'The Revolution'

[Publius]

When is set to begin?

I want to know when your errant gesticulations will actually take the form of something useful.

I see a lot of talk on this forum about the upcoming 'revolution' and how you're preparing for 'the revolution' but I see absolutely no popular support for your 'movement', and as a matter of fact, I don't see your 'movement' at all.

Can you guys do anything to provide me with evidence that this 'revolution' isn't just a construct of your overactive imagininations, or that it really is a 'dreaded specter' hovering over our capitalist dystopias?

How big is your army? What financial backing do you have? What are your strategies for the assualt?

[bed_of_nails]

The revolution is set to begin tomorrow at 3:45 pm, standard greenwhich time.

Our army is 4.5 Million people.

Our financial backers are actually the huge corporations that suck money out of fools like you. They have been siphoning that money into private accounts for the revolution since BEFORE Marx.

Our strategy is similar to those seen in "Braveheart": Stand before the enemy and lift our kilts.

[Publius]

Good, this will make it easier for me and my bourgiouse allies to massacre your 'army' of bourgiouse teens.

[bed_of_nails]

You must have a very large army then.

[Rage]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 10:40 PM
massacre your 'army' of bourgiouse teens.
Yay!


/,,/
Rock on!

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 10:40 PM
Good, this will make it easier for me and my bourgiouse allies to massacre your 'army' of bourgiouse teens.
God that'd be fun.

Then the fuckers won't feel the need to ruin 6-7 weekends a year with their moronic protests through D.C.

[Lamanov]

..this guy. :rolleyes: [again?] <_< uhmpfffghhh

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 10:33 PM
When is set to begin?

Well, we were kinda banking on you, urm, letting us, urm, have the means of production...if its possible...please?

[Publius]

Well, we were kinda banking on you, urm, letting us, urm, have the means of production...if its possible...please?

Sure.

For a price.

[Bolshevist]

Too expensive. We&#39;ll just take it :)

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Anarcho [email protected] 18 2005, 08:43 PM
Well, we were kinda banking on you, urm, letting us, urm, have the means of production...if its possible...please?
You&#39;re already got them. It&#39;s between your ears. I hope.

[apathy maybe]

The revolution is not supposed to be an organised event, but rather a spontaneous voicing of disgust against the whole system.

Besides we wouldn&#39;t be publishing when we were going to kill all you capitalist scum. We want to take you by surprise.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

When is set to begin?

As soon as the working people realise there&#39;s an alternative to wage-slavery. We&#39;re working on it.


How big is your army?

Nearly a billion.


What financial backing do you have?

People like you pay us to do your dirty work, surprisingly enough.


What are your strategies for the assualt?

To sieze, secure and control the means of production.

Does that answer your questions?

[Forward Union]

You&#39;re already got them. It&#39;s between your ears. I hope.

Didn&#39;t know I had the ability to produce the necessities of survival between my ears...that&#39;s wonderful, I&#39;ll never need to buy again.

But on a more serious note, when will the revolution come? who cares, its not that important.

"Not whether we accomplish anarchism today, tomorrow, or within ten centuries, but that we walk towards anarchism today, tomorrow, and always" Errico Malatesta

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Anarcho [email protected] 19 2005, 09:30 AM
Didn&#39;t know I had the ability to produce the necessities of survival between my ears...that&#39;s wonderful, I&#39;ll never need to buy again.
Do you think the knowledge of how to grow crops and how to build houses came from a big instruction manual that fell out of the sky ?

[Paradox]

Didn&#39;t know I had the ability to produce the necessities of survival between my ears...that&#39;s wonderful, I&#39;ll never need to buy again.


Do you think the knowledge of how to grow crops and how to build houses came from a big instruction manual that fell out of the sky ?

Got to admit, he got you there. He&#39;s talking about our brains. All the tools and products we come up with start as ideas. Our brains are the most powerful tool.

Anyways, in regards to revolution, we can&#39;t put an exact date on it. Though I do see some of the revolts in Central and South America as signs of discontent, they&#39;re not necessarily a sign they&#39;re going to start a mass proletarian revolution. Venezuela could be an example of the path it might take, and because of what&#39;s going on down there, the u&#036; is pissed off, trying to convince the public that Venezuela is a "threat to democracy." :rolleyes: But, again we can&#39;t just slap a date on the fall of capitalism, though a few here in the forums see to think it most likely won&#39;t happen during our lifetimes. I can&#39;t say whether or not that&#39;s true, but in any case, we still have to work towards making it materialize.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by Apathy [email protected] 19 2005, 07:29 AM
The revolution is not supposed to be an organised event, but rather a spontaneous voicing of disgust against the whole system.

Besides we wouldn&#39;t be publishing when we were going to kill all you capitalist scum. We want to take you by surprise.
I&#39;ll be sure to make sure the revolution disposes of you and people like you first.

Your a counter revolutionary. Justice and compassion does not come from the attitude of:

"Besides we wouldn&#39;t be publishing when we were going to kill all you capitalist scum."

That is the philosophy of evil and vengance. I don&#39;t trust YOU to make anything remotely approaching justice and compassion. Thus you are the first anti-revolutionary that must be eliminated.

[Publius]

The revolution is not supposed to be an organised event, but rather a spontaneous voicing of disgust against the whole system.

Besides we wouldn&#39;t be publishing when we were going to kill all you capitalist scum. We want to take you by surprise.

With warriors such as yourself leading the charge, this revolution can&#39;t fail&#33;

Hilarious.

Is wanton violence a necessary part of communism?

[RedLenin]

though a few here in the forums see to think it most likely won&#39;t happen during our lifetimes.

It must happen in our lifetimes. We cant just sit back and wait for the day. We have to MAKE the revolution. If you sit back and lose all hope of seeing the revolution, it wont happen. If you seriously believe you wont live to see it, then revolution will always be nothing more than a dream. To quote Che: "The revolution is not an apple that falls when its ripe, you have to make it fall". I feel this is true. Dont sit around and wait for it, MAKE IT. I strongly believe it will happen in our lifetimes and I will work toward acheiving it. Never lose hope. We shall live to see the end of capitalism, or at least die fighting it.


With warriors such as yourself leading the charge, this revolution can&#39;t fail&#33;

When the masses of people say no, no force on this earth can stop them.

[Paradox]

Is wanton violence a necessary part of communism?

No. Though violence is pretty much inevitable, it is so because the proletariat will have to defend their movement. A war led by a small group of "professional revolutionaries" will not lead to Communism. Communism must be wanted by the vast majority of people, not forced upon them. And besides, the people couldn&#39;t win a war against the technology of the state. However, if the overwhelming majority of people want Communism, then the state faces a problem, they&#39;ll still try to maintain their power, but they&#39;ll be up against the masses, not some relatively small guerrilla force. Guerrilla forces might work in less developed countries, in so far as overthrowing the state, but it still would not be Communism. The best that could do is state capitalism, perhaps speed up the industrialization of the country. In highly developed nations such as the states, a guerrilla campaign would hardly stand a chance. The great mass of the population has to want Communism. And again, violence is most likely inevitable, as the ruling class isn&#39;t going to just stand aside and say "Ok. You win. Here you go."

[OleMarxco]

Blah, blah, blah. Brag this, brag that. This is not a popularity contest. Wait and see. People will convince themselves. I may be actively working towards that end, but it&#39;s the proletariat who take the last decision if they want to revolute, and, if that happens, godspeed shall we succeed - And it will not be like the bolsheviks who fought FOR the people, as a minority, instead of letting the people have the arms and do it themselves :D

[Paradox]

We cant just sit back and wait for the day.


Dont sit around and wait for it, MAKE IT.

Of course we have to work at it, but for revolution to occur requires that the masses WANT IT. If the masses don&#39;t want it, then it is not going to happen. Just because you work to make it happen does not mean that it will. It depends on the awareness and willingness of THE MASSES. This is not to say that we should give up, or that those who I said had feelings that it most likely won&#39;t take place in their lifetimes have "lost hope," they&#39;re just looking at the overall attitude of the people at this current period in time and think the masses aren&#39;t yet willing or wanting of a revolution. Look at Marx. All the work he did, and did he see any revolution? Revolution will happen when the people realize the inherent inequalities and injustices of the system and work together to change the system. Just because we&#39;re working for it today, doesn&#39;t mean it&#39;ll happen tomorrow. It depends on the willingness of the people, and that&#39;ll take time.


Never lose hope.

I&#39;m not. :ph34r:

[bezdomni]

I have to say that some of you are being silly, and it is not just the "restricted members". Killing someone simply for having a capitalist mindset will make us no better than the capitalists who kill us for having our mindset. The revolution is not an excuse for ideaocide (like genocide, except for you kill people for having a particular idea). It should be kept as peaceful as possible, there are ways to change the status quo without guns, bombs and murder. Only people who are a violent threat should be treated with violence.

Peaceful disagreement needs to be allowed, or else we will set up worse oppression than the bourgeoise.

[Publius]

I have to say that some of you are being silly, and it is not just the "restricted members". Killing someone simply for having a capitalist mindset will make us no better than the capitalists who kill us for having our mindset. The revolution is not an excuse for ideaocide (like genocide, except for you kill people for having a particular idea). It should be kept as peaceful as possible, there are ways to change the status quo without guns, bombs and murder. Only people who are a violent threat should be treated with violence.

Peaceful disagreement needs to be allowed, or else we will set up worse oppression than the bourgeoise.

When do we capitalists kill you for having your mindset?

To be honest, I don&#39;t take you guys seriously enough to entertain the thought of killing you.

The simple fact is, very few people are as angry at the world as you are.

Maybe I&#39;m just wrong and people really are pissed, but most people seem content enough.

[Sabocat]

When do we capitalists kill you for having your mindset?


Remember Vietnam? "Stopping the spread of Communism" and all that crap?

[Publius]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 09:29 PM





Remember Vietnam? "Stopping the spread of Communism" and all that crap?

That was a government and it&#39;s troops kill communists.

Capitalism is inherently anti-state. Don&#39;t equate them with each other.

[Sabocat]

Regardless, it was a capitalist government attacking a communist country without provocation.


Since capitalism is completely contrary to communism, I don&#39;t think it&#39;s that much of a stretch to say that it is in a capitalists best interests not to allow communism to exist.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 09:29 PM

When do we capitalists kill you for having your mindset?


Remember Vietnam? "Stopping the spread of Communism" and all that crap?
That is not capitalism.

Just like the secret mass graves and bullets in the back of the heads in Soviet Russia was not communism.

[bed_of_nails]

Originally posted by ahhh_money_is_comfort+May 20 2005, 11:24 PM--> (ahhh_money_is_comfort @ May 20 2005, 11:24 PM)
[email protected] 20 2005, 09:29 PM

When do we capitalists kill you for having your mindset?


Remember Vietnam? "Stopping the spread of Communism" and all that crap?
That is not capitalism.

Just like the secret mass graves and bullets in the back of the heads in Soviet Russia was not communism. [/b]
Thats funny, everyone I know who understands what capitalism is (including my History instructor with numerous degrees from Harvard and Princton) calls the USA a Capitalistic society.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by bed_of_nails+May 20 2005, 11:29 PM--> (bed_of_nails @ May 20 2005, 11:29 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 11:24 PM

[email protected] 20 2005, 09:29 PM

When do we capitalists kill you for having your mindset?


Remember Vietnam? "Stopping the spread of Communism" and all that crap?
That is not capitalism.

Just like the secret mass graves and bullets in the back of the heads in Soviet Russia was not communism.
Thats funny, everyone I know who understands what capitalism is (including my History instructor with numerous degrees from Harvard and Princton) calls the USA a Capitalistic society. [/b]
Is that fellow broke?

Let me guess? YESSSSS.

Capitalism is business? Did the war in Vietnam somehow facilitate the opening of shopping malls?

If that was capitalism, then communism dug secret mass graves in Cambodia.

[bed_of_nails]

Actually the bastard just goes down to Mexico because he has an amazing house down there he says. He doesnt make too much, but in Mexico he is one rich bastard.

[bezdomni]

Vietnam was a capitalist government attacking a pseudo-socialist state.

That wasn&#39;t really the intention of my post and I wasn&#39;t necessarily talking about the United States, although I&#39;m sure a few communists have turned up dead in the past, especially during McCarthy and all of that jazz. There are plenty of latin american countries that will exterminate communists, the USSR would kill a true socialist (like Trotsky), Hitler killed commnists, mussolini killed communists...I could go on but I have made my point.

There are also groups like Redwatch that advocate violence against us.

I don&#39;t see why you cappies are argueing what I&#39;m saying, I&#39;m sort of on your side. If there is a revolution, I don&#39;t think we should kill people just for opposing us, that would result in a bloody, totalitarian regime and a new elite ruling class oppressing even more people.

The only thing that should be met with violence is violence itself if there is no other way of avoiding it.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 11:43 PM
Actually the bastard just goes down to Mexico because he has an amazing house down there he says. He doesnt make too much, but in Mexico he is one rich bastard.
Oh.

He uses economic leverage to live better. What a classic capitalist. You mean he uses his economic reserves to take advantage of a situtation where the economic reserves are less? Is that what you are saying? Why isn&#39;t he using his economic advantage to lift up the people around him in Mexico instead of taking advantage of the situtation?

So then he is part of the oppressor class in Mexico?

[Publius]

Regardless, it was a capitalist government attacking a communist country without provocation.


Since capitalism is completely contrary to communism, I don&#39;t think it&#39;s that much of a stretch to say that it is in a capitalists best interests not to allow communism to exist.

A capitalist government?

Do you think these things out before you post?

How is a government that restricts industry with anti-trust laws, child labor laws, minimum wage laws, welfare, government funded health care, social security, high taxes, regulation, forced cartelization, and numerous other restrictive schemes &#39;capitalistic&#39;?

Answer: It isn&#39;t.

Government and capitalist are irreconcilable forces. Free markets do not tolerate government incursions.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 11:46 PM
Vietnam was a capitalist government attacking a pseudo-socialist state.

That wasn&#39;t really the intention of my post and I wasn&#39;t necessarily talking about the United States, although I&#39;m sure a few communists have turned up dead in the past, especially during McCarthy and all of that jazz. There are plenty of latin american countries that will exterminate communists, the USSR would kill a true socialist (like Trotsky), Hitler killed commnists, mussolini killed communists...I could go on but I have made my point.

There are also groups like Redwatch that advocate violence against us.

I don&#39;t see why you cappies are argueing what I&#39;m saying, I&#39;m sort of on your side. If there is a revolution, I don&#39;t think we should kill people just for opposing us, that would result in a bloody, totalitarian regime and a new elite ruling class oppressing even more people.

The only thing that should be met with violence is violence itself if there is no other way of avoiding it.
You are a dangerous anti-revolutionary and must be stopped. That is not how communism works according to the doctrine. Either get in line with the party or be labeled a anti-revolutionary, viva la revolucion.

[apathy maybe]

Ask a stupid question, get a stupid reply.

The revolution is not a planned organised event.

Even if it were the people involved wouldn&#39;t be telling you about it.

According to Marxist theory (and others) by the time the revolution comes, scum is what the capitalists (i.e. the ones in control of the means of production) will be. Though it seems that a lot of capitalists are scum already.

Are justice and compassion part of the capitalist system? Are they meant to be? Is wanton violence part of the capitalist system?

I do not intend to &#39;lead&#39; the revolution, nor am I a communist (notice my nice avatar), you presume to know me from on part of one sentence, which was meant partly in jest.

[Raisa]

Originally posted by Publius+May 20 2005, 10:42 PM--> (Publius @ May 20 2005, 10:42 PM)
[email protected] 20 2005, 09:29 PM





Remember Vietnam? "Stopping the spread of Communism" and all that crap?

That was a government and it&#39;s troops kill communists.

[/b]
Exactly.

Capitalists dont do shit.

They pay and invest in people to kill you when your ideas matter enough to get in their way.

[Sabocat]

A capitalist government?

A government that works on behalf of and for the enrichment of the capitalist class is in my opinion a capitalist government. The attack on Iraq was for no other reason than oil and hegemony. A clear example of the government working on behalf of oil corporations and the capitalist class.

How would you describe the special interest lobbyists? What about the money they pour into candidates to get favorable treatment for their respective industries/products? I guess a more accurate title would be Market democracy.


Do you think these things out before you post?

Do you?


How is a government that restricts industry with anti-trust laws

Yeah, they came down real hard on Enron, Worldcom, Microsoft..etc. Take a look for example at the oil industry. Broken up under anti trust laws, but slowly all consolidating again without any restrictions being imposed. Another example would be the FCC reversing ruling on how many forms of media can be owned in one geographical location by one company.

Keep in mind, this government also enacted the Taft-Hartley and other restrictive labor laws like the Transportation and Railroad act that is currently going to restrict pilots and airline mechanics from striking after their salaries have been cut, pensions abandoned even though it breaches their existing contracts.



child labor laws

A concession won by organized labor through striking, resulting in the above.


minimum wage laws

See above. Minimum wage has not kept pace with inflation or general cost of living. In essence workers living on minimum wage are the working poor. It is not a livable wage. It is also in the capitalists best interest to ensure a minimum salary to keep their wage workers alive. Barely.


welfare

All but eliminated. Most states now have 2-5 year LIFETIME limits to collecting welfare.


government funded health care

That one is just funny. Medicaid under attack and on the verge of elimination, Medicare restructured enriching the pharmaceuticals.


social security

Under attack and on the verge of privitization. Guess who makes the most money from this little scheme?


high taxes

Only for lower and middle classes, tax cuts for the wealthiest.


Government and capitalist are irreconcilable forces. Free markets do not tolerate government incursions.

Free unrestricted L-F markets do not tolerate government incursions.



Capitalists dont do shit.

They pay and invest in people to kill you when your ideas matter enough to get in their way.

I wonder where they get those people to do their killing? I would agree that there are some private mercenary companies out there, but the vast majority of killing done on behalf of the capitalists is by government troops.

[Publius]

A government that works on behalf of and for the enrichment of the capitalist class is in my opinion a capitalist government. The attack on Iraq was for no other reason than oil and hegemony. A clear example of the government working on behalf of oil corporations and the capitalist class.

How would you describe the special interest lobbyists? What about the money they pour into candidates to get favorable treatment for their respective industries/products? I guess a more accurate title would be Market democracy.

It&#39;s a mercantilism form of government, not a capitalist one.




Yeah, they came down real hard on Enron, Worldcom, Microsoft..etc. Take a look for example at the oil industry. Broken up under anti trust laws, but slowly all consolidating again without any restrictions being imposed. Another example would be the FCC reversing ruling on how many forms of media can be owned in one geographical location by one company.

Keep in mind, this government also enacted the Taft-Hartley and other restrictive labor laws like the Transportation and Railroad act that is currently going to restrict pilots and airline mechanics from striking after their salaries have been cut, pensions abandoned even though it breaches their existing contracts.

Well, since none of those companies were/are monopolies, it would have been stupid to &#39;come down on them&#39;.

The FCC&#39;s regulations are draconian anyway, do away with all of them.

And as a market supporter I disagree with government getting involved in labor disputes at all.


A concession won by organized labor through striking, resulting in the above.

A lie made up by socialists.

&#39;Child labor&#39; as you know it was almost non-existant when it was banned.

And I guess you prefer children starving to death than children working in factories?

What about children who want to work?



See above. Minimum wage has not kept pace with inflation or general cost of living. In essence workers living on minimum wage are the working poor. It is not a livable wage. It is also in the capitalists best interest to ensure a minimum salary to keep their wage workers alive. Barely.

Minimum wage is enough to stay above the poverty line, what&#39;s your point? You say it&#39;s not livible? People live on it all the time.

And since minimum wage reduces employment, it hurts those it&#39;s meant to help.

Read some studies: http://www.house.gov/jec/cost-gov/regs/minimum/50years.htm



All but eliminated. Most states now have 2-5 year LIFETIME limits to collecting welfare.

Good start.



That one is just funny. Medicaid under attack and on the verge of elimination, Medicare restructured enriching the pharmaceuticals.

The Federal Government pays over 60% of all health care costs in this country.

&#39;On the verge of elimination&#39;&#33; Bullshit. It&#39;s going to be around forever, pissing away our money.

You have to be making this up.



Under attack and on the verge of privitization. Guess who makes the most money from this little scheme?

Not Wall Street: http://factcheck.org/article310.html

They would make 16 cents on every &#036;10,000.

The FactCheck article demolishes this garbage.

And if your point is that it would help businesses, than that&#39;s a good thing. It would spur economic growth which benefits consumers and employees.

We want the economy to grow. Right?


Only for lower and middle classes, tax cuts for the wealthiest.

What a dumbass.

The tax rates are LOWER for the lower and middle classes and HIGHER for the higher classes so the upper class pays HIGHER taxes.

Note: http://taxes.yahoo.com/rates.html





I wonder where they get those people to do their killing? I would agree that there are some private mercenary companies out there, but the vast majority of killing done on behalf of the capitalists is by government troops.

Take it up with the government. If they were doing what the Constitution told them to, none of this shit would be happening.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by Raisa+May 21 2005, 06:48 AM--> (Raisa @ May 21 2005, 06:48 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 10:42 PM

[email protected] 20 2005, 09:29 PM





Remember Vietnam? "Stopping the spread of Communism" and all that crap?

That was a government and it&#39;s troops kill communists.


Exactly.

Capitalists dont do shit.

They pay and invest in people to kill you when your ideas matter enough to get in their way. [/b]
Right on sister. Especially the capitalist with money who travel to poor countries to live off the backs of the poor locals. These people should be dealth with harshly by loyal revolutionaries. Starting in Mexico where capitalist imerialist Americans travel and live lavishly and decadantly taking advantage of the locals misfortune.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 11:43 PM
Actually the bastard just goes down to Mexico because he has an amazing house down there he says. He doesnt make too much, but in Mexico he is one rich bastard.
Hey Bed_of_Nails:

You still with me on this? Kill all the imperialist Americans in Mexico who take advantage of the local economy. Viva la revolucion.