Propaganda by the Deed

[Hebrew Hammer]

What are your opinions of it?

[Tommy4ever]

Stupid. Never worked, never will work. Has only ever had a negative effect on the socialist movement.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I don't think you'll get many positive opinions of it on this site.

That said, there are many acts that are taken on an individual basis (and are erroneously classified as POTD) that I do support. One example would be Simon Radowitzky murdering an Argentinian police chief, after the police chief ordered the deaths of many demonstraters in Buenos Aires. Or (in a more recent example) EPR gunmen killing a police chief in Oaxaca in the aftermath of the repression there, much of which he himself was responsible for. There are also many direct action initiatives that I'm in favor of.

However, none of that has much to do with POTD as it was originally intended, as a tactic to awaken people.

[Paulappaul]

Stupid. Never worked, never will work. Has only ever had a negative effect on the socialist movement.

lawl you really put alot of thought in this post Tommy, good job!
:rolleyes:

If the Greek struggles have shown us anything, it is that Direct Action for the purpose of moving the struggle forward is successful. My experience in the Northwest with the Anti - Police Brutality movement has led me more and more to believe that Propaganda by the Deed is a good method. Not the only method we must employ, but one of the methods.

[el_chavista]

Does Chávez and his military fellas' 1992 putsch count as propaganda by the deeds? After all, it made him the best known politician in Venezuela.

[pastradamus]

Does Chávez and his military fellas' 1992 putsch count as propaganda by the deeds? After all, it made him the best known politician in Venezuela.

Dont know if I would describe the Chavez putsch as propaganda of the deed but certainly it made him a household name as a consequence.

One big characteristic of propaganda of the deed is its Machievellianism, That is to say " the end justifies the means". Chavez in 92 was a genuine means and not something to simply disrupt and gain popularity - so for that reason I wouldnt characterise it as such.

[Delenda Carthago]

I wonder, why is it called "deed", and not "propaganda by the bomb"? Isnt it what its all about?

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

Propaganda of the Deed at its own when followed with Communiques that make the action and the reason behind the action clear is to be accepted, as Propaganda of the Deed shows the fallibility of the Capitalist System and Imperialism.
1.) 'Stupid. Never worked, never will work. Has only ever had a negative effect on the socialist movement.'
This is a comment that lacks material, as it has worked positively in terms of pushing forward Class Consciousness and actions against Capitalism and Imperialism.
2.) ', it is that Direct Action for the purpose of moving the struggle forward is successful. '
However Propaganda of the Deed in order to be truly successful must be combined with Class Education and other Non-Clandestine activities as without the Organizing of the Workers to go along with said actions, Propaganda of the Deed at its own reaches futility. The Red Army Faction had problems regarding this, as the Red Army Faction was unwilling to organize themselves around the Working Class to a degree and simply had engaged in Armed Action with an unwillingness to engage in other required actions. Which is something that must be learned from and corrected.

[Public Domain]

It's useful and inspirational - if people can see the reason behind it.

Otherwise it usually ends up being distorted and used as propaganda against us.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I started a thread on this topic in the anarchist group three years ago that got a lot of replies, some of which were interesting. If anyone's interested:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?do=discuss&group=&discussionid=227

[Hebrew Hammer]

One big characteristic of propaganda of the deed is its Machievellianism, That is to say " the end justifies the means".

I think the Machiavellian nature of the concept is precisely why you can't very well say "it's stupid, lawlz," and just discard it outright. Now, I would first like to point out, I am just curious and wanting to discuss this so I hope in the process of this, I don't get restricted. I merely want to discuss the possible utility of PBTD in terms of revolution.

With this being said, an obvious failure or an action that could be described as propaganda by the deed, is the burning of the Reichstag in 1933 allegedly done by Left-Communist, Marinus van der Lubbe. Whether he truly did or not is not the point of this discussion, he was accused of it and that's what's important. As we all know a Communist, burning down the Reichstag greatly aided the Fascists to assume power. I know, some of you may say, this is precisely why we shouldn't do such things because it will only hurt the cause and probably rightfully so. But what if we turned that event on it's head.

Let's assume the Fascists burned down the Reichstag then pinned van der Lubbe as the fall guy and used him as a useful political chip to gain power. Flip that, what if we used PBTD, to stage such events against the right and enemies of proletariat in order to foment revolution and (as another member said) "awaken the masses." That's the original intent right? To awaken the masses? While, certainly couldn't do this now (at least not in America) couldn't this be a useful tactic, if we had a well organized, coordinated and well funded party? I think this could be quite useful in combination with infiltration and other such things.

Currently, I heard awhile ago that banks (this particular case in Washington state) have stolen from the citizenry. People are made are the bourgeoisie whom they believe are bankrupting the country and stealing their money. Concievably, we could use this to our advantage if we had the organization, coordination and funding and political base and use PBTD to help foment and ignite revolution.

Am I mad? Discuss.

[Tommy4ever]

I'm not saying that Propoganda of the Deed is stupid because its violent or Machiavellian. I'm just saying it is a truly terrible idea. I'm not sure why anyone thought that a high profile assassination or act of terrorism would somehow inspire the masses behind their cause. History has already proven that this method was extremely counterproductive to socialist movements. So lets consign it to the dustbin where it belongs.

[ellipsis]

Didn't work for any urban guerrilla movements that used it. Armed propaganda on the other hand is a much more useful tactic.