The Workers must be Armed and Organised!

[(A)]

19492
“The workers must be armed and organized. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered;
any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.” — Karl Marx

Two Items to discuss here. Firstly the politics of Gun rights and how the left should fight the state by any means to ensure that the working class remains armed.
It seams like a clearly Liberal idea to disarm the population under the pretext of safety. I am sure this has been discussed in length here but I am always interested in new debate if anyone
has any to offer.

Secondly I want to know your personal preference on Firearms and other weapons. What are you able to acquire in your state and what arms do you already possess or intend to possess.
Personally I have yet to acquire a firearm due to the pains that Canada puts on gun owners. As I am now Self-employed I plan on getting my restricted firearms license early next year.
At the moment I would like to purchase a Henry .45-70 lever action govt and a Colt 1911 Govt. I want a larger caliber round and like the aesthetics and reliability of these guns.

[Freeloader]

Well its all about context.

The debate and consideration of arms will differ from nation to nation, and maybe even with nations. And also differ relative to the political tensions between workers and the state/or capitalist class and the real or perceived revolutionary movement in progress.

Right now, arms are not relevant to the political situation. i.e. there is not political armed conflict between the working class and the ruling class.

So isn't the real question that of pragmatics of revolutionary practice: does the working class need to be pre-armed ?

I would say No, the working class does not have to pre-armed, but it must take arms when necessary (and i am in general against de-arming american civilians, but not in favour of re-arming for example british civilians).

An interesting quote from the source of your original quote which is from : Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League (https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm)


(https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm)"The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition"

Today this would be equivalent to the working class being armed with, RPG,s, Drones,Sniper Rifles, Assault Rifles, Grenades, Mines, Attack Jets, Tanks, etc.

To really understand the quote, and the text by Marx, we need to understand the historical context and the events of the time.

I dont think it applies lock stock and barrel to all times and all situations as a universal tenet . But what is universal is the fact that forms of civil war and armed reaction should be expected in a revolutionary situation and that we as revolutionaries must meet that force with force. How we do so is up to question and debate and we must study past historical revolutions carefully for there lessons.

The other thing is we shouldnt use this important question of arms and violence to defend individual preference of owning a firearm or not. Or to use the idea of an armed population as some sort of canvas for projecting our own fantasies upon. i.e. the working class mostly have a firearm therefore we are somehow closer to revolution , or that the working class is strengthened by owning a firearm as if despite it being fractured and having no independent political representation that the fact that there are firearms means those problems arent so problematic anymore.

[(A)]

But there are politically active armed conflicts between the working class and the ruling class.

Looking close to home to the situations faced by working people caused by a militarized police force that is active in the suppression of the working class and underprivileged.

And across the world their are working people subjected to the brutality of their respective states.
Their is a class war and they are winning.

More and more it seams obvious that it is active and needs immediate action on our part.

And I never said that we should not be organized; the title of the thread can attest.

But we must ensure that we have the ability to organize and revolt and that nothing is allowed to get in the way of that ability. Disarming the population needs to me met by force because the state is force. The silencing of revolutionary voices and organizations must be met with force as the state is force.

If they asked us strongly to stop fighting we would respond in kind; no.

If they make it law then we must defend our ability to fight in kind; By destroying the law.

[ckaihatsu]

I tend to see the 'cutting-edge' in terms of what *labor* is and isn't allowed to do, according to the state's violence and the corporate media's political agenda-setting -- here's a prime example from recent historic labor history:


Verizon striker run down as New York cops protect scabs

http://www.wsws.org/asset/610e7627-5bd6-46f0-ba8c-ee09d0222d6A/verizon-injury.jpg?rendition=image480
Strikers posted this picture of injured worker being taken away after being struck by van

http://www.revleft.com/vb/threads/195644-BREAKING-Verizon-Employees-on-Strike!?p=2872455#post2872455

[Heretek]

This was a thread a while ago.

Arguments against are; how useful is a handgun going to be against tanks and armored vehicles? What exactly happens to the people who shoot cops in this society? Ever notice how it's generally reactionaries who acquire weaponry, and then use said weaponry to 'defend their property' and kill colored people without repercussion?

[ckaihatsu]

This was a thread a while ago.

Arguments against are; how useful is a handgun going to be against tanks and armored vehicles? What exactly happens to the people who shoot cops in this society? Ever notice how it's generally reactionaries who acquire weaponry, and then use said weaponry to 'defend their property' and kill colored people without repercussion?


'People of color'.

You're welcome.

[(A)]

Heretek:

I would argue that their are more guns in America then people and that if even 1% of the American population where to rise up they would outnumber every single American active and reserve military man by over two hundred and fifty thousand armed men.
As Freeloader pointed out Marx said we should be militarized ourselfs. I would not disagree. You are right a handgun cant hurt a tank; but that's not an argument to disarm.

I am not advocating murdering cops; I am advocating self-defense against cops by any means necessary. If that means going to war then I am all for it.
The revolution will be fought by cops and soldiers VS us.
All we can do is let them know they should hand in their badges and join the working class.

[Freeloader]

Looking close to home to the situations faced by working people caused by a militarized police force that is active in the suppression of the working class and underprivileged.

Well that's the prime function of the police isn't it ? To defend private property and capitalist relations by using force against the national working class and poor. Increased militarization matters, but the response of "We must arm ourselves to defend against the increasingly militarized police" may be a necessary call, but it should be called relative to the specifics of the situation. Because a bad call , of arming, of fighting and leading to loss of life of a section of politically active workers is a bad move for the our cause, we lose more than the lives of those lost.



Disarming the population needs to me met by force because the state is force. The silencing of revolutionary voices and organizations must be met with force as the state is force. ....
If they make it law then we must defend our ability to fight in kind; By destroying the law.

What exactly are you proposing? If the next USA president issues a call for all firearms to be handed in and a outright ban on owning any firearm. Are you suggesting "terrorist" activity against state forces and administration ? Because that's what it sounds like.

Any consideration such as this must take into account how it progresses the class struggle. Have you considered that such violent actions may do more harm in silencing revolutionary voices and organizations than the disarming of the general population would.

The state always will have greater firepower. Our greatest weapon is numbers and mass mobilization. The fact that nothing moves without the working class. We and our organizations are our own best weapons. We should defend our rights and our organizations and ourselves personally, but must consider the consequences in relation to armed conflict, consider the tactics in view of the strategy and always look at the long game.

[(A)]

I am simply agreeing with Marx's statement



The workers must be armed and organized
Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered
any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary


"The workers Must be armed and organized". It is Our responsibility if we plan on calling ourselves Revolutionary's to arm ourselves and Organize the working class around us.
I mean what should we be doing besides that? I train in martial arts and am working on acquiring firearms and am still learning and connecting with Anarchists and revolutionary's.
"Under no pretext should arms and Ammunition be surrendered". Now I agree that back in the day things where different but that means we have been losing the fight against Liberalism and
The state. We need to protect our gun rights under the states or acquire arms illegally.
"Any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary". Protest, call in, fight for what little rights you have. If they take your rights its time to revolt.

[Sewer Socialist]

Regarding weapons, I see some odd logic here. Many people here disingenuously imply that anyone is planning on meeting the military on the battlefield in tank battles or whatever, as if that's how 4th generation warfare works. And I mean, if you're pointing out that fascists use guns to oppress people, isn't the logical conclusion that resisting fascists with guns also resisting oppression?

I do think you're maybe not placing enough emphasis on the "organized" part, at least in your writings here, Democracy, and that might be allowing some people's imagination to run away. What does "organized" mean to you? What do you mean when you say you're making connections? What sort of connections, and for what? Obviously, don't be too specific, respect security culture and such.

[GLF]

There is no doubt that guns would be completely worthless in a communist society. But this isn't a communist society. I'm afraid any attempt by the centre-left to disarm the proles must be fought by any means necessary. The right wing (fascists) understand the importance of keeping their people armed for their revolution. We better not forget it ourselves. That's the way I see it.

To me, tanks and such are meaningless. Yes, the government has them and the workers do not. But that's just all the more reason the workers need to be armed even more. Besides all that, the workers vastly outnumber the military and police force. And as the war unfolds they cannot keep the superior arms out of our hands because of losses and defections. But if the workers aren't armed they will be confident to begin the war. Maybe I am looking at things in too simple a manner, but it's honestly how I see them. Marx's words ring true now as much as ever.

[(A)]

I didn't think I would have explain that.

To me organization means enlisting, training and unionizing groups of people and individuals working towards common revolutionary goals. Inciting and educating the working masses for years and all across the world.

I restarted using this forum in hopes of fining common cause; Connected with several groups and more...

Freeloader. I am not saying to start shooting people. I am saying to keep away from the Liberal fallacy that "Guns are bad Mkay" and fight to keep what little rights we have.
If we let them take our last means and resort to fight and organize then we will have truly lost.
Also I just wanted to see what guns you all had or wanted.

[Freeloader]

If we let them take our last means and resort to fight and organize then we will have truly lost.


Are weapons(guns) the last means and resort to fight and organize ?

This is exactly what im arguing against. You are placing to much importance on firearms and armed conflict.

We should never forget that armed conflict will likely play a role in a revolutionary process, but you seem to be placing it as the alpha and omega of revolutionary socialism.

Oh, and don't own a gun , don't want a gun...and cant really own a gun since i live in UK (possible but not really worthwhile with all the bureaucracy).
The UK, where all revolutionary politics are irrelevant because we don't have access to firearms...:glare:

[(A)]

Well then how do you see a UK revolution looking like?

I know you guys are pretty polite over their but I doubt asking the State to politely fuck off will work.

I think armed conflict will be inevitable. The state will not just accept defeat. Its monopoly on violence will come fully to bear against the Revolutionary's

"every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war"

[Freeloader]

To be brief, i see a UK revolution looking more like Venezuela's Bolivarian revolution. With armed conflict becoming a possibility relative to popular support. I.e. less public support the more reactionary force will be tempted to use military force to remove a revolutionary government.

"Its monopoly on violence will come fully to bear against the Revolutionary's"

Sure, i dont really disagree with this but like i said before. Its really a question of pragmatics:

-do we need to pre-arm now ready for revolutionary events
-what weapons do we need i.e. knowledge of explosives may be more useful than a handgun
-could we expect to acquire weapons when needed, i.e. smuggling, raiding military stockpiles
-what method of warfare could we expect
-what role can civilians play i.e. demonstrations, strikes,
to
If in the UK we right at this moment removed the tories and placed a revolutionary communist government. that government i assume would have access to weapons if not via the military than via the fact that the UK makes various weapons. These weapons could be mobilized in the form of militas or whatever by the revolutionary forces.

But thats all pie in the sky. In the UK we basically don't have guns but communists shouldn't be wasting time campaigning for gun ownership rights. Just as Communists in countries where guns are owned by ordinary people may make a case to keep those rights but shouldn't necessarily waste time fighting to regain those rights if lost. There is simply better things and more important things to do. The inevitable or not armed conflict can be dealt with when we approach that situation.

I am a believer in the phrase "by any means necessary" but 1. this for me applies to the success of socialism, gun ownership is but a small tool that may come into play at a certain stage. 2. the phrase is always a hidden question- are your means really and truly necessary ?

On a side note this issue reminded me of the fact that there are 3d printed guns, the main design which was basically banned i believe by the US government. The future may see guns easily available and ammunition the only obstacle.

[ckaihatsu]

Here's from another thread:





Any bad system can simply be fixed by making it law and enforcing it with guns. How do you think capitalism works.





And there's your fetish with militaristic force -- we might call it 'military determinism', which *isn't* a real thing.

[(A)]

So Freeloader you want to see a Socialist Party take political power in one of the more conservative states in the western world and then use the military to fight off counter revolutionary's?

I cant... Their is nothing revolutionary about politics. Replacing one state with another is Just violent Liberalism.



I DO believe we should be armed now because the struggle is now; our enemy is armed and has the "legitimacy" to attack us.
I would recommend getting a weapon legally now.
When the fighting becomes active it would be harder to raid military stockpiles while wielding rocks.
I would expect mass rioting; seizing and defense of our community's and means of production. A well organized Working class would have a goals and means to reach them.
Civilians that are not active I think would either avoid the trouble outside their door or run and hide.


Your plan assumes you could replace once government with another and that that would even be a good idea. Besides the reactionary military force, Any lack of public support you might find due to the nature of the British and the fact that you would have to kill/depose the monarchy and I am sure someone will be pissed about that; you would also just be replacing one capitalistic government with another maybe less capitalistic one. Just opening another can of worms so to speak.

My Revolution is one where the state is Smashed and the military/royalty and any forms of authority are cast down never to be recreated. The working class wont have an army to fight their wars for them; they are the cause of liberation.