synthesis
11th August 2010, 03:01
So I was rummaging through the Trashcan, as I am prone to do - call me an e-freegan - and I came across this quote:
Secondly, one should consider the fact that revolution is not a military enterprise but a social one supported by armed struggle where necessary. Conventional military conflict as you describe it is not a part of anarchist revolution at all.
This idea deserves dissection, if only as a tactical and logistical exercise.
Where does the social enterprise end and the military enterprise begin?
Is the military enterprise simply an extension of collective aggression against capitalism? Or is it a qualitatively different phenomenon?
What exactly does it target: capitalism as a collection of individuals? As a system of exploitation? As a mode of production on a linear line of historical progression? All (or none) of the above? Most importantly: what is its purpose?
Discuss.
Secondly, one should consider the fact that revolution is not a military enterprise but a social one supported by armed struggle where necessary. Conventional military conflict as you describe it is not a part of anarchist revolution at all.
This idea deserves dissection, if only as a tactical and logistical exercise.
Where does the social enterprise end and the military enterprise begin?
Is the military enterprise simply an extension of collective aggression against capitalism? Or is it a qualitatively different phenomenon?
What exactly does it target: capitalism as a collection of individuals? As a system of exploitation? As a mode of production on a linear line of historical progression? All (or none) of the above? Most importantly: what is its purpose?
Discuss.