just needs to be some outward justification for those who don't identify with us.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Um? HELLO MR. SENSICAL: THATS EXACTLY WHAT i AM TRYING TO FUCKING SAY. I'M SAYING WE NEED TO GET OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR "LITTLE BOXES", I'M SAYING WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT COUNTRIES OTHER THAN THE U.S., I'M SAYING WE SHOULD NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANYONE WILLING TO JOIN THE REVOLUTION. WAY TO UNDERSTAND THE POINT.

OK buddy, if you want to discuss please have the maturity to do so. Otherise you can kindly, fuck off.

If you weren't so damn condescending and up your own ass you would realize that your little idealist perception of not excluding people from revolution is your "little box". Lets say a worker's movement just try and simply convince everyone that worker's revolution is the right thing to do. Now if you use this tactic, instead of correctly pointing out your enemies and your allies, and deal with them accordingly, then your simply finished! I cannot stress enough how much of a suicide mission any revolutionary worker's movement would become if they tried be allies with everyone.

But what do I know, I'm just Mr. Sensical who want's to exclude people from revolution, even though said people are class enemies.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Your critique is incredibly lame. Remember how I said we should put them on trial instead of mindlessly massacring hundreds of people for little social and political gain? If you want blood, you'll get it, but it will be blood on all of our hands, not just yours.
I doubt anybody is against a trial where it is needed, there were even trials in the Soviet Union or Cuba for example. But during a war time situation, worker's defend themselves. Get over it.


We can shoot most of them afterwards anyways, there just needs to be some outward justification for those who don't identify with us.
You worry way to much about people "who don't identify with 'us'".

[Oktyabr]

You worry way to much about people "who don't identify with 'us'".

A number of failed revolutions did so because to many people were shocked by the extreme actions of the Left and recoiled away from it. They thus went over to the right wing to protect themsevles from the "Red menace".

I know I can be confrontrational and arrogant, but the root of many of my ideas comes from wanting to do what I feel can help the left grow stronger and eventually triumph.

[Oktyabr]

[QUOTE=mykittyhasaboner;1441731]I cannot stress enough how much of a suicide mission any revolutionary worker's movement would become if they tried be allies with everyone. QUOTE]

I'm not trying to be friends with everyone: I'm trying not to make enemies with specific kinds of people. fuck the bourgeois. Screw every one of them. But if you go around shooting people, you know what kind of propaganda victory that would be for the government? "Latest News! Murderous Reds purge and slaughter across the country!!!" just imagine that. If your going to shoot people and not have a good reason or outward proof that they really have done something wrong, then all the people stuck in the middle ground are going to shift right, and you will be a key contributor to re-nazi-fication in the end.

[Oktyabr]

Also, your name sucks shit. It sounds like some creepy perverted mentally unstable kind of username.

[Brother No. 1]

many people were shocked by the extreme actions of the Left and recoiled away from it.

Oh yes it was the "Extrems of the left" and not the constand propaganda that was bombared on them over the past years.:rolleyes:

The Capitalists over-exagerate things Communists have done or just compeletely lie about us. If there have been "Extremes of the left" then they were small and made into "large killings" by the Cappies.





They thus went over to the right wing to protect themsevles from the "Red menace".

Now were "they" over on the right side to begin with or has there been a non right wing party in most Western countries and in Western Europe? They Elite made them believe we were "Evil" and that we were "killers."

[Oktyabr]

Oh yes it was the "Extrems of the left" and not the constand propaganda that was bombared on them over the past years.:rolleyes:

The Capitalists over-exagerate things Communists have done or just compeletely lie about us. If there have been "Extremes of the left" then they were small and made into "large killings" by the Cappies.
Now were "they" over on the right side to begin with or has there been a non right wing party in most Western countries and in Western Europe? They Elite made them believe we were "Evil" and that we were "killers."

We forget that we murdered a couple thousand priests, nuns and bishops in spain (while justifiable to us) a little while ago. Like that was completely made up by the cappies :rolleyes:

You're underestimating how the fence sitters in a conflict can tip the balance if one side provokes them. Had such killings and events such as burning churches not occurred in the first place, then they would have no proof whatsoever. We have played ourselves into some incredibly nasty traps at several crucial moments in history, and pardon me for being worried that we do it again when we have the choice to. The cappies can lie, but sooner or later some media source will figure them out (Vietnam was going well for the White House until some reporters decided to tell Americans the truth).

[mykittyhasaboner]

Also, your name sucks shit. It sounds like some creepy perverted mentally unstable kind of username.
Then don't fucking read it, you arrogant prick.

I'm not going to debate with someone who resorts to personal attacks when they can't argue their own position.

[Glenn Beck]

We forget that we murdered a couple thousand priests, nuns and bishops in spain (while justifiable to us) a little while ago. Like that was completely made up by the cappies :rolleyes:

You're underestimating how the fence sitters in a conflict can tip the balance if one side provokes them. Had such killings and events such as burning churches not occurred in the first place, then they would have no proof whatsoever. We have played ourselves into some incredibly nasty traps at several crucial moments in history, and pardon me for being worried that we do it again when we have the choice to. The cappies can lie, but sooner or later some media source will figure them out (Vietnam was going well for the White House until some reporters decided to tell Americans the truth).

More common and damaging than lies are half-truths. Anti-clericalism in Spain is one excellent example of that. Trying to play to the sensibilities of bourgeois media, intellectuals, and governments is a fool's errand. Leaders who are too moderate for most of revleft and whose democratic credentials are spotless like Hugo Chávez and Salvador Allende have been hit with the most ridiculous calumnies that even some leftists end up believing. How do you think an actual militant revolutionary movement, no matter how humane and dignified, would fare in the media? Do you honestly think CNN will ever speak kindly of an anti-capitalist insurgency?

[Communist Theory]

Also, your name sucks shit. It sounds like some creepy perverted mentally unstable kind of username.
Come on quit with the spamming we don't mind sensible debate but if you want to go add some bullshit like this DON'T.

[Lynx]

The communist movement is not out for blood - that is the preserve of individuals with personal scores to settle.

[Black Sheep]

Why do we assume that all people born into the proletariat are on our side while all people born into the bourgeois are our enemy?We do not assume, but we suspect,because there is a logical basis that the bourgeoisie will act against us.Because they are not morons,and they have their wallets to safeguard.



What have we got to gain by assuming that all people who belong to a certain class are against us? It is a good precaution.A flock of sheep would 'assume' that every wolf out there is against them,so they would not accept one as a sepherd-dog.


Most of the people on this site are petty bourgeois according to my understanding. Yeah,most are.However, i doubt that many in here are of bourgeoisie backround.I doubt that more than 10 people in here have a father who owns a factory, for example.
Also bourgeoisie =/= petit bourgeoisie.In many countries, the latter are a significant percentage of the populace,they do have an advantage from the collapse of capitalism, so they are our allies, in many cases.I.e., in greece, the p-b are somewhere at 20-30%

In addition, while having to take into account one's socio-economic status (class), you also need to consider one's motives,will,and alignment.
A worker could very well be reactionary,against his interests, a p-b, or even a bourgeoisie could be with the working class, for ethical and moral reasons alone, and again against his interests.
Personally, i would not trust a cappie in my revolutionary party/organization, etc,because it is something i wouldn't risk, but that doesn't mean that i would shoot his head off, while he fought for our cause, just because he is a cappie.

[Old Man Diogenes]

I don't think any of us are advocating to shoot everyone who is from bourgeois background. We understand that you can be a committed class warrior and still be bourgeois.

Excellently put.

[HoChiMilo]

my.space.bar.is.screwed.up.so.sorry.for.the.period s.but.i.cant.resist.the.topic.at.hand.

this.one's.directed.at.'bathroom.stalinist'.
'Members of the 'upper class' make their living by directly exploiting labor from workers and generating surplus value as a result of it'

what.about.those.who.have.collected.inheretence.an d.for.some.reason.or.another.still.support.the.mov ement
or.won.the.lottery..sure,the.money.may.have.been.i ndirectly.acquired.through.exploitation.but.is.it. worth.damaging.our.idealogy's.reputation.by.roughs hod.killings
i'm.not.advocating.non-violent.revolution--there.are.capitalists.out.there.who.undoubtedly.de serve.lead.restitution.but.for.a.tactical/public.opinion.perspective.i.think.we'd.lose.a.lot .of.followers.if.we.didn't.act.with.some.reason.

with.socialism,violent.revolution.is.necessary.and .inevitable.but.we.can't.lose.touch.of.the.fact.th at.we're.fighting.for.socialism.as.an.end.to.war.a nd.needless.violence.

[Black Sheep]

my.space.bar.is.screwed.up.so.sorry.for.the.period s.but.i.cant.resist.the.topic.at.hand.
jesus christ,my eyes ... you could copy a space and paste it, ctrl+c, ctrl v.


'Members of the 'upper class' make their living by directly exploiting labor from workers and generating surplus value as a result of it'
Actually, the cappies just do not pay the full value of their labor to the workers, full labor value minus wage equals surplus value.


but.is.it.worth.dam aging.our.idealogy's.reputation.by.roughshod.killi ngs
I'd say that i dont care that much about our reputation, rather than the risks i would have to take, when considering my alliances, and distinguishing friend from foe.