Is it legal to...

[UnknownPerson]

Is it legal to propose methods of overthrowing governments? Is it against these forum's rules? Posting this in the learning section because it's somewhat related to the study of law.

[Sasha]

on an strictly theoretical level its not only allowed its very much encouraged.
if you atm are actually organizing an coup or uprising we advise you to keep that to PM only :lol: (no actually keep that of this board completely)

as an rule of thumb, its okay to say "during the revolution we might be forced to deal with the resisting bourgeoisie harshly", but saying "we need to shoot the president in the head now" not so much.

[gendoikari]

I think the more pressing question is when would a violent overthrow be prudent. Obviously now is not
the time, we have the NOC to look forward too in the 2012 and 2016 elections, but what series of events would make that prudent?

[Tjis]

I think the more pressing question is when would a violent overthrow be prudent. Obviously now is not
the time, we have the NOC to look forward too in the 2012 and 2016 elections, but what series of events would make that prudent?

When there's an organized working class capable of taking over the means of production in a short amount of time and defending them.

[gendoikari]

When there's an organized working class capable of taking over the means of production in a short amount of time and defending them.

Even then it doesn't have to be violent. It could still be done democratically.

[Tjis]

Even then it doesn't have to be violent. It could still be done democratically.
Moving towards socialism would mean abolishing property. Whether it is voted about is of no consequence. A person who just lost their property is not going to be happy about it at all, especially since currently property is considered a natural right, as established in various constitutions.

When private property is made illegal and occupied by workers it is unlikely that all former owners are just going to leave it at that. It's also very unlikely that capitalists outside of a revolutionary area are going to let a revolution spread unopposed. In every revolutionary situation in history there was also a reaction. The future one will be no exception.

So violence unfortunately is inevitable. On the other hand, violence is an everyday reality right now, and not just the many wars that are fought for corporate interests. People are homeless even though there are empty houses. People are hungry even though there is food. What is keeping homeless from occupying houses, and hungry from stealing food is the threat of violence by the state, because these things are crimes that will get you arrested and imprisoned. It is under this threat that people decide to become a wage laborer, which then robs them of the product of their labor in exchange for a fraction of its value.
This violent normalcy of capitalism is far greater than the violence of a revolution. It's a shame that a revolution is an inherently violent process, but it is still better than letting things remain the way they are.

[Dogs On Acid]

Isn't that what we talk about on here? Replacing the current system?

We are literally discussing the overthrow of governments and their replacement with a more socially and economically efficient system.

[Dogs On Acid]

Isn't that what we talk about on here? Replacing the current system?

We are literally discussing the overthrow of governments and their replacement with a more socially and economically efficient system.