U.S. Soldiers Repugnant and Disgusting

[The Man]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368314/German-newspaper-publishes-suppressed-photos-U-S-soldiers-posing-partially-naked-Afghan-corpse.html


U.S. Soldiers are taking pictures with half-naked dead civilians in Afghanistan. If you have seen the pictures.. They are horrible..


http://www.drudgereport.com/am.jpg

[khad]

Over 1 million dead Iraqis agree: Liberal democracy is so much better than a crazy dictator. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/so-committed-peace-t151695/index.html?p=2051248#post2051248)

[daleckian]

Over 1 million dead Iraqis agree: Liberal democracy is so much better than a crazy dictator. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/so-committed-peace-t151695/index.html?p=2051248#post2051248)

Did that administrator on this forum really say that? wow, who is this guy/gal/whatever?

[Princess Luna]

Over 1 million dead Iraqis agree: Liberal democracy is so much better than a crazy dictator. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/so-committed-peace-t151695/index.html?p=2051248#post2051248)
Except Iraq didn't go from a crazy Dictatorship to a Liberal Democracy,
it went from a crazy Dictatorship to a Dictatorship who does whatever America tells it to do. If it was a Liberal Democracy the Iraqi people would have booted America out a long time ago.

[Threetune]

Except Iraq didn't go from a crazy Dictatorship to a Liberal Democracy,
it went from a crazy Dictatorship to a Dictatorship who does whatever America tells it to do. If it was a Liberal Democracy the Iraqi people would have booted America out a long time ago.



What, like the British have? And The Polish have? And the Italians have? And etc, etc...
What planet are you from?

[empiredestoryer]

he sure does look cool in his shades maybe we can even get his autograph if we ask him nicely ..A TRUE AMERICAN HERO

[Luís Henrique]

What, like the British have? And The Polish have? And the Italians have? And etc, etc...
What planet are you from?

Are Britain, Poland, or Italy under American military ocupation?

Luís Henrique

[RATM-Eubie]

Dont stereotype all US soldiers based on idiotic individuals like this one.
I have many military in my family and trust me not all of them are like this...

[empiredestoryer]

Dont stereotype all US soldiers based on idiotic individuals like this one.
I have many military in my family and trust me not all of them are like this...
your right mate not all us miltary are like that ...just 99 percent are PURE HUMANSCUM

[Per Levy]

your right mate not all us miltary are like that ...just 99 percent are PURE HUMANSCUM

you do know that a lot of poor joined the american military in order to earn money and survive, right? the military is not a nice thing but saying that "99% of the military personal is humanscum" is just wrong.

[Reznov]

Did that administrator on this forum really say that? wow, who is this guy/gal/whatever?

Hes the Nicolae Ceausescu of Revleft, what'd you expect?

[RATM-Eubie]

your right mate not all us miltary are like that ...just 99 percent are PURE HUMANSCUM

Thanks for proving how big an idiot you are.....

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

i wouldn't call all soldiers human scum as such. i've lost friends as they joined the british army, and i understand the avenues of poverty and desperation that leads many working people into the army. however, in pledging your loyalty to bourgois armies and actively engaging in the repression of the oppressed classes, you become an enemy and hold a responsibility for the institution you represent. in that sense, soldiers can be called repugnant, as they represent a disgusting, reactionary and repressive institution.

'good' soldiers are still soldiers and agents of repression. they might not all do things as demonstrated in the op, but they all stand in the army that does, regularly as part of them carrying out the campaigns of their bourgois leaders.

[empiredestoryer]

Thanks for proving how big an idiot you are.....
well that maybe true but its also true that the us army are complete scum one and all and nothing in the world makes me happyer than seeing that scum coming home in coffins

[RATM-Eubie]

well that maybe true but its also true that the us army are complete scum one and all and nothing in the world makes me happyer than seeing that scum coming home in coffins

Well im glad that you know that you are a complete (excuse my language) fucking moron. Really what are you some 13 year old who thinks its rebellious to see "the big bad Americans" die? Im anti war and all, i support the troops but not the mission. This is why most people dont take radicals seriously is because the stereotypes like this moron.
You do realize that the vast majority of soldiers are working class right? You do realize they join because they want an education and the military will pay for that right?
Im sure that only American solders in your book are just evil and everyone else is just good right?

[psgchisolm]

Over 1 million dead Iraqis agree: Liberal democracy is so much better than a crazy dictator. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/so-committed-peace-t151695/index.html?p=2051248#post2051248)2 Million dead Kurd's, Iranian's, Kuwaiti's, and Iraqi's also agree.
http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/hussein.html


Are Britain, Poland, or Italy under American military ocupation?

Luís Henrique
Italy and Germany were in WW2. Poland, tons of other Eastern European countries were liberated from the Nazi's by the Soviets. Said countries were also occupied by Soviet forces for a fair amount of time. After the collapse of the Soviet Union Eastern Europeans countries kicked the Russians out.

[empiredestoryer]

you support the troops well your bigger fool than me mate their pure scum one and all and the whole world knews it apart it seems from one fool living in some sister fucking red neck apart of kansas by the way you can guess im not from the usa and im not from the middle east:)

[Princess Luna]

you support the troops well your bigger fool than me mate their pure scum one and all and the whole world knews it apart it seems from one fool living in some sister fucking red neck apart of kansas by the way you can guess im not from the usa and im not from the middle east:)
wow i am impressed! it must have taken a lot of time and effort to visit every solider in the American (or British) army. I am sure you must have done that if you are so willing to call them all pure scum and say you are glad when they die because if you didn't that would just make you a asshole who likes to say rebellious sounding stuff even if he has no clue what the fuck he is talking about.

[Robocommie]

wow i am impressed! it must have taken a lot of time and effort to visit every solider in the American (or British) army. I am sure you must have done that if you are so willing to call them all pure scum and say you are glad when they die because if you didn't that would just make you a asshole who likes to say rebellious sounding stuff even if he has no clue what the fuck he is talking about.

I vote the latter!

Total douchebag anyway, talking about "sister fucking red neck part of Kansas." So nice to see a supposed Communist utter such disgusting stereotypes about poor Southerners. What a stunning example of worker's solidarity, what a laudable example of proletarian internationalism. What a total cock.

[#FF0000]

2 Million dead Kurd's, Iranian's, Kuwaiti's, and Iraqi's also agree.
http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/hussein.html



And it was allllll made possible thanks to US bombs 'n gas.

[Dunk]

Most military men and women are overwhelmingly working class, and overwhelmingly deluded that they are part of "the good guys". I'm a veteran. My experiences overseas opened my eyes. It does the same to some. Others, it ossifies their delusions.

While some simply see a monster displaying monstrous behavior in this picture, I see the system that created the monster. This monster doesn't know he's a monster. He was convinced by propaganda and the conditions in his life (poor, needs education/job, convinced the US stands for good through outside influences) that joining the military was for him. He then finds himself in hostile land, with no clear enemies to fight - so everyone is an enemy. Taking a picture with a dead Afghan probably is a way to cope with the threat his life is under - because coming across what he perceives to be a dead enemy can only be a relief to him. If he isn't killed in Afghanistan - which odds are pretty good he won't be - he'll face nightmares and mental anguish for a long portion of his life thanks to his experiences. He probably already does.

I don't want you to feel sorry for him - or for other military men and women - I want you to understand other people.

I was never in a firefight, although odds are this man has. I've fought men hand to hand dozens of times in life or death situations, have witnessed men attempt suicide, seen people shot at, but I've never been in a firefight. I have nightmares every night. My nightmares focus around the terror of realizing that there is no escape - from zombies, hostile forces, or sometimes an "other" - and that whatever weapon I have never works. They started in 2007, and I've had the same nightmares every night since. Still, these nightmares aren't really comparable to the waking nightmare of realizing I wasn't one of the "good guys".

So while I think this picture is a hideous example of some of the worst behavior human beings are capable of - of gloating over the corpses of people who should have never been harmed, it doesn't make me hate working class young adults who join the military, or fall into the easy trap of thinking in nationalist terms, though I accuse no one in this thread of such a thing.

As for myself, as I imagine many others here also agree, this picture is a good reminder of how important it is to destroy capitalism - because there can be no victory against imperialism unless private ownership is annihilated.

[empiredestoryer]

maybe when you have a british or us soldier standing around your corner or kicking in your door then you can speak i have its was a british soldier in ireland and hes a much a scumbag as the us soldier who kicks a door in in iraq or any more country in the middle east where the us scumbags have invaded but lads it does make me even happyer seeing british soldiers coming home in coffins :)

[khad]

Well im glad that you know that you are a complete (excuse my language) fucking moron. Really what are you some 13 year old who thinks its rebellious to see "the big bad Americans" die? Im anti war and all, i support the troops but not the mission. This is why most people dont take radicals seriously is because the stereotypes like this moron.
People certainly took Marx seriously with his "imperialist soldiers deserve what they get" line.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/09/16.htm


However infamous the conduct of the Sepoys, it is only the reflex, in a concentrated form, of England’s own conduct in India, not only during the epoch of the foundation of her Eastern Empire, but even during the last ten years of a long-settled rule. To characterize that rule, it suffices to say that torture formed ail organic institution of its financial policy. There is something in human history like retribution: and it is a rule of historical retribution that its instrument be forged not by the offended, but by the offender himself.

The first blow dealt to the French monarchy proceeded from the nobility, not from the peasants. The Indian revolt does not commence with the Ryots, tortured, dishonored and stripped naked by the British, but with the Sepoys, clad, fed, petted, fatted and pampered by them. To find parallels to the Sepoy atrocities, we need not, as some London papers pretend, fall back on the middle ages, not, even wander beyond the history of contemporary England. All we want is to study the first Chinese war, an event, so to say, of yesterday. The English soldiery then committed abominations for the mere fun of it; their passions being neither sanctified by religious fanaticism nor exacerbated by hatred against an overbearing and conquering race, nor provoked by the stern resistance of a heroic enemy. The violations of women, the spittings of children, the roastings of whole villages, were then mere wanton sports, not recorded by Mandarins, but by British officers themselves.
It's interesting to observe that while revleft does not tolerate anything but hatred for police (in fact, a user was recently restricted for defending cops as working class), any hatred of imperialist troops provokes an irrational defensive response from the peanut gallery of liberals, even though soldiers of empire do just about the same job as police - and they do it on a global scale.

Let's play a game:

While some simply see a monster displaying monstrous behavior in this picture, I see the system that created the monster. This monster doesn't know he's a monster. He was convinced by propaganda and the conditions in his life (http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/agunn/teaching/enl3251_spring2005/omf/GREENE.htm) (poor, needs education/job, convinced the police do good in the community (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-124264823.html)) that becoming a cop was for him. He then finds himself in a hostile community (http://www.insurgentamerican.net/2007/05/28/why-people-hate-cops/) and sees violence and death every day. He learns to hate the community in his charge, suspecting everyone and believing no one. Taking a picture with dead kids (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-299525/Officer-dismissed-dead-body-photo.html) after a gang-related shootout is a way to cope with the threat his life is under - because coming across what he perceives to be a dead enemy can only be a relief to him. If he isn't killed in or maimed in the line of duty (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2010/1228/Why-police-officer-deaths-rose-37-percent-in-2010), he'll face nightmares and mental anguish for a long portion of his life thanks to his experiences. He probably already does. (http://www.aaets.org/article132.htm)

[RATM-Eubie]

Really dont care what Marx has to say about this... Yea Marx was a genius but im not gonna agree with everything he says just because he is Marx. I dont uphold him like a God i just uphold his ideas and treat him like a genius. Not all soldiers are evil. I agree with what Dunk has to say. Hell i was at one point thinking about joining the military to get my college pay for but i agree 100% with what Dunk has to say, couldnt of said it any better myself.

[empiredestoryer]

three british soldiers were killed in afganstan today isnt life great:)

[Pretty Flaco]

Really dont care what Marx has to say about this... Yea Marx was a genius but im not gonna agree with everything he says just because he is Marx. I dont uphold him like a God i just uphold his ideas and treat him like a genius. Not all soldiers are evil. I agree with what Dunk has to say. Hell i was at one point thinking about joining the military to get my college pay for but i agree 100% with what Dunk has to say, couldnt of said it any better myself.


There's a fair amount of people in the military for that reason. If I want to go to college, it might actually be in my best interest to join the military. Just because I join doesn't mean I'm actually doing any killing either.


three british soldiers were killed in afganstan today isnt life great:)

What kind of deranged person finds enjoyment in the death of people they're not even familiar with? man you're fucked up.

[Dunk]

I think I need to respond to the reasonable criticism khad has posted.


If he isn't killed in Afghanistan - which odds are pretty good he won't be - he'll face nightmares and mental anguish for a long portion of his life thanks to his experiences. He probably already does.

Despite the following "I don't want you to feel sorry for him..." I need to iterate that while I've meant to promote an understanding of how the man in the picture became a monster, I didn't mean to suggest and am sorry if I did that the personal repercussions he almost certainly is facing or will face absolves him of any wrongdoing. The issues I deal with similarly do not afford me self-forgiveness, and there are none who have the authority to grant me forgiveness.

Understanding how this man came to gloat over a corpse does not excuse the material support he provides for an imperialist mission, nor does it excuse his extraordinarily offensive behavior displayed in the photographs.

I think an important thing to keep in mind when the anger that imperialism arises in many of us on the left is that, yes, while the struggle against imperialism must be supported, we should not fall into the traps of focusing on imperialist armed forces as the source of imperialism - it's too easy to begin to think "Damn those fucking brutal Americans!" or "I like seeing those British dogs come home in a wooden box!" and fall into nationalist thinking.

The annihilation of private ownership - which is the source of imperialism - requires proletarian internationalism.

[#FF0000]

Really dont care what Marx has to say about this... Yea Marx was a genius but im not gonna agree with everything he says just because he is Marx. I dont uphold him like a God i just uphold his ideas and treat him like a genius. Not all soldiers are evil. I agree with what Dunk has to say. Hell i was at one point thinking about joining the military to get my college pay for but i agree 100% with what Dunk has to say, couldnt of said it any better myself.

It has nothing to do whatsoever with whether or not soldiers are "evil". It's what soldiers do. Soldiers, like cops, are the fist of the ruling class. Their job description is the serve the ruling class.

It's just that simple. Individual cops and soldiers might be a-okay people, just like someone who has a job as a driver for the Mafia might be an alright person. Doesn't change the fact that he's working for the Mafia.

[progressive_lefty]

They are animals. It's so sad to know that they are spread across the world Japan, Korea, Australia, Europe.. Mostly against the will of those country's populations.

[Metacomet]

I was under the impression that more and more of the people in the American armed forces are from upper middle class, evangelical backgrounds? Am I mistaken?

[empiredestoryer]

They are animals. It's so sad to know that they are spread across the world Japan, Korea, Australia, Europe.. Mostly against the will of those country's populations.
your right they are animals but theyve been getting a rough time lately and i dont think they like it:)

[Princess Luna]

I was under the impression that more and more of the people in the American armed forces are from upper middle class, evangelical backgrounds? Am I mistaken?
No, most are from the working class and join for the benifits (such as free collage) or out of a misguided sense of patriotism.

[khad]

No, most are from the working class and join for the benifits (such as free collage) or out of a misguided sense of patriotism.
Have you ever stepped in a military infested shithole town? It's interesting to note that all these soldiers are curiously better off than the actual working class.

There's a reason why military towns didn't get hit with the foreclosure epidemic.

[Princess Luna]

Have you ever stepped in a military infested shithole town? It's interesting to note that all these soldiers are curiously better off than the actual working class.

There's a reason why military towns didn't get hit with the foreclosure epidemic.
How soldiers live while in the military has nothing to do with how they lived before they joined it.

[A.J.]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368314/German-newspaper-publishes-suppressed-photos-U-S-soldiers-posing-partially-naked-Afghan-corpse.html


U.S. Soldiers are taking pictures with half-naked dead civilians in Afghanistan. If you have seen the pictures.. They are horrible..


http://www.drudgereport.com/am.jpg

I believe this is what's called "atrocity tourism"

[Queercommie Girl]

It has nothing to do whatsoever with whether or not soldiers are "evil". It's what soldiers do. Soldiers, like cops, are the fist of the ruling class. Their job description is the serve the ruling class.

It's just that simple. Individual cops and soldiers might be a-okay people, just like someone who has a job as a driver for the Mafia might be an alright person. Doesn't change the fact that he's working for the Mafia.


Agree. It's not primarily a moral critique, but an institutional one.

Certain people become reactionary (and just because they are working class doesn't mean they can't be reactionary, working class people aren't all "saints") not due to any "intrinsic moral quality", but due to their institutional status.

The majority of reactionary people aren't the typical "pure evil guys" you see in those Hollywood-style films. The idea of "pure good and evil", inherited from the Abrahamic religions, is a philosophically reactionary idea that needs to be destroyed. "Pure good" and "pure evil" simply don't exist. They never did in the entire universe, and they never will. Even Hitler who gassed 6 million Jews isn't "pure evil". Everything is conditional. There is a rational cause for everything in existence.

[Queercommie Girl]

Individual US soldiers aren't intrinsically "evil", but the military institution of the capitalist United States is completely and utterly reactionary.

Genuine Marxists should ultimately plan to have an uprising of rank-and-file soldiers against the ultra-reactionary and semi-fascist military aristocracy in the US state. Like how 2500 years ago rank-and-file peasant soldiers in Zhou China rebelled and cut down their superiors - the slavelord aristocrats dressed in bronze armour, with their iron swords.

This is partly why I don't support gun control in the US. Guns could potentially play a revolutionary role in the US in overthrowing the bourgeois aristocracy, just like how iron swords helped the new feudal landlord class overthrow the slavelord aristocracy in ancient China 2500 years ago.

The military aristocracy is always a reactionary force in society, and "gun control" is a way for the elitist military aristocracy to take armed violent power away from the hands of the people at large. In Bronze Age China, only the ruling slavelords could possess metal weapons and armour, while peasants and slaves used tools made from stone. This prevented the lower classes from violently fighting back. The invention of the great technology of iron metallurgy changed all this. Iron swords and iron spears are much cheaper than Bronze weapons. For the first time in Chinese history, the lowly peasant could possess a metallic weapon, and Chinese slavery society was destroyed and replaced by feudalism, which is more progressive.

[Queercommie Girl]

Finally, here is a line from a relatively progressive anti-war poem written in Tang Dynasty China more than 1000 years ago, (when feudal China was the most powerful empire in the world) I give it to all the soldiers of the Western world, especially US soldiers:

Year after year the skeletal remains of soldiers litter the lands beyond the Great Wall,

Only to see Western-style grapes flow into the villas of the Han aristocrats.

US soldiers are losing their lives as reactionary immoral conquerors of foreign lands for nothing, absolutely nothing. They have died for nothing. Their deaths are nothing but a complete and total waste of human lives. American soldiers are dying only to allow super-rich bourgeois aristocrats in the US continue to indulge in their corrupt lives of hundreds of mistresses and huge banquets and expensive cars, while the working class families and relatives of these soldiers are losing their jobs and their social welfare.

Better for working class soldiers to rise up and kill off the bourgeois aristocracy ruling America and oppressing the American people.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

it is worth pointing out that soldiers may have been working class before they signed to fight the wars of the bourgeois, but after that, they are no more working class than a lad from a working class background who went on to own a factory that employs cheap immigrant labour. i'm unsure of what class they are specifically part of, but it is not proletariat. perhaps soldiers and indeed all members of the repressive state apparatus are in a class of their own? i'd like to know if there's a specific class definition with regards to this.

[Queercommie Girl]

Rank-and-file soldiers are technically a part of the working class, but this doesn't mean they can't be reactionary, if they serve in a reactionary institution. Who says no section of the working class can be reactionary?

Say one person works for a mafia organisation that is economically run like a capitalist business. Then from a purely economic point of view, such a person would be a worker. But he/she would be a reactionary worker, due to the nature of his/her work.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Rank-and-file soldiers are technically a part of the working class, but this doesn't mean they can't be reactionary, if they serve in a reactionary institution. Who says no section of the working class can be reactionary?

Say one person works for a mafia organisation that is economically run like a capitalist business. Then from a purely economic point of view, such a person would be a worker. But he/she would be a reactionary worker, due to the nature of his/her work.

i'm not so sure that rank-and-file soldiers share the same relation to the means of production as ordinary workers. an old friend became a solder, rank-and-file, and had benefits to his career similar to, or even better than those a manager may receive. we don't consider managers a part of the proletariat generally and they work for wages, and solder careers go way beyond the usual wage labour dynamics, from what i know from soldiers i've known personally - they have always done far better than workers i know.

[brigadista]

corporate mercenaries fooled into thinking they are being "patriotic"when they are just corporate rich mens armies serving corporate rich mens states... no excuses

[Queercommie Girl]

Not all workers are equal economically. Even in civilian society, professional "middle-class" workers earn a lot more than a migrant part-time low-income worker.

Also, in many countries, soldiers are actually extremely poor. Even in the US, there are accounts of veterans not being able to sustain a decent livelihood at all once they leave the force.

[Queercommie Girl]

corporate mercenaries fooled into thinking they are being "patriotic"when they are just corporate rich mens armies serving corporate rich mens states... no excuses

Strategically, if US soldiers can be made to rebel, even partly, it would be a huge blow to the US capitalist state machine.

[TC]

Dont stereotype all US soldiers based on idiotic individuals like this one.
I have many military in my family and trust me not all of them are like this...

Whether or not they take sadistic delight in murder, all are hired murderers for US imperialism - when you sign up you signal your willingness to murder on command.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Not all workers are equal economically. Even in civilian society, professional "middle-class" workers earn a lot more than a migrant part-time low-income worker.

Also, in many countries, soldiers are actually extremely poor. Even in the US, there are accounts of veterans not being able to sustain a decent livelihood at all once they leave the force.

i do understand that, i just find it difficult to view soldiers as a section of the proletariat, when they are active in the violent, murderous repression of oppressed people. i am not disagreeing with you though objectively.

[brigadista]

Strategically, if US soldiers can be made to rebel, even partly, it would be a huge blow to the US capitalist state machine.

unlikely without the draft at this time

[RATM-Eubie]

Whether or not they take sadistic delight in murder, all are hired murderers for US imperialism - when you sign up you signal your willingness to murder on command.

Alright going from the standpoint, are all soldiers all around the world just "hired murderers" then? If you are a soldier for a state are you just a "hired murderer" no matter what your reasoning for joining?

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Alright going from the standpoint, are all soldiers all around the world just "hired murderers" then? If you are a soldier for a state are you just a "hired murderer" no matter what your reasoning for joining?

is that such a difficult concept to grasp? of course they are hired killers, they are quite literally paid to kill. their reasons for embracing this employment opportunity are irrelevant in this regard.

[RATM-Eubie]

is that such a difficult concept to grasp? of course they are hired killers, they are quite literally paid to kill. their reasons for embracing this employment opportunity are irrelevant in this regard.

Really everyone is hired to "kill"? Not everyone in the military is "hired to kill" there is a lot of other shit in the military to do other than to be "hired to kill"...... Lots of other stuff..... No doubt that there are people that are hired to kill because that is part of some jobs in the military...
Anyways what i was saying and my point was TC seems to make it sound like that they enjoy what they are doing, which for some of them is killing. My point is when you join the military you have no choice where you go. And what is "murder"? If someone is trying to kill you and you shoot back is that "murder"? Dont agree with any invasion but i do know that not all US soldiers are "murderers".
I support the troops but no the mission they are currently undertaking... Some people have little to no choice but to join the military to have a better life for them and their families, its one of the few choices they have... Its called understanding...

[Optiow]

Wankers.

[khad]

The class dynamics are different between a conscript army and a professional army like the US army today.

Professional armies have an illustrious history of crushing workers' movements. Anyone remember the Paris Commune?

[Queercommie Girl]

Alright going from the standpoint, are all soldiers all around the world just "hired murderers" then? If you are a soldier for a state are you just a "hired murderer" no matter what your reasoning for joining?

In an institutional sense, not in a moral sense, yes it is indeed the case. This is because ultimately revolutionary Marxists seek to overthrow the existing capitalist state, and the armed forces serve the intrinsic interests of the capitalist state.

This doesn't mean the army is "evil", it's just that frankly strategically the army is in the way of the revolution, and therefore as an institution must be completely dismantled, replaced by the armed people.

[Queercommie Girl]

The class dynamics are different between a conscript army and a professional army like the US army today.

Professional armies have an illustrious history of crushing workers' movements. Anyone remember the Paris Commune?

That's a good point, khad.

Of course the armies of the ancient Chinese feudal dynasties were different because they consisted largely of conscripted (sometimes forced) peasants.

[Queercommie Girl]

I support the troops but no the mission they are currently undertaking... Some people have little to no choice but to join the military to have a better life for them and their families, its one of the few choices they have... Its called understanding...


Support the rank-and-file troops if you want, but you must not support the actual institution of the US army if you still call yourself a revolutionary socialist.

Socialism cannot be established on the existing basis of the US state machine. That's Marxism ABC.

[#FF0000]

Really everyone is hired to "kill"? Not everyone in the military is "hired to kill" there is a lot of other shit in the military to do other than to be "hired to kill"...... Lots of other stuff..... No doubt that there are people that are hired to kill because that is part of some jobs in the military...

If you don't like the phrase "hired to kill", then how about the less controversial and perhaps more correct "hired to directly serve the ruling class"?


My point is when you join the military you have no choice where you go. That doesn't really matter. No matter where you go, you're working for ruling class interests and against working class interests.


And what is "murder"? If someone is trying to kill you and you shoot back is that "murder"?Yeah, it kinda is when you're part of an invasion force.


Some people have little to no choice but to join the military to have a better life for them and their families, its one of the few choices they have... Its called understanding...It's one of the only choices they think they have, and while I definitely understand it (we all do, I think), I still don't support it, and I still don't just let them join without trying very hard to change their minds.

Still, when it comes to individual soldiers, I think of their decision to join the military the same way I would think of someone's decision to shoot heroin or join any other gang -- as a terrible mistake they made that doesn't necessarily make them a terrible person.

And, listen, if you won't buy this line from us, then how about you go ahead and listen to this guy?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/54/SmedleyButler.jpeg/150px-SmedleyButler.jpeg

His name's Smedley Butler, and he won two motherfucking medals of honor and lived to talk about both of them.

And what would this man, a two-time Medal Of Honor recipient, and a Major in the Marine Corps, have to say about the military?


"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents." Welp.

You know, it goes without saying that people who join the army don't see themselves in this way, but we aren't concerned with perception. We're concerned with things as they actually are.

[TC]

Really everyone is hired to "kill"? Not everyone in the military is "hired to kill" there is a lot of other shit in the military to do other than to be "hired to kill"...... Lots of other stuff..... No doubt that there are people that are hired to kill because that is part of some jobs in the military...

No, everyone last one of them is a hired murderer. Some of them murder by pulling triggers and some of them murder by providing logistical support to those who pull triggers. If a group of gangsters shoots up a restaurant to kill their rivals, its not just the person who pulled the trigger who is charged with murder, but the getaway driver too.



Anyways what i was saying and my point was TC seems to make it sound like that they enjoy what they are doing, which for some of them is killing.

I know that it helps psychologically to pretend that they murder out of devotion to god, country and family - but the reality as evidenced by numerous accounts is that many do enjoy killing. But this is really besides the point; it is totally irrelevant whether they like murdering or not to the fact that they are murderers. If your husband, wife, daughter, son, mother or father, is gunned down by an occupying army or a street gang, you don't care whether they enjoyed it.


My point is when you join the military you have no choice where you go.

You have a choice to join or not to join - and if you join while your government is engaged in several wars of aggression and occupation you anticipate being deployed to an illegal war zone. Or you anticipate helping them commit those crimes by relieving pressure from other fronts and bases so others can go to the war zone. These are not conscripts, these are volunteer killers.


And what is "murder"? If someone is trying to kill you and you shoot back is that "murder"?

Self-defense is only an excuse that justifies killing when you are part of a defending force - not when you're part of an occupation or invasion.

If an armed robber breaks into your house and shoots at you and you return fire killing them - this is justifiable homocide not murder, because it is excused by self defense.

However if you break into someone's house with an assault rifle and they shoot at you - if you return fire and kill them this is murder, even if they shot first, because you aggressed against them, you put yourself in a position where armed confrontation was going to take place whereas they merely responded to armed invaders.

The analogy is obvious - if you're in the Iraqi army or Iraqi resistance, if you were born in Iraq, you have no choice but to meet violence with violence because if you do not you or your family or others of your country will simply be slaughtered. If you're in the American army in Iraq however - you voluntarily introduced violence and aggression into the situation - you created the conditions where a shootout between yourself and the resistance would occur. In this way, resistance soldiers are not murderers, but American soldiers are.



I support the troops but no the mission they are currently undertaking...

Then your support is just nationalist jingoism. Do you support the resistance soldiers and the mission they undertake? Or are you just a nationalist?


Some people have little to no choice but to join the military to have a better life for them and their families, its one of the few choices they have... Its called understanding...

I have zero understanding for anyone who murders for a better life for themselves and their family, whether they murder for the mob or for the state. Simply because these people are motivated not by patriotism but by selfishness - and yes indeed it is selfish to think that your debt-free college education is worth a price paid in blood by people in the middle east - does not make these people more sympathetic, it makes them worthy of more condemnation.

It is also simply false that they have little to no choice but to join - anyone qualified to join the military is qualified to do other things - domestic non-violent illegal activity is also a choice far more honorable than joining the military and a choice they should have taken.

[PhoenixAsh]

O..Wow

...so we have come to the point that we actually condemn people for survival. Well..some revolutionaries seem to think people should rather starve because they are poor, have no education or job opportunity...joining the army because you want to eat and provide for their family is naturally mightily selfish if you want to eat and deserves extra condemnation! :rolleyes: Where have I heard such rethorics before???


The army is a reactionary institution based on the myth of right of conquests and supports the establishment. Regardless of this being a socialist or capitalist establishment...this goes for all armies. This ambition needs to be fed by large hordes of poor people who will actually join the fighting....people who litteraly have no chance in society and only have very few options to survive and make a living.

And that makes the army different from the cops....while it essentially performs the same function.

Now...if association is being guilty of the deed...you know...the get away driver etc. doesn't that make everybody slightly involved in the military apparatus or with the military apparatus equally guilty? Workers in the food processing industry which sells to the army, rubber manufacturers and the workers in the plants and refineries...paper mills, texile industry....all these workers contribute daily to the continued existence and functioning of the criminal apparatus that is the military....and all work to survive and better themselves.

So...yeah...the intent of the argument is sound...in as far as it criticises the military... But what you are actually saying and what the implication of that is is insane.

[khad]

O..Wow

...so we have come to the point that we actually condemn people for survival. Well..some revolutionaries seem to think people should rather starve because they are poor, have no education or job opportunity...joining the army because you want to eat and provide for their family is naturally mightily selfish if you want to eat and deserves extra condemnation! :rolleyes: Where have I heard such rethorics before??
I would have to disagree on this one. You make it seem so dire when in fact the financial situation in today's professional militaries actually makes soldiers better off than people of the regular working class. They go to the military because the prospect of working as low-paid service worker and drawing food stamps is that much more scary to them.

You hear "nigga's gotta eat" so much from these people, but when you probe further they come out with rationales about wanting to start a career and get references and education for it. You can feed yourself on food stamps and welfare, but that's socially stigmatized. However, drawing pension benefits and other forms of assistance from the military is regarded as honorable. It is never about survival but upward mobility that staying in the actual working class doesn't give.

Job assistance like this gives veterans a huge advantage over the regular working class: http://www.military.com/Careers/Home
Pensions: http://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/veterans-pensions
Lifetime health care: http://www.tricare.mil/

[PhoenixAsh]

20% of the US recruits came from the poorest families in the US. The avarage amount of enlisted men who originated from the poorest strata avarage 30%. The avarage income over all enlisted men and officers families is $41.141 according to the Heritage foundation...which is $ 600 lower than the avarage US income.

That said the argument here is not limited to the US army but to armies the world over. We are making generalisations here.

Traditionally in the course of history from early modern era to contemporary armies has been that the rank and file is mainly made up by the lowest strata of society. That mix maybe somehow shift with the introduction of professional armies for some countries...but that does not negate the fact that most soldiers are from the lowest and lower class in society.

Taking a job because of lack of job opportunity or not wanting to remain at a certain position for the rest of your live is nothing to be scolded for. Everybody with a job is doing exactly that....getting a job within the capitalist system is benefitting that system and you are in fact collaborating with the system. Nevertheless we are not scolding workers for working and in someway strengthening the system.

[Impulse97]

Based on what I see here it seems to me that poor workers should be forced to stay poor, hungry and sick because that's solidarity. And as we all know solidarity > adequate living. :rolleyes:

I fail to see how wanting a better life for yourself or family is wrong.

[Gorilla]

V. I. Lenin, Terms of Admission into Communist International


4. Persistent and systematic propaganda and agitation must be conducted in the armed forces, and Communist cells formed in every military unit. In the main Communists will have to do this work illegally; failure to engage in it would be tantamount to a betrayal of their revolutionary duty and incompatible with membership in the Third International.


http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/jul/x01.htm

(Granted, there is a satisfying tingle of epater la bourgeoisie to be had by taking a "Fuck The Troops" line. Nevertheless this should be resisted.)

[Queercommie Girl]

Traditionally in the course of history from early modern era to contemporary armies has been that the rank and file is mainly made up by the lowest strata of society. That mix maybe somehow shift with the introduction of professional armies for some countries...but that does not negate the fact that most soldiers are from the lowest and lower class in society.


In many feudal countries too in ancient times, especially countries like feudal China, the state army largely consisted of conscripted poor peasants.

The Han Chinese never had a special military caste like European knights, Japanese samurai or Mongol horsemen. Han soldiers, whether in the ancient feudal agricultural era or the modern industrial era, largely consisted of the poor. Whenever certain special military castes did exist in certain Chinese dynasties, it was always introduced by the nomads from the north, not something inherent in Han culture. (Han armies in ancient times also had proportionally fewer horsemen compared with Altaic or European forces of a similar time period, they were much more infantry-based - swordsmen, spearmen and archers, and later artillery too, after gunpowder was invented in China)

Of all the Han Chinese feudal dynasties, only the Tang Dynasty had an aristocratic military caste to some extent, because the Tang ruling class was semi-Han and semi-Xianbei (a nomadic people from North Asia) The Tang was also the most expansionist Chinese dynasty. Purely Han Chinese dynasties aren't very expansionist if you compare them to similar empires of the ancient world like Rome, the Han culture isn't really very militaristic at all. The scholar-official class generally tends to look down upon poor soldiers as "Chinese trash". (Like "white trash")

[khad]

Based on what I see here it seems to me that poor workers should be forced to stay poor, hungry and sick because that's solidarity. And as we all know solidarity > adequate living. :rolleyes:

I fail to see how wanting a better life for yourself or family is wrong.
It's not "wrong" in the same sense that accepting promotions in the corporate world to better your yourself and your family is not "wrong." People will take advantage of the opportunities given to them.

However, one's relationship to the working class necessarily changes. Leftists are delusional to think that the class character of a professional mercenary force is equivalent to that of a conscript army.

I'm sick of seeing all this whiny liberal garbage heaping sympathy on the mercenary caste when the far braver men and women, in my opinion, are the working class toiling in the lettuce fields, construction yards, and meat plants.

[#FF0000]

Based on what I see here it seems to me that poor workers should be forced to stay poor, hungry and sick because that's solidarity. And as we all know solidarity > adequate living. :rolleyes:

I fail to see how wanting a better life for yourself or family is wrong.

So, hypothetically, if a worker was gonna be given a free college education and a ton of cash to shoot another worker in the face, would that be okay?

How do you feel about scabs, bro?

[khad]

How do you feel about scabs, bro?
I have sympathy for scabs. They are the ones who have to work or face starvation, as they are desperate workers who accept lower pay just so they can have a job.

The professional mercenary caste, on the other hand, is explicitly a labor aristocracy, as their benefits privilege them over the working class.

[PhoenixAsh]

However, one's relationship to the working class necessarily changes. Leftists are delusional to think that the class character of a professional mercenary force is equivalent to that of a conscript army.

That...I will not argue against. Though I do not agree entirely with equating a standing army with a professional mercenary force...though I agree they share many characteristic.

There is alo a lot of difference per country and what you say may go for some countries to a lesser or higher degree...while not being applicable to others....within an army it may even differn from division to division. SpecFor for example are competely different from standard infantry.




I'm sick of seeing all this whiny liberal garbage heaping sympathy on the mercenary caste when the far braver men and women, in my opinion, are the working class toiling in the lettuce fields, construction yards, and meat plants.

Fair enough. Though sometimes conscripts and volunteers have little choice. I think however we can all agree that after a while...at some point you can look for a job outside the army and it becomes complacent to remain within the army.

[Impulse97]

So, hypothetically, if a worker was gonna be given a free college education and a ton of cash to shoot another worker in the face, would that be okay?

No, that would not be okay, but the vast majority of US service people do not see combat in their careers. Also, the chances of a service person has of seeing combat varies greatly by which branch they join. Would you condemn someone in the Coast Guard as you condemn those in the Army and Marines?

Killing is rarely justified and should be avoided as much as possible. What then of the Revolution? If there is a armed revolt in a nation, is it okay to kill those workers who join or were in the Army? What makes our killing of them any better than their killing of workers?

What of the military in general? Would it not be in our interest to have support from within? To reduce the effectiveness of the forces that seek to destroy our revolution? To expidite the collapes of the Capitalist's military? What of the training? Would it not be to our advantage to have a number of people within our ranks who are already trained for war? What of the training they could provide to our green forces?

[Queercommie Girl]

^

Firstly, revolutionary Marxism is not absolutely pacifist. Sometimes killing people is ok. (Like killing the ultra-corrupt capitalist aristocracy) It depends on the situation.

Secondly, the US state machine must be smashed to have a genuine socialist revolution in America. The institution of the US army cannot be directly used by revolutionaries for progressive ends. Sure, you could build a revolutionary army in the US, but that must be a separate institution altogether.

There is no scope for reform within the US army. The institution of the US army must be overthrown.

[Jose Gracchus]

The class dynamics are different between a conscript army and a professional army like the US army today.

Professional armies have an illustrious history of crushing workers' movements. Anyone remember the Paris Commune?

It is still raised frequently by exploitative and manipulative means from the proletariat, in the main, where they have few (if any) real other opportunities to go to college or the like.

How in your dream-cosmos do you expect me to believe we will ever achieve revolution without agitating amongst these "mercenaries" and bringing them over? I suppose we've reached the bottom of the barrel where supposed communists would like the reinstatement of the draft such that its class character is more palatable to them.

[RATM-Eubie]

All soldiers are not "Repugnant and Disgusting" is my point you people. I think the vast majority are not "Repugnant and Disgusting".

[Jose Gracchus]

I think this goes to show that the left is more dominated by moralistic navel-gazing (in this case, I want to keep my pretty little white hands clean, and not have to work with MERCENARY CASTES ARGHH) than practical politics. Someone find me an even intermittently successful left that did not split the military (at least the rank-and-file).

What's the alternative for revolution? Drug-addled fantasies about "urban people's war"? Khad and others should form COMMIES FOR THE DRAFT! Bet it'd go over great.

[#FF0000]

No, that would not be okay, but the vast majority of US service people do not see combat in their careers. Also, the chances of a service person has of seeing combat varies greatly by which branch they join. Would you condemn someone in the Coast Guard as you condemn those in the Army and Marines?

Yes. And whether they're pulling a trigger or not is irrelevant, because even if they never get the opportunity to do it themselves, it is their job to do it, or their job to make it possible for others to do it.


Killing is rarely justified and should be avoided as much as possible. What then of the Revolution?

Violence is justified in self-defense. Revolution is an act of self-defense on the part of the working class. In revolution, violence is justifiable (though perhaps not always useful)


If there is a armed revolt in a nation, is it okay to kill those workers who join or were in the Army? What makes our killing of them any better than their killing of workers?

Uh, if soldiers are taking up arms against a worker uprising, then yeah, it is absolutely justifiable to use violence against them.


What of the military in general? Would it not be in our interest to have support from within?

Do you really think anti-capitalists, in the state that they're in now, could have more influence over the worldview and politics of a soldier than the military itself? What on earth makes you think that's even a viable strategy, and how does change the fact that the military is the fighting arm of the ruling class?


What of the training? Would it not be to our advantage to have a number of people within our ranks who are already trained for war? What of the training they could provide to our green forces?

Revolution is a social struggle, not a military one. Sorry.

[#FF0000]

Someone find me an even intermittently successful left that did not split the military (at least the rank-and-file).

Those were large, conscripted armies, though. America has a small volunteer force.

[#FF0000]

Quick question:

why would you guys support US troops over Iraqi troops? Is that just an arbitrary thing, or...?

[Queercommie Girl]

I think this goes to show that the left is more dominated by moralistic navel-gazing (in this case, I want to keep my pretty little white hands clean, and not have to work with MERCENARY CASTES ARGHH) than practical politics. Someone find me an even intermittently successful left that did not split the military (at least the rank-and-file).

What's the alternative for revolution? Drug-addled fantasies about "urban people's war"? Khad and others should form COMMIES FOR THE DRAFT! Bet it'd go over great.

I don't know what exactly you mean by "urban people's war", but you obviously have no real understanding of Marxist history. The Chinese Trotskyist leader Chen Duxiu formed a well-armed urban militia based entirely on the working class between 1925 - 1927 during the Chinese Revolution in Shanghai.

It's funny that you trust a capitalist army more than you trust an armed worker's militia. Why, just because the former seems more "manly"? :rolleyes:

(A worker's militia would have a much more balanced gender distribution as well than a professional military force, which would consist almost entirely of men)

Strategically you could try to make the rank-and-file of the current US military rebel against the system, but ultimately the military aristocracy (i.e. a professional elite military caste) is a reactionary institution and a product of class society. In a socialist or communist society an army would not exist, just like the "state" would not exist, there would just be the armed people.

I don't support compulsory draft, but I do oppose the policy of "gun control". The people of America should have the right to arm themselves if they wish. Leninism believes in the armed people.

[RATM-Eubie]

Quick question:

why would you guys support US troops over Iraqi troops? Is that just an arbitrary thing, or...?

I support my troops to come home. Im against idiotic wars like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. I just want the troops to come home safe.

[Hexen]

Dont stereotype all US soldiers based on idiotic individuals like this one.
I have many military in my family and trust me not all of them are like this...

I tend to view that the Military are varying from Punch Clock Villians (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PunchClockVillain) or just plain psychos. The only decent ones are either somehow left the military in disgust (and now are protesters and such), court martialed, tortured in cells like Bradly Mannining, or killed.

Either way, their just puppets doing the bourgeoisie's dirty work.

[Jose Gracchus]

Those were large, conscripted armies, though. America has a small volunteer force.

So what? If the Army is all-reactionary, they will crush and kill us. What other factors on that account matter? Furthermore, the military's shrinking has more to do with the changing dynamics of modern warfare than its class composition (which remains the poor and working class in the lower enlisted ratings in particular).

And by what definition is it "small"? We have a standing armed forces that numbers 1.5 million with 1.5 million reservists. Looking the world over, that is quite large.


Quick question:

why would you guys support US troops over Iraqi troops? Is that just an arbitrary thing, or...?

What the fuck does this even mean? "Iraqi troops"? Who are they? You mean the troops of our puppet state? The insurgents? In what sense would we "support" one over another? Of course a revolutionary hopes for the defeat of his imperial power abroad.

Of course I am very suspicious of this kind of blather about vague "support". As usual it seems leftists are consumed by the abstract moral self-righteousness of the flags they choose to shroud themselves in, rather than in substantive political work. In most cases who people say they are "supporting" is totally fatuous and irrelevant, bearing no relevance upon the real world.


I don't know what exactly you mean by "urban people's war", but you obviously have no real understanding of Marxist history. The Chinese Trotskyist leader Chen Duxiu formed a well-armed urban militia based entirely on the working class between 1925 - 1927 during the Chinese Revolution in Shanghai.

And what happened to that Shanghai revolt? Oh yeah, it was crushed by the Kuomintang. Hence why I say if there's no fraternization and solidarity with rank-and-file in the armed forces, the Left dies. Thank you for supplying yet more proof for my claim.


It's funny that you trust a capitalist army more than you trust an armed worker's militia. Why, just because the former seems more "manly"? :rolleyes:

Because in any protracted struggle really trained and organized troops backed by organized production and centralized bourgeois command will crush workers' militias organized on the fly. The rank-and-file must be split from the military apparatus.


(A worker's militia would have a much more balanced gender distribution as well than a professional military force, which would consist almost entirely of men)

Yeah, but thankfully I never said anything about this, you're just butthurt and trying to insinuate bullshit to discredit me.


Strategically you could try to make the rank-and-file of the current US military rebel against the system, but ultimately the military aristocracy (i.e. a professional elite military caste) is a reactionary institution and a product of class society. In a socialist or communist society an army would not exist, just like the "state" would not exist, there would just be the armed people.

I'm sure you think you're being profound by quoting the Manifesto on this forum.

Of course I doubt the support of the officer class. Maybe you didn't notice, but the Russian Revolution occurred because the masses of the Army defected from the reactionaries, and the officers were often co-opted on an individual basis (which is not unthinkable, consider the case of anti-imperialist professionals in the past, like Major General Smedley Butler). The PLA won because...it was a formally trained and organized force, backed by the Soviets, and masses of the Kuomintang army defected and were able to use heavy equipment on the side of the PLA against their former leaders.


I don't support compulsory draft, but I do oppose the policy of "gun control". The people of America should have the right to arm themselves if they wish. Leninism believes in the armed people.

Individually/privately armed workers will be slaughtered without the support of the rank-and-file in the Armed Forces. Period. Hell, they'll probably be slaughtered by the armed property-owners, which is what U.S. gun culture is all about. I mean, you must hate blacks, right, since they're much less armed due to vast imprisonment and felon status, am I right? :rolleyes:

This thread suggests many reason why many modern leftists shouldn't be trusted to look after a Port-a-Potty, much less agitate for revolution.

[Queercommie Girl]

And what happened to that Shanghai revolt? Oh yeah, it was crushed by the Kuomintang. Hence why I say if there's no fraternization and solidarity with rank-and-file in the armed forces, the Left dies. Thank you for supplying yet more proof for my claim.


Actually it was primarily due to incorrect policies, rather than inferiority of armed power per se.

There is nothing wrong with trying to split up the armed forces strategically speaking, I never said I'm against that. But workers must have their own military force, and not just put their trust in the professional army.



Yeah, but thankfully I never said anything about this, you're just butthurt and trying to insinuate bullshit to discredit me.
I only made such a point because you were deliberately using macho discourse to describe your views.



Of course I doubt the support of the officer class. Maybe you didn't notice, but the Russian Revolution occurred because the masses of the Army defected from the reactionaries, and the officers were often co-opted on an individual basis (which is not unthinkable, consider the case of anti-imperialist professionals in the past, like Major General Smedley Butler).
My point was that there shouldn't be a professional army in a communist society. No state, no army.



The PLA won because...it was a formally trained and organized force, backed by the Soviets, and masses of the Kuomintang army defected and were able to use heavy equipment on the side of the PLA against their former leaders.

Individually/privately armed workers will be slaughtered without the support of the rank-and-file in the Armed Forces. Period. Hell, they'll probably be slaughtered by the armed property-owners, which is what U.S. gun culture is all about.
I didn't say I don't think one could turn over the rank-and-file in the existing armed forces.



I mean, you must hate blacks, right, since they're much less armed due to vast imprisonment and felon status, am I right? :rolleyes:
And what the fuck does this suppose to mean? You are just fucking butthurt and trying to implicitly accuse me of racism. Stop playing the fucking race card. It gets old pretty fast.

Ah...I'm Black, so everyone else, Whites, Asians, they must all hate me! AWWWWWWWWWWWW!!! AWWWW I must be on the bottom barrel and disadvantaged at all times!!! LOL

Pathetic.

[Jose Gracchus]

Actually it was primarily due to incorrect policies, rather than inferiority of armed power per se.

Prove it.


There is nothing wrong with trying to split up the armed forces strategically speaking, I never said I'm against that. But workers must have their own military force, and not just put their trust in the professional army.

No shit, Sherlock. Good thing I have supported workers' organizations forming gun clubs and associations and trying to encourage basic training, firearms competence, and the like among the working-class. I said the splitting of the Army is a necessary (BUT NOT SUFFICIENT) condition, so we should not write every last soldier off as some murdering scum we hate. We need to form a revolutionary army from rank-and-file soldiers mobilized in support of the working class combined with armed working class militants. That's reflexive. However, we're not going to build it on the fly totally outside of the existing military personnel, equipment, etc.


I only made such a point because you were deliberately using macho discourse to describe your views.

Give a single example.


My point was that there shouldn't be a professional army in a communist society. No state, no army.

Good thing I never brought that up. I consider myself a libertarian socialist, so I think its pretty fatuous for a Leninist (those so enamored of standing militaries to march through the public square, goosestepping) like you to try to pick this bone with me. I am worried about what would happen to all of us if khad et al had their political way vis-a-vis the Army: FUCK EM THEY'RE ALL MERCENARY MURDERING FUCKS. We're going to all get shot.

To me, revolutionary politics are an immanently practical art, not one about making sure you remain at all times in a zone of perfect pure revolutionary virtue, or some shit.


I didn't say I don't think one could turn over the rank-and-file in the existing armed forces.

Then why are you arguing with me?


And what the fuck does this suppose to mean? You are just fucking butthurt and trying to implicitly accuse me of racism. Stop playing the fucking race card. It gets old pretty fast.

I'm being sarcastic, and parodying your pathetic attempt at trying to paint me a sexist through pure hand-waving.


Ah...I'm Black, so everyone else, Whites, Asians, they must all hate me! AWWWWWWWWWWWW!!! LOL

I'm not black, I was just parodying you. I'm Hispanic.

[Queercommie Girl]

Prove it.


The CCP joined the KMT organisationally and did not possess any degree of political independence. That is what killed the revolution.



No shit, Sherlock. Good thing I have supported workers' organizations forming gun clubs and associations and trying to encourage basic training, firearms competence, and the like among the working-class. I said the splitting of the Army is a necessary (BUT NOT SUFFICIENT) condition, so we should not write every last soldier off as some murdering scum we hate. We need to form a revolutionary army from rank-and-file soldiers mobilized in support of the working class combined with armed working class militants. That's reflexive. However, we're not going to build it on the fly totally outside of the existing military personnel, equipment, etc.
I never said I completely agree with khad either.



Give a single example.
You were talking about "little white hands" as if those who completely reject the army as a "mercenary force" (which I personally don't) are not "manly enough" or something. (Though your use of "white" could also mean it is a kind of "reverse racism" against whites - I might not be so much against that kind of reference)



To me, revolutionary politics are an immanently practical art, not one about making sure you remain at all times in a zone of perfect pure revolutionary virtue, or some shit.
I agree to some extent, but this doesn't mean Marxism is amoral or that "revolutionary virtue" is not important. The two are not mutually exclusive.



Then why are you arguing with me?
I'm not really arguing with you as in totally disagreeing with you, just replying and responding to you.



I'm being sarcastic, and parodying your pathetic attempt at trying to paint me a sexist through pure hand-waving.

I'm not black, I was just parodying you. I'm Hispanic.


I never explicitly called you a "sexist". You seem to respond to me in a super-aggressive way for no good reason. I don't know why you called me "butthurt", whatever that means, I don't know where that comes from.

[Jose Gracchus]

The CCP joined the KMT organisationally and did not possess any degree of political independence. That is what killed the revolution.

How could they have withstood the National Revolutionary Army in Shanghai even if the CCP had turned Bolshevik and put forward a program for a nation-wide uprising. Do you think the prospects were good for army defections and widespread uprising?


You were talking about "little white hands" as if those who completely reject the army as a "mercenary force" (which I personally don't) are not "manly enough" or something. (Though your use of "white" could also mean it is a kind of "reverse racism" against whites - I might not be so much against that kind of reference)

Reverse racism doesn't really exist. I mean, maybe if you're in the Nation of Islam, or something.

In any case, yes, I do mean I think working people of color in the U.S. would probably be following sanctimonious (too righteous to agitate in the Army probably privileged white intellectual/hippie types) down the rabbit hole in the event of these disastrous politics being followed. And well "white" in terms of being morally clean or pure. I don't see how that would in any way imply male-only or male-dominant.

Okay, well in the latter case, I may have been overly brusque. Since you seem to be replying in good faith, I apologize for being so sarcastic.