Poll: Is revolution inevitable?

[Eagle_Syr]

I'm hoping to read some thoughts from the more learned members here

Simply say what your view on revolution is, whether it is inevitable, and why you think so.

Heck, this may not even be a relevant thing to discuss, but I am looking for input especially to learn more about the criticisms of capitalism.

[Ostrinski]

Revolution is never inevitable. But with a proper political program and educated class conscious working force, it is a possibility.

[hatzel]

Well revolution is a constant; the Revolution, on the other hand, casually eludes possibility...

[Revolution starts with U]

It depends on what you mean by revolution. Is the revolt/rebellion inevitable? Certainly not.

Is it inevitable that wage laborers will do what they can to improve their material situation against the forces that try to bind her? Certainly.

[MuscularTophFan]

Thomas Jefferson said that every 20 years there should be a revolution.

[Positivist]

Thomas Jefferson said that every 20 years there should be a revolution.

Good for him, he also owned over 300 slaves.

[Vorchev]

I'm hoping to read some thoughts from the more learned members here

Simply say what your view on revolution is, whether it is inevitable, and why you think so.

Heck, this may not even be a relevant thing to discuss, but I am looking for input especially to learn more about the criticisms of capitalism.

It's a paradox.

Communists have to suggest revolution is inevitable to keep up pressure.

Of course, if it's inevitable, then why do we need to organize?

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Revolution is never inevitable. But with a proper political program and educated class conscious working force, it is a possibility.

This.

[MuscularTophFan]

Good for him, he also owned over 300 slaves.
Yes he was a victim of his time. Just like how Gandhi was a racist who referred to black South Africans as "kaffirs." Gandhi was a racist because a lot of people of this time where racists. As a politician Jefferson did everything against slavery so he kept his private life of owning slaves away from his political one. Doing things as a legislator is differant from someone's personal life. For example Ronald Regan had many gay friends being an actor from Hollywood, yet he did next to nothing as president to stop the AIDS epidemic.

[Zav]

It will happen if Capitalism continues. All empires fall, but there is no guarantee that it will be a Communist revolution. It could as easily be Fascist or Feudalist. Of course we may also destroy the planet before Capitalism collapses, in which case we're all going to die off, and likely take most life with us. The Holocene Extinction will become total if the Revolution doesn't happen relatively soon (century or two).
If that happens in our lifetimes and we haven't effected a global Communist Revolution, we should all get together and have a glorious "I told you so" celebration before we starve to death. I'll bring pipe tobacco, home-made root beer (the alcoholic kind), and mead.


It's a paradox.
Communists have to suggest revolution is inevitable to keep up pressure.
Of course, if it's inevitable, then why do we need to organize?
It is inevitable that we will organize. You and I aren't separate from the world of stimuli.

[Book O'Dead]

Why is it that all I do is complain about these polls?

I'd rather see one that asks: How do you make revolution as capitalism implodes?

A. Implode Yourself! (stick your head in your ass and pray you don't loose your internet account)

B. Go out and leaflet in front of a nearby factory or industrial, commercial center that has regular to heavy pedestrian traffic. The leaflet should say this: WELCOME TO THE CLASS STRUGGLE! What you add afterwards is your own fucking business and may not reflect the views or opinions of this writer or his uncle Karl.

C.Tell anyone who will listen that you've lost your faith in capitalism. Make it sound like it just happened. Something like this:

YOU [hanging onto a strap on the metro]: I just lost my faith in capitalism!

THE GUY NEXT TO YOU MINDING HIS OWN BUSINESS: What?

YOU [now swinging like a manic ape]: I said "I just lost my faith in capitalism!".

THE GUY WHO WAS FORMERLY MINDING HIS OWN BUSINESS WATCHES YOU FOR A FEW SECONDS AND SAYS: You need a buck, mister? You want some money for a cup of coffee or something?

And you take it from there.

[Book O'Dead]

Maybe the "revolution" is happening but we can't see it?

[Lanky Wanker]

Meh, unlikely. I'm amazed how so few people even know about the shit going on in the world today, and how even fewer know but just don't care.




Why is it that all I do is complain about these polls?

I'd rather see one that asks: How do you make revolution as capitalism implodes?

A. Implode Yourself! (stick your head in your ass and pray you don't loose your internet account)

B. Go out and leaflet in front of a nearby factory or industrial, commercial center that has regular to heavy pedestrian traffic. The leaflet should say this: WELCOME TO THE CLASS STRUGGLE! What you add afterwards is your own fucking business and may not reflect the views or opinions of this writer or his uncle Karl.

C.Tell anyone who will listen that you've lost your faith in capitalism. Make it sound like it just happened. Something like this:

YOU [hanging onto a strap on the metro]: I just lost my faith in capitalism!

THE GUY NEXT TO YOU MINDING HIS OWN BUSINESS: What?

YOU [now swinging like a manic ape]: I said "I just lost my faith in capitalism!".

THE GUY WHO WAS FORMERLY MINDING HIS OWN BUSINESS WATCHES YOU FOR A FEW SECONDS AND SAYS: You need a buck, mister? You want some money for a cup of coffee or something?

And you take it from there.


How much fucking crack have you had today? :lol:

[human strike]

Revolution is a reality of everyday life under capitalism. Is a permanent overthrow of capitalism inevitable? Who knows? But temporary breaks in capitalist social relations are a constant until then. The likeliness of permanent change increases with time and worsening ecological and social crises of course, but I think it's a mistake to focus on preparing for some future glorious event, rather we should focus on the revolution of everyday life. I can't wait to end capitalism, so I'm not going to wait.

[Sea]

It's a paradox.

Communists have to suggest revolution is inevitable to keep up pressure.

Of course, if it's inevitable, then why do we need to organize?Revolution is definitely possible.

If things keep going the way they have been, a leftist revolution could be moderately likely. What's unlikely is that things would keep going the way they have.

We need to organize to tip things far in out favor.


If that happens in our lifetimes and we haven't effected a global Communist Revolution, we should all get together and have a glorious "I told you so" celebration before we starve to death. I'll bring pipe tobacco, home-made root beer (the alcoholic kind), and mead.I'll bring the Karl cupcakes and dance albums! :D

[Catma]

I don't think I'm more learned, but I think it's unlikely at the moment. It will become more likely as time passes, but it will never become inevitable.

[Vorchev]

It is inevitable that we will organize. You and I aren't separate from the world of stimuli.

Yes, but in how long? Tomorrow? Next year? 10 years? 100 years?

Inevitability can take a long time, and if we think it is inevitable, then we can always procrastinate organization later on.

[Desperado]

This is more of an existential question.



Of course, if it's inevitable, then why do we need to organize?

Exactly.

It's not an objective material thing which will necessarily happen (like a rock falling by gravity) but something we have to do. Yet of course we are also really just matter and energy following the laws of physics and interacting. How can we reconcile this determinism, or really physicalism with our sense free will? But that's a problem when considering anything we do, why we bother at all and find purpose or meaning in anything in reality when it can seem all objective and "dead". Reconciling the ought with the is.

[Desperado]

Is it inevitable I get up and go in a minute (when I'm undecided if I want to)? Even if in the end the event did happen.

It's tied into problems of induction as well. The revolution will only be "proven" by its happening, just as the sun rising tomorrow is only proven by its happening.

[Questionable]

Yes he was a victim of his time. Just like how Gandhi was a racist who referred to black South Africans as "kaffirs." Gandhi was a racist because a lot of people of this time where racists. As a politician Jefferson did everything against slavery so he kept his private life of owning slaves away from his political one. Doing things as a legislator is differant from someone's personal life. For example Ronald Regan had many gay friends being an actor from Hollywood, yet he did next to nothing as president to stop the AIDS epidemic.

I know this is way off-topic, but I just have to say that owning actual slaves goes a bit beyond being a product of your own time. Jefferson played an active role in a vile institution. Having some residual racist or sexist attitudes deep down is something that could maybe be considered "a product of their time," but when you take an active role in oppression, especially if you're someone who goes around preaching about freedom and inalienable rights, that excuse doesn't really work.

That being said, I'm going to have to quote Kautsky on the issue of revolution:


When we speak of the Irresistible and inevitable
nature of the social revolution, we presuppose that men are men and not puppets; that they are bcings endowed with certain wants and impulses, with certain physical and mental powers which they will seek to usc in their own interest.... life consider the breakdown of the present social system to be unavoidable, because we know that the economic evolution inevitably brings on the conditions that will compel the exploited classes to rise against this system of private ownership.

[wsg1991]

Good for him, he also owned over 300 slaves.

and Engels was a racist ,

i don't see the point sorry

[Questionable]

and Engels was a racist ,

i don't see the point sorry

Aside from the fact that he wasn't, there's a huge different between tossing a racial slur around sometimes when you're angry and owning 300 slaves.

[hatzel]

That being said, I'm going to have to quote Kautsky on the issue of revolution:

Alternatively one could cite, for example, Stanisław Ossowski, who argued the exact opposite. One difference would be that Ossowski was better positioned to make reference to prevailing economic disparities, given the development of capitalism between Kautsky and the 50's, much of which seemed to contradict these earlier assertions. Still, both would probably be equally guilty of masquerading as prophets of sorts, extrapolating their pre-/assumptions into a hypothetical future, perhaps more for ideological reasons than anything else...

The point being that sometimes we need more than pretty-sounding words. Or perhaps we need considerably less than that, who knows?

[Rafiq]

Us organizing is inevitable. If you do nothing, more will take your place. The idea that "then why should we do anything" will be barred down by real material forces.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Questionable]

Alternatively one could cite, for example, Stanisław Ossowski, who argued the exact opposite. One difference would be that Ossowski was better positioned to make reference to prevailing economic disparities, given the development of capitalism between Kautsky and the 50's, much of which seemed to contradict these earlier assertions. Still, both would probably be equally guilty of masquerading as prophets of sorts, extrapolating their pre-/assumptions into a hypothetical future, perhaps more for ideological reasons than anything else...

The point being that sometimes we need more than pretty-sounding words. Or perhaps we need considerably less than that, who knows?

I'm a bit confused by what you're saying. Could you post the Stanislaw quote you're referring to in question? I wouldn't dismiss what Kautsky said as "pretty-sounding words," he was only arguing that we must assume that the proletarian will seek its interests when capitalism becomes bad enough to no longer sustain them. In that sense, the revolution is "inevitable," as far as we presume that the workers won't just lie down and die.

[Deicide]

Yes, it's inevitable, because it's the inevitable dialectical synthesis of the laws of history that Marx and Engels discovered. Communism will come around by itself and we'll live happily ever after. So shut up, sit down, drink a beer, sing the internationale, do a little dance, etc. If we all prayed to Marx with Das Kapital in each of our hands, for a good year or two on every sunday, it'll come, I'd say around 50% faster, so we should be living in Communism around 2nd February of 2119. No, no, no, on a serious note, I'm a optimistic pessimist, so I don't expect communist revolution in my lifetime, which is the next 60-70 years, if I don't get shot, run over by a car or meet some other unnatural demise. Although there will undoubtedly be social conflicts of some sort due to the nature of Capitalism. Anyway, I'm going to make money in the meanwhile and look out for my own interests. Fuck hippy lifestylists.

The earth could be hit by an Asteroid and then we would all be proper fucked. There's a 1 in 250,000 chance that we'll be hit by Apophis in 2036.

[Rafiq]

Thomas Jefferson was a fucking reactionary scumbag, even for his time.

[electrostal]

Of course it is, if you're a Marxist you know that capitalism must, eventually, neccessarily be replaced with socialism-communism.

[Desperado]

Us organizing is inevitable. If you do nothing, more will take your place. The idea that "then why should we do anything" will be barred down by real material forces.


Depends if you mean us as in communists and anarchists or a vanguard or us as in the working class. If we say the latter, the same epistemological problems come up.

[Book O'Dead]

Thomas Jefferson was a fucking reactionary scumbag, even for his time.

I disagree.

[JPSartre12]

Revolution is never inevitable. But with a proper political program and educated class conscious working force, it is a possibility.

I agree. The future is pretty open-ended and we don't really know exactly what's coming, but I think we have a decent gist of where the historical trend might end up.

[eric922]

Thomas Jefferson was a fucking reactionary scumbag, even for his time.
Reactionary? He was a revolutionary for his time, he opposed feudalism and monarchy. His position on slavery was abhorrent, but seeing as how it was a fairly common practice at the time, it isn't enough to call him a reactionary.

However, his position on slavery isn't as simple as you make it. He pushed for and signed a law outlawing the slave trade during his presidency.

This doesn't justify him keeping slaves, but the fact is you can't call him a reactionary for a practice that was common during his own time, unless of course you are changing the meaning of the word. Now, if you want to call him scum for owning slaves, I won't argue with you.

[Firebrand]

I think that barring global apocalypse and the extinction of the human race, the revolution is inevitable. Considering the nature of capitalism is to increase exploitation exponentially it will inevitably at some point push people too far, causing them to revolt. Whats more it will do it over and over again, and if people are driven to revolt enough times the odds are on that one of the revolts will succeed and the structure of society will change.

When it occurs is another matter, it could be next week, it could be 200 years from now. The purpose of activism as far as i'm concerned is to accelerate the process. I'd really prefer to skip another 200 years of exploitation.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

The only thing inevitable is the liquidation of the Capitalist Class. If the Proletariat does not do it, the sun will.

[Internacional]

The only thing inevitable is the liquidation of the Capitalist Class. If the Proletariat does not do it, the sun will.

If the Capitalist Class liquidates, then what? By today's standards, everyone in the Western World (for the most part.) is a capitalist, as most of us are consumers. That liquidation for all of us would be a disaster. I don't think that capitalism will go away so easily. They have the entire world in a vice as of now, I just don't see the system in place "Disapperaing" for at least another 100 years, when the world population, combined with scarce resources, forces humanity to adopt socialist policy.

A planned revolution with the forces of the proletariat as well as members of the petty bourgoeise is the way to go regarding a revolution. The resources are quickly disappering, and I think in the next 15-50 years, we'll see the rebrith of true Marxism-Leninism.

[ckaihatsu]

We *could* look at this issue in relation to the traditional corporate mainstream media hegemony....

Arguably, in the past, one would have to either already know actively political people or would have to take the time to get to know such personalities and their ideas -- otherwise the only voice they'd hear would be the hack talking heads on TV.

*These* days the information, at least, is far more accessible, and due to standardized information outlets like Wikipedia there's a certain sense that the Internet is not *just* the off-road nerd, geek, and porn avenue that it arguably was in past decades. In being far more mainstream and far more participatory, I think people are more used to having their own role *on* it, and feeling more comfortable interacting on their own *through* it -- it's no longer the back-trail through the woods at night.

With improved confidence in oneself on the net comes increased confidence in dealing with whatever happens to be *on* the net, and, so, by extension, the world, including politics. Add to this that everything is a web search away, and soon the practice of doing a little background info searching becomes second-nature and even cliché.

I like to think that this means that the "floor" is lifted up for most, so that they / we don't have to fall for a Bushian bunker-mentality politics as we saw in the first half of the previous decade. The net has only really hit its stride *since* that time, around '05-'07, due in part to key hardware developments and price drops around that time. So today we have more of an information home appliance infrastructure, condoned by mainstream society, that delivers a kind of intellectual independence to anyone who simply makes the decision to take up that challenge.

Add to this the '08 economic meltdown and its progeny, the current Euro crisis, and we have very good prospects for revolution, at least....

[electrostal]

I sometimes wonder what will come after Communim? Will that truly be the "end of history? Doesn't Diamat say that nothing lasts forever, in a way?

[TrotskistMarx]

Dear friend, I am not a psychiatrist, psychologist and sociologist. But according to what I read by Eric Fromm, humans behave in the same all thru their lives. Except of course people who re-invent themselves, and make a radical change in their lives usually thru higher education and self-reading. But , for a revolution it would be required for at least 60% of USA to experience a re-invention of themselves not into Einsteins and Noam Chomsky super-brains. But at least into people who are very sure in their heads, and accept that both democrats and republicans are evil political parties. And that the USA is ripe for at least a third party.

But americans for many many reasons, like an excess of working, driving for hours and hours all day, chores, domestic chores, hectic busy lifestyles, and even with access to computers, to internet, to alternative TV news channels like Democracy Now, and The Russia Today News. Even with mainstream politicians like Ron Paul preaching anti-war platform. Americans can't wake up.

I read in a book by Edgar Allan Poe, that humans have a tendency to support and love at lot more organizations, institutions and individuals that are full of wealth, luxuries, and pomposity. And tend to reject, despise and alienate any organization, institution and persons that are regular looking, average joes, humble and who lack brightness, luxuries and pomposity.

This is also another great reason of why the majority of the 320 million americans tend to support Obama and Mitt Romney a lot more than third party politicians and anti-war politicians.

That's why americans do not like Amy Goodman, Michael Moore, Sean Penn, and even Ron Paul, Cynthia Mckinney and Cindy Sheehan, they are too humble for americans. Americans like most people of this world love pomposity and brigthness.

Maybe that's also why in Mexico Peña Nieto has 38% in pre-election polls and Lopez Obrador 24%

I think it is the task of the left of this world, to work more on the image and marketing tactics. And to hire progressive celebrities like Sean Penn and other progressive celebrities. That would make the left more popular and better looking


.


.



I'm hoping to read some thoughts from the more learned members here

Simply say what your view on revolution is, whether it is inevitable, and why you think so.

Heck, this may not even be a relevant thing to discuss, but I am looking for input especially to learn more about the criticisms of capitalism.

[TrotskistMarx]

You are right, I am a realist, and asking Thomas Jefferson not to own slaves in that time. Is like asking Noam Chomsky not to hire wage-slaves to cook his meals, clean his house etc.

.


Yes he was a victim of his time. Just like how Gandhi was a racist who referred to black South Africans as "kaffirs." Gandhi was a racist because a lot of people of this time where racists. As a politician Jefferson did everything against slavery so he kept his private life of owning slaves away from his political one. Doing things as a legislator is differant from someone's personal life. For example Ronald Regan had many gay friends being an actor from Hollywood, yet he did next to nothing as president to stop the AIDS epidemic.

[Book O'Dead]

Dear friend, I am not a psychiatrist, psychologist and sociologist. But according to what I read by Eric Fromm, humans behave in the same all thru their lives. .

What you say is incorrect. Erich Fromm did not say any of the things you just wrote.

I have read several books, article and essays by Erich Fromm and I assert to you that Erich Fromm has never suggested that "humans behave in the same thru all their lives"[sic].

In fact, quite the contrary. Erich Fromm's method of social psychology takes the view that the social psyche is in constant evolution; it is dynamic and ever changing.

This is consistent with the materialist conception of history which assumes a corresponding effect on the mind as objective reality changes. IOW's the social and psychological state of mind of people is constantly adapting to the ever-changing conditions of the world at large.

[NoahZoahaar]

It is inevitable that capitalism will collapse, for it is inherently unstable. Capitalism will continue to try to find ways to prolong its hegemony, but, ultimately, it will by collapse by it's own nature. However, we must be sure to organize, both to aggravate and quickly bring about this collapse, and to make sure we have the power to structure the void that comes with the collapse of capitalism.

[Raúl Duke]

This is how I, and I believe Marx, saw this issue:

Every class society by definition have two classes with opposing interests and thus class tension. As long as you have class contradiction there's always the possibility of revolution/change, like what happened in feudalism's case.

I feel that the way the argument is presented in the Communist Manifesto (historical materialism) makes it seem "inevitable" but now we're reaching an era where elements of the Left question this "inevitability" of revolution.

[ckaihatsu]

[H]umans have a tendency to support and love at lot more organizations, institutions and individuals that are full of wealth, luxuries, and pomposity.




Americans like most people of this world love pomposity and brigthness.


Time for a full entryist campaign into TED...!


= D

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

I for one think it's inevitable as I think capital, in and of itself, carries it's own seeds of destruction.

[Geiseric]

Well seeing as capitalism collapses every few years, it would make sense for a majority of people to eventually want to replace it with something not run by profit which is the fundamental flaw with capitalism.

[RedZezz]

As my sig. says:

[Ocean Seal]

You are right, I am a realist, and asking Thomas Jefferson not to own slaves in that time. Is like asking Noam Chomsky not to hire wage-slaves to cook his meals, clean his house etc.

.
You're right, a life without slaves sounds hard. You're right I'm sure that there weren't any people who had no slaves at the time, I bet even the slaves had slaves. For fucks sake its sad to see people defending this fuck. Have you even thought that there were people who actually liberated their slaves, including reactionary George Washington?

[Comrade Trollface]

You are right, I am a realist, and asking Thomas Jefferson not to own slaves in that time. Is like asking Noam Chomsky not to hire wage-slaves to cook his meals, clean his house etc. Wage slavery coexisted with chattel slavery. Jefferson could have easily freed his slaves and paid them a wage. Such things were not unheard of, even in ancient Rome.
And stop slandering Chomsky. Everyone knows that he has grad students for shit like that:mad:

[Dunk]

The Revolution is possible.

[MotherCossack]

yeah and i am the queen of sheba!
noooo course I dont mean it.... but..... i mean....
there aint half a load of reasons to sink into despair..... from where i'm sitting.....

maybe it depends on the country.... i mean us lot in merry old ingerland or the great old british isles.... not exactly chomping at the bit of revolutionary zeal are we?
bunch of lazy, reactionary, stick in the muds more like ......
only revolution we considered, lately, was all about industrialization and the particulars of mill machinery.........[industrial revolution bruv!]
And i have been reliably informed ,by a geazer called Bob, that Marx werent all that impressed by the English cos he thought we was a bunch of bourgeoise apologist wannabe class traitors in the making... if you get my drift.