Is violence at political figures an acceptable act

[yeahjim]

the topic is pretty self explanatory, so without further ado ill leave it open to debate.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

I once thought so

[Hate Is Art]

Depends very much on the circumstances.

After the I believe very much of Revolutionary Tribunals and Firing Squands to get red of the old leaders weren't clever enough to flee the peoples wrath.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

Yes, the majority if not all current world leaders should be killed, I fully support killing them also support killing head of corperations who abuse human rights and other stuff

[Hate Is Art]

Yes, the majority if not all current world leaders should be killed, I fully support killing them also support killing head of corperations who abuse human rights and other stuff

Surely you shouldn't just assume they all deserve to die?

[JokingClown]

If I saw Saddam Hussien when he was in power, and I had a gun, I would shoot him. Same goes with Hitler and many others.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

NO NO NO, killing just isint right. I just want a more humaine world not another bloodbath

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

you know guys I once thought it was okay........

[ComradeRobertRiley]

What is wrong with murder petey?

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

treat others as you would like to be treated, comrade. wise word as old as civilisation. If only they had been implemented.
let it start with you
paz y amor
-petey

[Ortega]

Petey, you have good points.

But the rest of you, this is a complete... trap i guess. If anyone investigating this site (FBI, etc) were to come across any direct threats, which the conversation is moving toward, well... it wouldn't be good. So just watch what you say.

[Soviet power supreme]

FBI :lol:

I saw a thread somewhere and it said that They dont fear communists anymore and dont think they pose a threat to USA.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Yet pacifissts are whats this world comming to

[Xprewatik RED]

Killing leaders is a new tyranny. Violence is tyranny. Extradite an individual, inprison an individual. But treat that person as a human. If the person is horribly evil it does not matter. You cant set precedents on who can die or else you are playing god. So incarsarate the individual treat them to a decent life and let nature do its job. Some people can also reform. And remember people are living in a capitalist society, they dont see it as evil, they see it as correct they have been told so from birth. So shooting a leader of a corporation is wrong.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Originally posted by Xprewatik [email protected] 3 2004, 10:56 PM
Killing leaders is a new tyranny. Violence is tyranny. Extradite an individual, inprison an individual. But treat that person as a human. If the person is horribly evil it does not matter. You cant set precedents on who can die or else you are playing god. So incarsarate the individual treat them to a decent life and let nature do its job. Some people can also reform. And remember people are living in a capitalist society, they dont see it as evil, they see it as correct they have been told so from birth. So shooting a leader of a corporation is wrong.
thanx comrade

[Ortega]

Originally posted by Soviet power [email protected] 3 2004, 05:47 PM
FBI :lol:

I saw a thread somewhere and it said that They dont fear communists anymore and dont think they pose a threat to USA.
But that article in the thread was also from The Onion (http://www.theonion.com)

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

lol

[Ahura Mazda]

Not at all. To advocate the slaughter of those who you don't like or disagree with is purely animal, for lack of a better word. We are humans, animals of reason as well as emotion. Use your reasoning before acting on your emotions. And that means acting only in defense of your self, not your power.

[Pete]

Assassination is not anything any would want on the left. That is, those with a head ont heir shoulder so they can see that it would not make things better, but much worse. Violence, especially targeted cold blooded killing, alienates people, from potential supporters to those already working to create a better world. Also, matyrs are not good things to have at hand. Remember this? "This hand burns first!" English religious troubles were fueled by matyrs. No the reaction does not need anymore propaganda.

Of course, if they shoot first we must fight back. That is the only logical answer. As Mao did, if it comes to war, we should only fight when we know we can win. Assassinations don't help us win though. They are counterproductive.

-Pete

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

yes that is partly true but when you kill them you become just like them. jail 'em instead

"you become what you set out to destroy"
-I think jello biafra said that

[Pete]

I disagree. Jailing is worse then fighting to defend your self. If you fight and die defending your cause, defending mind you, then it will only support the cause in the long run. If you are not the agressor, but the defendant the 'moral superiority' is still on yourside.

Jails are .. a nother topic. Hardly a useful form of convincing people that you are right eh? Throwing them in jail.

[el_profe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2004, 10:07 PM
What is wrong with murder petey?
if you want political leaders murdered and bussinessmen killed, like the guerillas did. DONT ***** when they kill back.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

thanx el profe thats another reason

as for crazypete I wasnt talking about jailing the dissenters no just murderers

[synthesis]

Anything* is acceptable if it furthers the cause of proletarian revolution and emancipation.



*Almost.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

I dunno.It depends on the circumstance and the leader.I mean,if its a leader I hate I would shoot him myself.It does not do anything for my conscience if i know I am shooting an imperialist dog.I would say that if its an asasanation on a reactionary leader,then fine I'm for it.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

violence just makes the cause look bad

[Intifada]

it is counterproductive, however if bush was assassinated i would be very pleased. :D

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

I still disagree with you comrade

[Intifada]

so you wouldnt be happy with the killing of bush if it happens?

[James]

I'm against it; for the reasons outlined in this thread.

Bush;
How would it help the situation?
Bush isn't really an individual - well he is obviously, but if he was murdered, someone else would take his place, if not someone worse. Plus they'd have an excuse to have a major clamp down.

Leaders don't tend to be needed to be assisinated, if the masses are against them. If the masses arn't against them, maybe you shouldn't contemplate murdering their leader.

[Intifada]

How would it help the situation?

it wouldnt, as i said, it would be counter productive. all i said was that i would be very happy.

[James]

but unhappy because of the massive "step back"?

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 05:05 PM
so you wouldnt be happy with the killing of bush if it happens?
I dont like bush but no I would not be happy as a matter of fact I'd fear total marshal law

[Intifada]

yeah. in the long term it would make our situation worse.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

thats more like it think long term

[Bolshevika]

I think it's perfectly fine to assassinate political leaders, in fact, I encourage it, especially if your target's name is George W. Bush. It's a very good way to get a point across.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

AND LOOSE CREDABILITY?

[Bolshevika]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 07:20 PM
AND LOOSE CREDABILITY?
If anything killing a political leader will bring you credibility and massive respect, sort of like the Brigette Rosse when they assassinated the Italian prime minister, this made them extremely famous and well known.

If anything killing GWB will only bring the said group massive amounts of members. I mean, only something like, 90% of the human population hates the bastard.

[Soviet power supreme]

It really does depend on circumstances.

Killing a Bush right now would piss off many americans and feds and others would find some Iranian guy that supposedly did.Well then you could kiss Iran goodbye.

But what about couple years later when his policies has really pissed of the majority of the Us people.The crowd would dance on the streets.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

I am very dissapointed in you all.

It seems you learnt nothing from Che

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

HOW ABOUT THAT REVOLUTION SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH THE LOVE OF MAN
NOT THE HATE OF MAN

[ComradeRobertRiley]

well like che who killed for the good of man I agree

[Comrade Ceausescu]

I am very dissapointed in you all.

It seems you learnt nothing from Che

I think it is ok to assasinate leaders if they are hated by the masses.Che was not.


HOW ABOUT THAT REVOLUTION SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH THE LOVE OF MAN
NOT THE HATE OF MAN

So we should love one man who only cares about himself and hates the working class?We should spare his head because of morality?I think not.I always say this but to quote Chairman Mao,"A revolution is not a dinner party".

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

HOW ABOUT LOVE ALL
TREAT EVEN THE LOWEST OF THE LOW WITH DIGNITY

[BOZG]

In a revolutionary situation, that is at a time where the proleteriat is rising against capitalism and the state, I think the assassination of leading political figures can be justifiable, if they pose an extreme threat to the movement. Though I do not think it should be decided by a single person, who would take it upon themselves to shoot someone.

Outside of these situations, I completely disagree with the assassination of political leaders because I complete refute the idea of "individual terrorism". Acts such as the assassination of a world leader can only have negative effects. For beginners, the world and capitalism is not controlled by single persons, there will always be another to fill the breach but most likely at the expense of civil liberties. Killing someone like George Bush, Tony Blair etc etc merely gives the state a reason to brutally crack down on anti-establishment activities and to create a climate of fear within a country. The assassination of a world figure by a single person or group, rejects the idea that the masses can rise up and can spark a revolution, thus it has a regressive effect on their consciousness and at this stage, will merely disgust most people and make them more distrustful.

A good pamphlet against "individual terror" is Marxism & Terrorism, a collection of writings by Trotsky, two of which are linked below.

On Terrorism & The Collapse Of Terror And Its Party (Both articles on same page) (http://marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1909/tia09.htm)

[ComradeRobertRiley]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 4 2004, 11:22 PM

I am very dissapointed in you all.

It seems you learnt nothing from Che

I think it is ok to assasinate leaders if they are hated by the masses.Che was not.
What? are you saying that I think che was hated by the masses?

Che was a great bloke and i agree with what he did.

[Xprewatik RED]

Assasination of people after a revolution is tyranny... It doesnt end. The killing won't end. People say it will stop but then this system founded on blood continues on blood. Noone will be able to stop it. It will create a monster, a monster. If you don't see this than you should look at history. Humans will still be involved, archetypes and collective conciousness won't disappear. People will still have evil in them. Give them a chance and those of evil can sieze anything and they will turn your revolution into a blood bath. A blood bath. If you mew up some individual you find a threat than society is safe. You don't need to shoot them. There is no reason. You are cannot play GOD you are not nature. Nature will take its course and the indiviual will die. Governments now play god, and that is wrong. Many of you are obviously heavily influenced by this, and your anger. Control yourself leaders cannot be full of hatred or else they will be corrupted. You are no better than them if you kill maybe in YOUR head you can justify it but thats it. So just stop the killing.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

and the governments will continue forever unless we kill them, your words and leaflets alone will do nothing.

[Xprewatik RED]

So after a revolution just to be safe we kill all leaders, dissidents, religous people, etc.... wow....great.....

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Thats not what he said at all.Next time actually read the posts...


CRR,I was not saying that Che was hated by the masses.What you were saying is haven't you learned anything from Che's assasination and yes I have.It is not right to assasinate a leader who is loved by the masses.And I also believe that you should not assasinate a leader who is not your country's leader.At least not with the help or consent of a revolutionary organazation from that specific country.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

Xprewatik RED - I said nothing of the sort, post revolution and pre revolution and during the revolution are 3 differant things.

Comrade Ceausescu - I (as che did) believe that it is ok to kill leaders of your own and foreign countries. Any leader who isnt left-wing needs to be replaced.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Its ok to do it in another country if you have the support of those people,but just running in and doing it because you think its right is really like imperialism.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

when it comes to communism:



"by any and all means"

[Soviet power supreme]

So after a revolution just to be safe we kill all leaders, dissidents, religous people, etc.... wow....great.....

What the hell are you talking about?

The assasination is completely different thing than terror.
Who brought the masses to this discussion.We were talking about assasinating ONE leader.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

The guy was talking out of his arse

[BOZG]

Any leader who isnt left-wing needs to be replaced.

They do not need to be replaced, they need to be removed and that's it. We don't need left leaders either, though I'm sure the anarchists will debate what exactly a leader is.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2004, 07:45 PM

Any leader who isnt left-wing needs to be replaced.

They do not need to be replaced, they need to be removed and that's it. We don't need left leaders either, though I'm sure the anarchists will debate what exactly a leader is.
yeah sorry i didnt mean replaced, i meant removed. sorry.

[timbaly]

Just to put this out there, many people who find assasinating leaders such as Bush and Blair to be ok happen to be the same people who condemn the United States for its political assasinations and assasination attempts. That especially goes with the attempts on Castro because I have heard countless leftists chastise the US gov't for their actions, yet at the same time many of them would support the assasination of countless Western leaders.

[BuyOurEverything]

Assassination is generally not a usefull strategy, as it tends to create martyrs. However, if a leader is killing or oppressing people and their assasination would not be detrimental to the cause, I would absolutely support it.