Post-Revolutionary Sedition and Free Speech

[Sadena Meti]

There has been some discussion of this in the People getting Offended (http://www.revleft.com/vb/people-getting-offended-t153384/index.html) thread, but I wanted to deal with it separately.

First, to define terms. When I say Post-Revolutionary I mean immediately after the successful revolution. Not some far off utopia or end-stage communism.

Sedition can be defined many ways. Calling for the overthrow of the government, something we do on here regularly. Calling for armed resistance against the government. Calling for the Armed Forces to mutiny. Even interfering with military recruitment (that's what they indicted me on back in 2007).

Would (not should) a post-revolutionary government allow sedition under the freedom of speech?

(EDIT)

And, can you provide examples of how historical revolutionary governments dealt with sedition (or dissent).

[RGacky3]

Sedition should not even be a thing, NO ONE has the right to demand loyalty to an entity under penalty of law.

[Sadena Meti]

There was a situation in the post 1917 revolution, I am fuzzy on the details but I'm sure someone can correct me. Trotsky had a group of prisoners who were opposing the revolution. He wrote to Lenin asking him what to do. Lenin reply "Kill them outright." Trotsky didn't.

[Thirsty Crow]

Sedition should not even be a thing, NO ONE has the right to demand loyalty to an entity under penalty of law.
Right? Excuse me, but to hell with rights (given this hypothetical situation).
I would adovocate a consistent "no platform" when it comes to Fascists and proto-fascist groups. Freedom of speech does not apply here (what about the "freedom of speech" of minorities under attack in more remote parts of a country?). No amount of quas-bourgeois sentimentalism regarding human rights, when Fascists are concerned, will ever mean anything to me.

As far as liberals and other counter-revolutionary groups are concerned, they shouldn't face state sanctioned censorship, but should be montired for possible concrete activity (sabotage, violent attacks, arms smuggling etc.). I wouldn't mind 50 liberals shouting at a town square, partly because there would be at least twice as much revolutionary workers who'd vocally oppose them. But structural violence - I don't think that would be neccesary, or productive, for that matter, if a country does not face conditions of outright civil war.

[Viet Minh]

There is no ruling elite, therefore there is no sedition, just opinion. Everyones opinion is valid, and everyones freedom is absolute, except where they infringe upon another individuals rights. This works well within a nation like Cuba for example, because they can simply send Fash and Caps away to the USA to live the American dream. No need for imprisonment, no need to supress opinions.

[Sword and Shield]

As far as liberals and other counter-revolutionary groups are concerned, they shouldn't face state sanctioned censorship, but should be montired for possible concrete activity (sabotage, violent attacks, arms smuggling etc.). I wouldn't mind 50 liberals shouting at a town square, partly because there would be at least twice as much revolutionary workers who'd vocally oppose them. But structural violence - I don't think that would be neccesary, or productive, for that matter, if a country does not face conditions of outright civil war.

I'd tolerate them so long as they don't accept outside funding. If they start getting funded by an American democracy fund or something, send them to the gulag...

[Revolution starts with U]

I would oppose replacing the capitalist class in control of everything with the vanguard. Classes are BS. And all you who deny the freedom of the mind, are just walking down the road of replacing one class with another.
Sticks and stones, my friends. Sticks, and, stones.

[Thirsty Crow]

I would oppose replacing the capitalist class in control of everything with the vanguard. Classes are BS. And all you who deny the freedom of the mind, are just walking down the road of replacing one class with another.
Sticks and stones, my friends. Sticks, and, stones.
No one denies (well, at least I think Sword and Shield does not) freedom of the mind. But when it comes to fascist scum, organized propaganda (hate speech par exellance) and free assembly are just ways of handing them with weapons, figuratively speaking.
They may think what they want, they may mingle among themselves and enjoy their disgusting attitudes and exchange them freely, but once they go out in the public, that's it, show's over (not that I'd advocate indiscriminate killings).


I'd tolerate them so long as they don't accept outside funding. If they start getting funded by an American democracy fund or something, send them to the gulag...
First of all, I really hope there won't be folk you who advocate the ressurection of the gulag system.
Secondly, if their "foreing funds" are not used for concrete criminal activity, then no, no harm to them at all.

[Revolution starts with U]

Protecting expression is something best left up to the populace. We can, and should, aggressively fight hate speech and haters. But it is not something we want to place in the hands of the state, as they WILL use that power to suppress ANY expression detrimental to the state itself, regardless of its' impact upon the populace.

[Thirsty Crow]

Protecting expression is something best left up to the populace. We can, and should, aggressively fight hate speech and haters. But it is not something we want to place in the hands of the state, as they WILL use that power to suppress ANY expression detrimental to the state itself, regardless of its' impact upon the populace.
I agree with what you're proposing (actual opposition at level of rank-and-file), and I think it would also be more productive than relying solely on state action.
Though, I'd insist on absolute crackdown on fascists, any means necessary.

[Revolution starts with U]

I just don't have the same trust in the state as you. Power seeks more power; always.

[RGacky3]

Right? Excuse me, but to hell with rights (given this hypothetical situation).


Then to hell with the "States" right to demand loyalty, and demand that people not be whatever ideology they want.


Power seeks more power; always.

Main principle that lenininst do not understand imo.