U.s. Revolution

[SYO]

I would like to know what everyone things is necessary in order for there to be a successful Socialist/Communist revolution in the United States.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Alot of Socialists and Communists.

Without alot of them there couldn't be a revolution.

[SYO]

Of course we would need alot of Socialists and alot of Communists, that is obvious. I would also like to know who agrees with the stance that most socialists take now at days of accomplishing things through peace. Doesn't this seem a bit uneffective when it comes to things, it reduces the socialist and communists to the likes of the hipppies in the 60's and 70's. Why is it that very few are willing to take up armed revolutions?

[EusebioScrib]

Anyone who says anything about "peace" is not a revolutionary. Just a liberal twat.

The conditions for a U.S revolution? Your asking the wrong question. We no longer live in a time where one country can have a revolution and another can't. We're in a time where if one nation has a revolution, it will sure a fuck effect everyone else majorly.

So the question should be: what are the conditions for a global revolution? I see it as several things. First, there must be a global equalization of capital. There must be no more room for capital to expand, that is no more imperialism. All the minor capitalist nations will develop to a point where they can no longer be colonial entities. Most if not all nations must be on an equal playing level. This will lead to further misery of the working class, which has already been struggling in all the respective nations in hopes of creating workers' power. At this point the international bourgeoisie will be relavtively united because they can't expand anywhere, so they will be forced to fight amonst themselves or unite to keep us tamed. This will be a major turing point in dual-power etc. Although I think we'll have a sizeable "alternative society" already set up by the time equalizaiton happens.

Also, during all this time the means of production will be developing to highly technological levels. There will be far less workers involved in production, and much more involved in reproduction. This is a major pre-condition for communism.

[SYO]

EusebioScrib,
It seems that what you have described will not be seen in our life times. In my opinion the shift from Capitalism to Socialism/Communism should begin in South American (because these countries are affect by the influence of the U.S.). Please correct me if I'm wrong. Also in your opinion what is the time frame in which you see what you described occuring?

[EusebioScrib]

It seems that what you have described will not be seen in our life times.

We're already seeing it. Many Latin American countries (Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba) and others (Iran, DPRK) are spearheading the equalization of capital. Our technology is capable of so many things, but like all means of production, we have little access to them.

[Marion]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 04:01 AM
So the question should be: what are the conditions for a global revolution? I see it as several things. First, there must be a global equalization of capital. There must be no more room for capital to expand, that is no more imperialism. All the minor capitalist nations will develop to a point where they can no longer be colonial entities. Most if not all nations must be on an equal playing level. This will lead to further misery of the working class, which has already been struggling in all the respective nations in hopes of creating workers' power. At this point the international bourgeoisie will be relavtively united because they can't expand anywhere, so they will be forced to fight amonst themselves or unite to keep us tamed. This will be a major turing point in dual-power etc. Although I think we'll have a sizeable "alternative society" already set up by the time equalizaiton happens.
I’ve heard many people argue that inherent in capitalism is unequal development across the globe, and plenty of arguments that the free trade system in particular locks “underdeveloped” countries into a subordinate relationship with more “developed” countries, but I’ve never heard anyone on the left argue that minor capitalist nations as a whole are likely to develop to a point of anything approaching equality if they remain in the capitalist system (which you seem to be suggesting by calling them “capitalist” nations). Have I misunderstood you??? You later refer to the likes of Cuba, Bolivia, DRPK (!!) – are these the minor “capitalist” nations you are referring to, or are these something else?

Plus, what do you see the role for struggle being? You make a brief mention of developing dual-power, but this seems more as a way of moving on once capitalism has declined than as anything responsible for the decline of capitalism itself. If the main prerequisite for communism is the development of capitalism (it seems the only one from what you’ve written) then does it not make sense for you to try and develop capitalism as much as you possibly can and then just join in the revolution when it occurs as a result of this development?

Am interested in where you're coming from on this one, so could you possibly explain this in a bit more detail?

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 11:11 PM

It seems that what you have described will not be seen in our life times.

We're already seeing it. Many Latin American countries (Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba) and others (Iran, DPRK) are spearheading the equalization of capital. Our technology is capable of so many things, but like all means of production, we have little access to them.
So you think Africa will have an "equal" share in capital within our lifetimes then?

[Delta]

Equilization of capital is not necessary for a revolution to occur in the United States. For revolutions to occur in other countries, all that is necessary is that the people of the United States and other outside powers control their governments to the extent that they cannot interfere.

What needs to be done right now? Education. We're vastly outnumbered. People must learn about how the system works. It's important to know that the media serves only as propaganda. Once a person knows this, their minds are forever free and are able in helping the revolution rather than opposing it. Bringing this information to as many people as we can is the most important thing we can do right now.

[Ander]

I believe that popular socialist revolutions must occur in other countries first. Latin America seriously has to just let go and do it, because there is so much potential there. Unfortunately, one revolution by one isn't going to do much good because the US will pick them off like vultures...unless they are lucky like Cuba.

Also, people need to stop relying on liberalism. For the most part, Americans see the Democrats as the most left-leaning alternative to George Bush and the evil Republicans. They don't realize that the problem isn't just Bush, but capitalism in general.

[lawnmowergoWHUMMM]

Sorry, EusebioScrib, I wouldn't call the colonies of the world "equalizing" their capital right now. The countries you listed seem to be in a revolt against capital. It's more like China and India that are on the upswing as far as being able to compete with the West in capitalist terms as opposed to simply revolting like some South American nations.

I also think that the world has pretty much been colonized out to wazoo. This is what World War I and World War II were about - the superpowers were done eating up the world so they had to eat each other. Note that this didn't really result in any great proletarian consciousness in comparison to any other time. The capitalists and bureaucrats are always in deadly competition over who is in control. However, this seems to be just another spectacle which people swallow.

The way revolts happen is they begin somewhere, successfully to a degree, and word spreads. What we need to do is learn about the hushed-up successful struggles around the world, and convince people around us that the winds are changing. Even if they aren't, the belief that they are can take us incredible places. It's like a paradox - there is no reason to put the first foot forward, there's no solid ground to walk on, but putting that first foot forward will make the ground appear beneath our feet.

Also I say as opposed to trying to found this great big, label-covered movement of our own, sometimes we can try to latch on to already-existing anti-authoritarian traditions and push them forward to the point that they are in conflict with the capitalist order.