Question to fellow Anarchists

[DeBon]

Afternoon comrades,

I have a question pertaining to the revolution. It seems people on RevLeft either take the side of 'evolution' or 'revolution'. Evolution being slow reform through laws, technological development, rise in class consciousness, and believing that over time a classless and stateless society will emerge. Revolution simply being a quick and swift movement that aims to accomplish the same as evolution.

Would a group of like minded anarcho-communists organizing and building up a self-sufficient commune be considered revolution or evolution? Or would that be in its own category?

[Tablo]

When you describe evolution that sounds like reformism. No one that isn't restricted supports reformism.

[Искра]

Revolution itself is a process. Only little Stalin-kiddies believe that revolution is that one rainy day when you shoot on cops and army and after that party you send reactionaries to Gulag and put red flag over Reichstag. But, that not a revolution. I could say that revolution starts with building up an organization/movement, then with class struggles (strikes, occupations, demonstrations etc.), then with armed uprising and then with proletariat dictatorship (in Marx’s not Lenin’s style) in which we are all trying to replace existing institutions with new ones (on economical and political level). Evolution, revolution... name it yourself – I don’t care.

[The Idler]

Revolution is a fundamental changing of the mode of production ie. not a tactic.

Anything else short of this is an evolutionary objective.

Communes, strikes, coups, demos, occupations, armed uprisings are tactics.