Are we all ready for revolution!

[Arlekino]

Hello Comrades

I want to ask an opinion about how we can do it revolution? To my knowledge it is impossible because of NATO forces around all us that would be no solution for revolution? Or I do not know something?

[Искра]

We are not ready for revolution because majority of working class do not support our ideas jet. If they supported us no one will care about NATO forces.

[chaotic]

There is a long way to the revolution. But we shouldn't be impatient. Many things must be done before for a preparation.

[Arlekino]

Well I am apologetic for disapproval but if is bigger masses of revolution movement would be occur we can’t fight with no arms and NATO is too powerful forces.

[Comrade B]

We aren't ready for a revolution, but we can always take steps for preparing the revolution.

[red cat]

Subjective conditions are too weak in most countries.

[Axle]

The revolution is still years away, man. And NATO won't mean a damn thing when the soldiers of those respective countries are on our side.

[Revy]

The revolution is still years away, man. And NATO won't mean a damn thing when the soldiers of those respective countries are on our side.

Someone here told me I was being too optimistic because I thought it wouldn't need to take 50 more years for a world revolution to come:blink:

I'll take optimism over sheer pessimism. I don't want to have to wait until I'm 70.

[Axle]

Someone here told me I was being too optimistic because I thought it wouldn't need to take 50 more years for a world revolution to come:blink:

I'll take optimism over sheer pessimism. I don't want to have to wait until I'm 70.

If we really started hitting the pavement, getting our message out and cultivating good strong leadership, I don't see any reason why it would take even half that long.

[RedRise]

If we really started hitting the pavement, getting our message out and cultivating good strong leadership, I don't see any reason why it would take even half that long.

That's a good point but it's much easier said then done.:closedeyes: Personally I think that if we educate the younger generation about our cause, by the time they're old enough to fight for it they can rise up together as a community, a nation, or even a planet! I don't think there's anything we can really do to get immediate results. Unless your nation has a history of being oppressed and is getting angrier by the minute, people who don't know about this or think that communism as evil and we're all nazis etc, won't see any point in an uprising.

[RHIZOMES]

Wow there is certainly some strong millenialist thinking in this thread.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Wow there is certainly some strong millenialist thinking in this thread.
millenialist?

[Plagueround]

My combat boots are on back order. I'll let you know when they come in, then we can start.

On a serious note, I'd say keep doing the whole educate, agitate, organize thing and not worry about a timeline. If you're a socialist with the mindset that revolution is some far off abstract and that's what you pass on, that's all it ever will be. Alternately, if you keep thinking that it's going to be tomorrow and plan like that, you may run into shortcomings in organization, numbers, and support. Plan for both.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Right now conditions are not on our side - we need to organize and fight all the immediate fights right now that will help put our side back on the offensive in the class war. The union/anti-oppression/anti-war fights we participate in today will help expose people to our ideas and tactics and radicalize tomorrow's revolutionaries.

However, revolution isn't a + b + c = revolution and progress isn't a straight line. In the nationalistic fervor of 1914, few could see that a revolution would happen in a few years. This revolution radicalized huge numbers of workers all over the industrial world and led to revolutionary situations in many other countries and strike-waves across the capitalist countries.

I don't know if a successful revolution will happen in my lifetime but if the world events of just the short amount of time I've been an active radical are any indication we will definitely see scores of worker revolts and many revolutionary situations and (although I haven't lived through any in the US yet do to the current state of the labor movement) strike waves.

So I think that there's a chance we could see a revolution in a major country like Brazil or Egypt and those of us in other countries will suddenly be put into a position where the whole idea of revolution will be on the minds of millions of workers. In the down-times like this we just need to do our best to prepare for potential future surges in the working class movement because it will probably come suddenly with only years or months to try and navigate it.

[robbo203]

If we really started hitting the pavement, getting our message out and cultivating good strong leadership, I don't see any reason why it would take even half that long.

You are not going to get anywhere by cultivating "good strong leadership". The whole "leadership principle" is antithetical to working class self emancipation. It fosters a sense of dependence upon others to effect a revolution on our behalf and, of course, this is just not possible. It will only serve to reproduce a pro-capitalist outlook

One other thing - it is no good just talking about a "revolution". I would have thought that the most important thing to say about a revolution is its goal, its social objective. That means a fundamental change in the basis of society. The term "revolution" becomes meaningless unless explicitly linked with a clear conception of the nature of the post revolutionary society that is sought after. That is a moneyless , wageless stateless society based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth.

If you dont make this explicit connection , you run the risk of being confused with those who advocate a mere change from one form of capitalism to another (viz state capitalism)

[Revy]

You are not going to get anywhere by cultivating "good strong leadership". The whole "leadership principle" is antithetical to working class self emancipation. It fosters a sense of dependence upon others to effect a revolution on our behalf and, of course, this is just not possible. It will only serve to reproduce a pro-capitalist outlook

One other thing - it is no good just talking about a "revolution". I would have thought that the most important thing to say about a revolution is its goal, its social objective. That means a fundamental change in the basis of society. The term "revolution" becomes meaningless unless explicitly linked with a clear conception of the nature of the post revolutionary society that is sought after. That is a moneyless , wageless stateless society based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth.

If you dont make this explicit connection , you run the risk of being confused with those who advocate a mere change from one form of capitalism to another (viz state capitalism)

I agree, actually. Unfortunately there are those who think that wages and money can be reconciled with a classless society. They don't want to be seen as "utopian", I would gather.

I'm not sure about a state, although I would like to change the nature of the state. The means of production would reside firmly in the hands of the workers, unlike the neo-stagist BS we hear on here about socialism being a period where the state assumes control of capitalist production.

[Olerud]

The Uk is by no means ready for a revolution however I'm already sharpening my cutlass and musket in preparation

[pranabjyoti]

Actually the war between proletariat and capitalists is going on and win of revolution in country is like winning a frontier against capitalism-imperialism. In this field, the countries of the third world, which were under capitalist-imperialist oppression and the capitalist values is not as deep rooted like the european and other capitalist countries. Overthrowing semi-feudal and scarcly capitalist regimes in that countries can not be considered as a very big task.
BUT, THE REAL BIG TASK WILL START AFTER THE REVOLUTION. Progress in the road of science and technology. In that case, in my opinion, the real duty of the world proletariat is to help those countries, where workers have won a big battle in its way to develop it into a technologically advanced state.
So far, I have observed that we, who think that they are a part of world proletariat, lag behind. Though, most of the participants in this website is in hiding behind their username, but I really have doubt that whether there is any participant in this forums from countries like Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia or from revolutionary organizations, that have a comparatively strong base in their countries.
If countries like Venezuela, Cuba want to advance in the path of socialism. I hope they will understand the importance of technological progress and THEY SHOULD LOOK FOR OUTSIDE HELP. Cuba, during the last 50 years have created a very good human resource and Venezuela have sufficient capital from its oil funds. Together, if they are searching for new ideas, together they will pick some useful one and can easily done necessary research and devlopment work to flourish the idea. But, so far, at least I haven't observed such initiatives from their behalf.
In my opinion, I clearly want to say that the best way of preparing for revolution is to make a technological base under the control of the world proletariat, so that, when workers in any country will gain some victory in the political field. We, on behalf of world can hand over those technologies for their quick progress.
IT WILL BE VERY VERY HARD TO INSPIRE WORKERS OF COUNTRIES LIKE UK, USA FOR A REVOLUTION UNTIL AND UNLESS THEY FOUND THAT THEY AND THEIR COUNTRY IS LAGGING BEHIND A SOCIALIST COUNTRY IN TECHNOLOGICAL RESPECT AND THE CONDITIONS OF THE WORKERS ON THOSE COUNTRY IS IMPROVING RAPIDLY.
Hope to hear from other comrades in this regard.

[ComradeOm]

According to Lenin, a man who knew a thing or two about revolutions, the question can be summed on a very basic level:


It is only when the "lower classes" do not want to live in the old way and the "upper classes" cannot carry on in the old way that the revolution can triumph
Now does anyone really think that either condition is satisfied in the West today?

[ls]

The Uk is by no means ready for a revolution however I'm already sharpening my cutlass and musket in preparation

No, true, but there are quite a few different strikes here, there is militancy being expressed by workers in the UK quite a lot recently and if we can effectively coordinate it in the relatively near future.. who knows? :p

[Olerud]

No, true, but there are quite a few different strikes here, there is militancy being expressed by workers in the UK quite a lot recently and if we can effectively coordinate it in the relatively near future.. who knows? :p
I think there's a massive difference between that and full on armed struggle, let's be realistic.

[Olerud]

Oh and I don't really see any countries being willing to arm us since there is no USSR around any more :(

[Искра]

Oh and I don't really see any countries being willing to arm us since there is no USSR around any more :(
You mean sold us wrong gun and to suppress a revolution? ;)

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Someone here told me I was being too optimistic because I thought it wouldn't need to take 50 more years for a world revolution to come:blink:

I'll take optimism over sheer pessimism. I don't want to have to wait until I'm 70.
I think we shouldn't put an exact date on it, put I agree with you in believing it won't take another fifty years.

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

However I believe that to make a Revolution under the current circumstances (I mean without the atrocious consequence of capitalism becoming terrible clear in the First World), we have to go to the Third World. In the Third World, a Revolution can spring up any time, in the First World it doesn't look like it.
The Revolution will under the current circumstances first take place in the Third World, no doubt.

[ls]

I think there's a massive difference between that and full on armed struggle, let's be realistic.

:confused: Socialism has never come close to being achieved before (anywhere) by unarmed workers?


Oh and I don't really see any countries being willing to arm us since there is no USSR around any more :(

Great logic, the proletariat should always rely on a foreign power to provide the means for their own emancipation.

[Olerud]

I think we shouldn't put an exact date on it, put I agree with you in believing it won't take another fifty years.
I herd it would be on December 21st, 2012.


Great logic, the proletariat should always rely on a foreign power to provide the means for their own emancipation.
Ok, you paint your face with your own shit and run at the gates of 10 downing street with a slingshot and a piece of molding wood. :)

[ls]

Ok, you paint your face with your own shit and run at the gates of 10 downing street with a slingshot and a piece of molding wood. :)

I thought that's more what you would advocate, it's similar to what you advocate anyway. You want to wait for the next country that is the brilliant saviour of the world to supply us with weapons, both are completely possible, heroic and authentically proletarian scenarios. Nevermind striking workers, they don't mean a thing. Obviously I'm wrong and things like the 1907 Belfast strike never happened.

[Olerud]

Nevermind striking workers, they don't mean a thing.

Oh yes because that's what i said