The Militant Revolution

[Peace on Earth]

For the moment, let's be realistic and assume the overthrow of capitalism will require violent force. Now, in any area or nation, there are many people will many ideas and opinions. How will any revolutionary force be led in such a way that one group does not hold complete power over others, but at the same time can lead a coordinated assault on the capitalist system?

Even on Revleft, it's frightening seeing the level of arguments that ensue over pointless topics. With lives on the line, who will be making the final decisions (if anyone) and if conflict arises between revolutionary groups, how will a solution be brokered?

[EvilRedGuy]

Isn't it too early to worry about revolutionary tactics? First come education to the proletariat, then comes planning for the proletariat, then comes anger towards the capitalist system around the world, then comes overthrowing and class war tactics. Sorry, i just don't get it. ;)

[Widerstand]

Selforganized networks with minimal hierarchy (no hierarchy is a principal impossibility) work perfectly in coordinating, synchronizing, adopting common tactics, etc. This can be proven through maths, observed in nature, and in human societies as well (for example the spread of new cultural trends, the spread of slang).

What is necessary for this to happen is that the various leftist groups are connected with each other, and that they are not pursuing a no-cooperation course. The form of connection is of minor importance. You can have a formal exchange between two groups, one person being part of two groups, one person in group a who is friends with someone in group b, one person of each group reading the other's blog (if they both know that the other group does this), one person who has friends in both groups (though this is the slowest). Not pursuing a non-cooperation course is key here. Sadly many groups do this, because they think that cooperating with groups disagreeing with their platform is harmful in one way or another. Principal non-cooperation is harmful. Cooperation, no matter how limited (for example if the group launches it's own campaign in response to another group launching one), is always preferable. If they choose to coordinate campaigns or even have joint ones, even better.

[Manic Impressive]

For the moment, let's be realistic and assume the overthrow of capitalism will require violent force. Now, in any area or nation, there are many people will many ideas and opinions. How will any revolutionary force be led in such a way that one group does not hold complete power over others, but at the same time can lead a coordinated assault on the capitalist system?

Even on Revleft, it's frightening seeing the level of arguments that ensue over pointless topics. With lives on the line, who will be making the final decisions (if anyone) and if conflict arises between revolutionary groups, how will a solution be brokered?

You're assuming that the violence will come from us which at the moment is not very realistic imo. It's more realistic to concentrate on gaining the means of production non violently and then deal with the inevitable violent backlash from the bourgeoisie.

[Peace on Earth]

You're assuming that the violence will come from us which at the moment is not very realistic imo. It's more realistic to concentrate on gaining the means of production non violently and then deal with the inevitable violent backlash from the bourgeoisie.
Violence will occur; that is all I am assuming. I never said where it would first come from.


Isn't it too early to worry about revolutionary tactics? First come education to the proletariat, then comes planning for the proletariat, then comes anger towards the capitalist system around the world, then comes overthrowing and class war tactics. Sorry, i just don't get it. ;)
I'm just curious. :)