How to deal with capitalists after the revolution?

[JPSartre12]

Comrades,

I have heard varying opinions regarding what to do with the capitalists during, and after, our revolution. Rather than just seeing a few ideas spotted on threads and posts from time to time (although there may well be threads dedicated to this, although to be honest I have not checked), I would like you to briefly explain what you would do them and why.

I like the idea that I have heard before about placing the bourgeois class on trial for their crimes during their capitalist dictatorship, although I am not sure if that would completely effective from removing them from our new society. I feel as if killing them would be grossly inhumane - perhaps we could educate them to work alongside the proletariat in our new society, but this seems very unrealistic.

Your thoughts?

[MaximMK]

They would loose all the power and money after the revolution so they would be just common people like anyone else without any power over them. Maybe if they did seriously bad stuff they should be punished but if they were just common capitalists i think they should be allowed to find their own place in the new society if they remain peaceful and do nothing against the revolution.

[Prinskaj]

After the revolution has occurred, and communism has been established (i.e. The state is no more and a genuine free access economy is functioning). Then I do not think that any actions against them will be necessary, since the chance of counter-revolution would be slim to none (Like the fact, that the capitalist system does not need to suppress supporters of a return feudalism).

[eric922]

Well I assume you mean during the early stages before communism is established. Honestly, I think the best tactic would be to issue a pardon to the majority of capitalists who are willing to integrate into the new society. Those who have committed really bad crimes such as killed workers should be brought to trial for their crimes, however overall I think mercy would be the best policy. It would help encourage them to accept the new society. Unnecessary violence would only promote more violence. If they know know they are going to be executed anyone they'd just fight harder.

[JPSartre12]

Maybe if they did seriously bad stuff they should be punished but if they were just common capitalists i think they should be allowed to find their own place in the new society if they remain peaceful and do nothing against the revolution.

Agreed, this is a very nice approach.


After the revolution has occurred, and communism has been established (i.e. The state is no more and a genuine free access economy is functioning). Then I do not think that any actions against them will be necessary, since the chance of counter-revolution would be slim to none (Like the fact, that the capitalist system does not need to suppress supporters of a return feudalism).

I am referring more to the time period wherein the revolution is taking place, not the future after it wherein we usher in communism. Although, once socialism is firmly solidified and we work towards communism, I would say that you are right.


Honestly, I think the best tactic would be to issue a pardon to the majority of capitalists who are willing to integrate into the new society. Those who have committed really bad crimes such as killed workers should be brought to trial for their crimes, however overall I think mercy would be the best policy. It would help encourage them to accept the new society. Unnecessary violence would only promote more violence. If they know know they are going to be executed anyone they'd just fight harder.

I also think that this is a very nice approach. However, do you think that there is a possibility of them refusing to integrate into the new society, or sabotaging it some way from within?

[eric922]

I also think that this is a very nice approach. However, do you think that there is a possibility of them refusing to integrate into the new society, or sabotaging it some way from within?


Well in that case he would have to try them and punish them like he would anyone else who broke those laws. sabotage would be illegal as would funding reactionary forces. However, I will say that the death penalty and torture should be banned period. I am firmly against those no matter what crimes have been committed. Lock them up for life if need be.

[Art Vandelay]

Those who violently attempt to roll back the gains of the proletarian revolution will have to be dealt with by force. Once the proletariat has abolished itself (along with all other classes) then there will be no bourgeoisie left. Perhaps for capitalists who did horrible things during the post-revolutionary society, trials will be set up; but for an average cappie they will just become and average worker.

[Rafiq]

(Like the fact, that the capitalist system does not need to suppress supporters of a return feudalism).

I'm sure that has something to do with the fact that, you know, they already killed all of those assholes hundreds of years ago? They did supress them. They just aren't a threat anymore because once most were killed, this gave space for capitalism to develop and render Feudal classes nonexistent. Now, only quasipostmodern shitbags want Feudalism, them, and reactionary national romanticists who are too into fantasy. Counter revolution is a 100% garuntee. Assuming the Bourgeoisie do nothing (100% impossible), two words: Petite Bourgeousie, a very militant class.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

I would argue that they would not have any decision-making power while remaining bourgeois (the soviets and party would naturally, by the way they both work, exclude them) and any that try to launch a counter-revolutionary attack on the dotp would obviously be put down.

I don't really think anyone would argue for killing them all and slaughtering them in concentration camps or anything. Anybody that did is pretty stupid, btw.

[Le Socialiste]

Some form of suppression will be necessary, this goes without saying. No class overtakes another through nonviolent means, because it is essentially the forcible supersession of one's interests with those of its rival's. Reaction is inevitable, the question then is how it will be dealt with. Those members of the bourgeoisie (petite or otherwise) who resist losing their status, wealth, and privilege through violent or disruptive means should be tried for their crimes. Simple as that. If they die trying, so be it. The point isn't to parade every single member of the ruling-class through the town square on a stick - the point is to overthrow them, with the working-class assuming their place.

[JPSartre12]

Some form of suppression will be necessary, this goes without saying. No class overtakes another through nonviolent means, because it is essentially the forcible supersession of one's interests with those of its rival's. Reaction is inevitable, the question then is how it will be dealt with. Those members of the bourgeoisie (petite or otherwise) who resist losing their status, wealth, and privilege through violent or disruptive means should be tried for their crimes. Simple as that. If they die trying, so be it. The point isn't to parade every single member of the ruling-class through the town square on a stick - the point is to overthrow them, with the working-class assuming their place.

^ Thank you, that was very articulate :)

Perhaps you or another senior Leftist can answer this question of mine ...

I agree with what you have all pointed out - the bourgeois class needs to overthrown through a revolution and there will be violent reactionary elements, yes. But would responding to those reactionaries with equal or greater violence so as to remove them and save our revolution be warranted? Perhaps I'm being too much of a purist when I say this, but I feel as if building our new society out of blood is not a good legacy to leave behind. What would you say, comrades?

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Depends on the nature of the revolution.

A mass organic revolution of the politically conscious working class, by the working class will (hopefully!) strip the the bourgeoisie of not only political power but economic hegemony, their entire asset base and the means by which to continue their class control of society. They will - individually and as a collective - be powerless to stop the march towards Socialism. There will be no need to 'do anything' with them beyond that. If they want to re-join society as working citizens, then they should be allowed to do so. If they want to undermine the system, then they will surely be dealt with according to the law, just as is the case under Capitalism.

No fuss, no emotion. Just sort it.

[JPSartre12]

A mass organic revolution of the politically conscious working class, by the working class will (hopefully!) strip the the bourgeoisie of not only political power but economic hegemony, their entire asset base and the means by which to continue their class control of society. They will - individually and as a collective - be powerless to stop the march towards Socialism. There will be no need to 'do anything' with them beyond that. If they want to re-join society as working citizens, then they should be allowed to do so. If they want to undermine the system, then they will surely be dealt with according to the law, just as is the case under Capitalism.

Yes, it does make sense that they would not be able to stop the implementation of socialism if they loose all political and economic power, and it does seem humane to put those that try to resist on trial and deal with them according to the law.

Thank you for that. However, a concern of mine: if we are discussing the political and economic power of the bourgeois class, how are we to react during/after the revolution if their retaliation takes a purely economic form - such as freezing or erasing our access to capital and funds, damaging and destroying the means of production in the spirit of "I would rather have no one have it than have the revolutionary proletariat have it", cutting off our supply to electrical power, depriving us of technology and resources, and so on.

I feel as if the bourgeois class may have too many tools that they can use, and we have too few :(

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Yes, it does make sense that they would not be able to stop the implementation of socialism if they loose all political and economic power, and it does seem humane to put those that try to resist on trial and deal with them according to the law.

Thank you for that. However, a concern of mine: if we are discussing the political and economic power of the bourgeois class, how are we to react during/after the revolution if their retaliation takes a purely economic form - such as freezing or erasing our access to capital and funds, damaging and destroying the means of production in the spirit of "I would rather have no one have it than have the revolutionary proletariat have it", cutting off our supply to electrical power, depriving us of technology and resources, and so on.

I feel as if the bourgeois class may have too many tools that they can use, and we have too few :(

It's nothing to do with humanity, or compassion for ex-capitalists. It's merely that there's no point in wasting time/money on a group who don't pose a threat anymore.

So what if capital freezes capital? What would that do? We'd have political power, their 'currency' would be useless and it'd be no threat. In retaliation, assuming world revolution, we could just abolish money, that'd be far greater retaliation than they could cope with.

[JPSartre12]

So what if capital freezes capital? What would that do? We'd have political power, their 'currency' would be useless and it'd be no threat. In retaliation, assuming world revolution, we could just abolish money, that'd be far greater retaliation than they could cope with.

Yes, but during the revolution itself, wouldn't lack of access to capital and resources hinder our ability to revolt?


So what if capital freezes capital? What would that do? We'd have political power, their 'currency' would be useless and it'd be no threat. In retaliation, assuming world revolution, we could just abolish money, that'd be far greater retaliation than they could cope with.

There's an answer! ^ :rolleyes: I suppose that our abolition of money could be a way to prevent such bourgeois retaliation, yes. But how exactly would we go about doing that? Would it simply require that we no longer acknowledge that money has any economic power?

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Yes, but during the revolution itself, wouldn't lack of access to capital and resources hinder our ability to revolt?



There's an answer! ^ :rolleyes: I suppose that our abolition of money could be a way to prevent such bourgeois retaliation, yes. But how exactly would we go about doing that? Would it simply require that we no longer acknowledge that money has any economic power?

Take power not by taking power of bourgeois institutions, but by creating parallel institutions. I say in the form of workers' councils. Obviously, if you're pro-party then you're going to have a slightly different viewpoint because parties aren't really designed to operate outside of institutions - their de facto raison d'etre (how's that for French?) is to contest for power in already-existing institutions.

Parallel institutions render current institutions useless, if popular will is behind the parallel, alternative institutions. So there's your answer.

[JPSartre12]

Take power not by taking power of bourgeois institutions, but by creating parallel institutions. I say in the form of workers' councils. Obviously, if you're pro-party then you're going to have a slightly different viewpoint because parties aren't really designed to operate outside of institutions - their de facto raison d'etre (how's that for French?) is to contest for power in already-existing institutions.

Parallel institutions render current institutions useless, if popular will is behind the parallel, alternative institutions. So there's your answer.

I did not even think parallel institutions!
When I think of workers' councils, I think of them as being institutions that are set up after the dictatorship of the proletariat and seizure of the means of production by a vanguard party ... I've always thought of the need for temporary centralization by the vanguard-run state, then begin to decentralize them into councils.

Silly me :lol:

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Indeed, the reason that in the past few years, independent organisation has failed is because it has not been organised. Things like Occupy, the UK Riots and so on in recent years have not really set up parallel organisations - they have more been political protests, rather than political struggles.

In her pamphlet 'The Mass Strike', Rosa Luxemburg was very clear that in order for a mass strike to occur (as the ultimate revolutionary weapon of the mass of the working class), both economic and political struggles needed to occur simultaneously and organically. That is, economic struggles (think trade unions defending workers' rights) and political struggles (think political sloganeering and revolutionary overthrow demands) need to co-exist. What we've seen in the past 20 years is a sort of vacuum on the left, where the State model of the USSR has fallen out of favour yet nothing concrete has replaced it. So you have a lot of much more democratic work on the ground outside the usual left-sects, but not with any sort of positive political ideas, and so they are unable to transfer this democratic spirit into genuine political struggle.

So when you see great protests occur (economic struggles), they generally amount to nothing because there is no political struggle to direct the economic struggle, and to fuse with the economic struggle.

[The Idler]

Capitalists won't exist without capital.

[Blake's Baby]

That's true, but not exactly the point. What is being got at I think is 'what is to be done with those who violently attempt to restore capitalism during the transition to socialism, or otherwise resist the transition to socialism, through terrorism, wrecking, or other armed resitance?'

[JPSartre12]

That's true, but not exactly the point. What is being got at I think is 'what is to be done with those who violently attempt to restore capitalism during the transition to socialism, or otherwise resist the transition to socialism, through terrorism, wrecking, or other armed resitance?'

Yes, that is what I'm getting at.

I understand the need for the revolution, of course, I'm just rather worried about he damage and violence that would take place during it. If there's a way that we could stage the revolution with as little violence as possible, I think that would preferable, but I'm not entirely sure that that's even possible.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Why is it preferable to stage the revolution with as little violence as possible?

By that, I don't mean to advocate support for petty insurrection, but clearly in a mature revolution made by politically conscious workers, violence will only come about through conflict, which will only come about when (probably when rather than if, if we're being honest!) capital resists the democratic will of the majority of society, the working class.

[La Guaneña]

Yes, that is what I'm getting at.

I understand the need for the revolution, of course, I'm just rather worried about he damage and violence that would take place during it. If there's a way that we could stage the revolution with as little violence as possible, I think that would preferable, but I'm not entirely sure that that's even possible.

It's pretty hard to "plan ahead" for something like that. A revolution is going to be a violent act, and the revolutionary violence used by the proletariat must escalate according to the violence the bourgeoise uses to defend it's interests, or defeat is certain.

[sanpal]

Comrades,

I have heard varying opinions regarding what to do with the capitalists during, and after, our revolution. Rather than just seeing a few ideas spotted on threads and posts from time to time (although there may well be threads dedicated to this, although to be honest I have not checked), I would like you to briefly explain what you would do them and why.

I like the idea that I have heard before about placing the bourgeois class on trial for their crimes during their capitalist dictatorship, although I am not sure if that would completely effective from removing them from our new society. I feel as if killing them would be grossly inhumane - perhaps we could educate them to work alongside the proletariat in our new society, but this seems very unrealistic.

Your thoughts?

One of these days the American space station began to investigate a surface of Mars. The following stage in development of this planet will be flight of people to Mars. This way of decision of this problem is rather constructive: two problems(tasks) simultaneously are solved - the Earth is released(exempted) from capitalists and there will be no shortage of manpower at colonization of Mars. Remember Australian experience.;)

[RedMaterialist]

What to do about the capitalists? First, the revolutionary state, like all states, must suppress (as in a dictatorship) the counter-revolutionary class. If the capitalists want to go peacefully, then fine. If not, then socialists will be forced to use the same kind of brutality against the capitalists which the capitalists have used against the proletariat (and before them serfs and slaves) for thousands of years.

If the Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Cuban, Angolan and French revolutions are indications of what will happen, then it won't be pretty.

[Thirsty Crow]

Obviously, expropriation is a measure aimed at destroying the practical economic basis of the existence of the bourgeois class as a class.
Socialize the workplaces and the enitrety of production, be it the production of ideas, services or images, or resources and physical products.

I would also advocate a no platform approach to possible political organizing of counter-revolution (this really seems obviously reasonable). No political organizations of the counter-revolution should be left to operate freely.

If involved with an underground counter-revolutionary activity, exile and personal property confiscation.

[RedskinUltra4]

I agree with the general sentiments I've read here.

In a genuine revolution the means of production will be seized to be owned and operated by the working-class in a democratic fashion. The personal wealth of capitalists beyond a certain limit will also be expropriated.

I am strongly against being vindictive against individuals solely because of their bourgeois status. Vengeance for its own sake leads down a very ugly road of corruption, abuse of authority, and inhumane crimes.

With that said, those who have committed the most egregious "white collar" crimes against their employees, small stockholders, and the public interest should be prosecuted. And it should go without saying that those who play a prominent role in funding and organizing any counter-revolution must be dealt with severely.

[Blake's Baby]

...
If involved with an underground counter-revolutionary activity, exile and personal property confiscation.

Exile to where? Sorry M, this doesn't make sense to me.

[jookyle]

I think that certain members of the capitalist class should be persecuted and tried in a people's court. Some of these people have made decisions that have directly led to the death, sickness, and destruction of livelihood for many people and should be held accountable for what they have done. A CEO at Dole decides to use a chemical on the banana plantations in Nicaragua which is banned in almost every country world, this leads to the workers to develop cancer and become sterile and his punishment is that he has to be equal with everyone else!? Fuck that, this people are enemies of humanity and should be treated as such.

disclaimer: I do not support the death penalty as a court decision, but would fully support these people spending the rest of their lives in tiny jail cell.

[Klaatu]

In my opinion, the richest capitalists should be forced to work at the lowest end of the wage scale.
They can then see how the rest of us survive, eating beans and $2/lb ground beast.

[Buttress]

I don't think that, during a proletarian revolution, the capitalist class will have any opportunity of reinstating capitalism. If a revolution is going to happen, the majority of people will want to overthrow capitalism and the only means the capitalists would have to protect their system is to use brutally violent and shameful tactics. The capitalists who "go quietly" then, should be at least commended for that (but maybe not their actions prior to the revolution).

Some capitalists will not go without kicking and screaming and they should be dealt with in a manner fitting the destruction of their kicks (and screams). But I am not talking about vengeance here, rather only what is necessary to protect people and socialism from this activity. I doubt torture would be necessary in any context (and nor do I believe that locking people in cages for all eternity would be necessary).

[ВАЛТЕР]

They'll probably fight tooth and nail for their property and whatnot. My guess is most of them will be killed in the revolution itself. Afterwards, if the revolution is carried out correctly, they shouldn't have anything to complain about. They'll live like everyone else.


However, if they act in a counterrevolutionary manner, then have them shot. We don't need that nonsense of theirs post-revolution.


In the end material conditions will determine how we act. Since we can't know for sure what we will do next week, not to mention post revolution.

[Marxaveli]

One of the things I fear most, is the revolution being able to take place at all, in particular in the USA. The country is so reactionary and anti-Socialist propaganda is so strong, you can bet your bottom dollar [no pun intended] that even if a Proletarian Revolution took place, the Capitalist government would almost certainly use direct military force to try and crush the revolution, even if it meant harming and killing many people. It is pretty well known that most people in the military are very reactionary, and many have been trained to deal with "civil unrest" in their own nation should it occur. Getting the revolution off the ground will be the most difficult part, by far. Or there could be a second Civil War, this time between the class conscious Proletarian vs. nationalistic groups like the Tea Party Patriots. Either way, resistance to the revolution will be very strong, we can count on this. In countries like the Nordic/Scandinavian nations, and perhaps France, where left-wing politics, social democracy, and intellectuals are much more prominent and respected in conjunction with a less potent reactionary force to contend with, I think the revolutions here will be easier to carry out than in Amerikkka.

If we DO get it off the ground, and it isn't crushed, I think we will have very good chances from that point. I agree with most of the posts that say the Capitalists should be given a chance to integrate into the new society, though the most treacherous ones and those who try to undermine the revolution should be punished. I would only endorse using violence against them however, if it was absolutely necessary. If we over do it, we will only make them hate the revolution more and they may be like "see, you socialists are just a bunch of dictators". Not a good thing, even if we are successful. So, violence should only be used as a last resort, though I suspect there will be instances afterward where this will be necessary, regrettably. On the other hand, those who do react violently right off the bat should receive the harshest of treatment, up to, and including, death. We cannot allow a repeat of the Paris Commune, when the Proletarian wasn't aggressive enough against the reactionaries, who ended up crushing the revolution.

[Rafiq]

To put it vaguely, it's quite simple. You see, if they submit before the proletarian dictatorship and obey like the good dogs they are, there won't be any problem. If they attempt to retaliate against the revolution, they will be thoroughly crushed. Next question?

[RedHammer]

We can give them exactly what they want. We can build a small enclave on the far side of the moon and throw them in there, where they will be free to thump their Atlas Shrugged and eat each other.

[Sea]

We must be as diplomatic (read: polite and civilized) as possible. No need to fulfill the prophecy of bourgeois propaganda which states that those evil godless commies will bring executions en masse.

[Pretty Flaco]

we tickle them into submission.

[robbo203]

After the revolution has occurred, and communism has been established (i.e. The state is no more and a genuine free access economy is functioning). Then I do not think that any actions against them will be necessary, since the chance of counter-revolution would be slim to none (Like the fact, that the capitalist system does not need to suppress supporters of a return feudalism).


Yes, I would agree and would add that there would be no conceivable leverage these ex-capitalists could exercise to enable them to get their way assuming they even wanted to see a return to capitalism. Bribery, corruption and economic compulsion of any kind becomes meaningless and, indeed, impossible to put into effect where the means of production become common property and individuals accordingly are able to exercise free access to goods and services as a result

[Generalist]

First of all, I just want to point out that this has been an inter-generational discussion between comrades. I read some of these things. There's issues with popular justice (divine violence, as they call it), which the authorities cannot do anything about, with ethics, which you cannot just leave it to individual grudges, otherwise that would not be justice. The best thing to do is to put them on the factory line. Make the bosses the lowest workers. They can live, but they begin at the bottom.

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

I agree with Sea. There's no need to kill everyone. The new society should be strong enough to resist capitalism, without murdering everyone.

[Dunk]

As long as money commands labor, the person who owns it is a threat.

[Klaatu]

Why not give them a taste of "trickle-down?" :lol:

[Ostrinski]

hunger games

[Comrades Unite!]

They would be stripped of all power, Their land seized and given to the workers,Their modes of production pulled away from them and put into state power and given to the workers.

They would be then under rigorous investigation after the revolution, the one's who are caught in Counter-Revolutionary activities should of course, be shot.

The Bourgeois will now be placed under the oppression of the Proletariat.
It will feel what it felt like to be a Proletariat yet they will retain their Bourgeois senses.

[Comrade Jandar]

Hang'em high.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Hang'em high.

All of them? Very helpful one liner there. Really contributing to the discussion. :rolleyes:

[Sheepy]

"You can go, we won't stop you... but we'll miss you~ :3"