Arming Or Funding A Revolution?

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Ok,

"times will be radically different at the time of the revolution" aside, how would we fund or arm and feed a revolution in the type of world we live in today? Just curious about your opinions.

[Whitten]

Everybopdy shoots the nearest bourgeois to them. Blunt or stabbing weapons also acceptable. Funds required: 1 knife/baseball bat per person. Cheapest world war in history

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 09:01 AM
Everybopdy shoots the nearest bourgeois to them. Blunt or stabbing weapons also acceptable. Funds required: 1 knife/baseball bat per person. Cheapest world war in history
Try taking on a tank with a baseball bat.

[Whitten]

Why do we need to take on the tanks? We just wont give them our oil to use them

[ComradeOm]

Its that simple, eh? I suppose we won't give them ammunition to shoot either? Or uniforms to wear?

[Black Dagger]

Well hopefully segments of the military would mutiny against their officers? There certainly is historical precedence, and the army's core for example is still very working class.

[Global_Justice]

i doubt the british army would fire on there own people. if it got to the stage a few million were marching on westminster and the financial city of london i can't see the anyone ordering the army to open fire.

[LeftistJosh]

If a countries military doesnt fire on there own people then we have won a battle. If the government was to keep demanding that they fire upon there own, then that could very well push the military to mutiny

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 11:46 PM
i doubt the british army would fire on there own people. if it got to the stage a few million were marching on westminster and the financial city of london i can't see the anyone ordering the army to open fire.
Are you kidding? :huh:

If the state is really threatened of course they will open fire, why on earth wouldn't they?

The state has no 'people', nationalism is socio-cultural tool that is cultivated by the state to rationalise and justify it's own existence, to embed assumptions of its apparent legitimacy into popular consciousness. It will do whatever it takes to maintain power.

The state is not just gonna put down its arms when 'enough' people come out on the streets in opposition, it's going to disperse the crowd to reinforce it's own authority and control.

If this means firing on its subjects then so be it. States don't chuck it in when they're faced with popular pressure they try their hardest to oppress, to crush dissent, to eliminate the opposition.

If you live and work under the assumption that the 'british army would fire on there own people' then you're placing not only yourself, but others in real danger.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 31 2006, 01:05 PM
Well hopefully segments of the military would mutiny against their officers? There certainly is historical precedence, and the army's core for example is still very working class.
That's what you'd hope and there is certainly precedent. Its still interesting an interesting question given the level of indoctrination that soldiers are subjected to these days. The army can no longer be relied upon to for a constant supply of young brutalised conscripts.

[rebelworker]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 01:46 PM
i doubt the british army would fire on there own people. if it got to the stage a few million were marching on westminster and the financial city of london i can't see the anyone ordering the army to open fire.
Thats ike saying " I doubt the police would turn on their own people".

Its true that large segments of the military would find it very undesireable to receive the order to shoot working class people, but weither they will disobey the orders, risking court marshal, is another story.

You will also have a huge segment of the army that is extreemly racist/right wing, and will happily put donw the race mixing godless communists who want to destry our way of life...

[loveme4whoiam]

Indeed, the indoctrination of the army in this country is extreme - but then, it does just play in the pre-existing racist, homophobic beliefs of those who seek to join the Army in the first place. I wouldn't rely on them for a second to not pull the trigger.

[Global_Justice]

Originally posted by rebelworker+Jul 31 2006, 03:46 PM--> (rebelworker @ Jul 31 2006, 03:46 PM)
[email protected] 31 2006, 01:46 PM
i doubt the british army would fire on there own people. if it got to the stage a few million were marching on westminster and the financial city of london i can't see the anyone ordering the army to open fire.
Thats ike saying " I doubt the police would turn on their own people".

[/b]
thats not what im saying. of course they won't bend over and let us in and there would be alot of violence. but someone was talking about tanks, i don't think it would get to the stage of warfare where people were fighting tanks in the streets. this isn't a military dictatorship it's a western "democracy". it would never get to the stage of open warfare between the people and the military. well, at least i hope it wouldn't because we would lose and end up in a military dictotorship.

[Janus]

it would never get to the stage of open warfare between the people and the military. well, at least i hope it wouldn't because we would lose and end up in a military dictotorship.
Why?

The military isn't made up of people? Even if they were not to disarm, the common populace outnumbers them manyfold. It doesn't take a military genius to figure out the outcome of that.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 08:04 PM
it would never get to the stage of open warfare between the people and the military. well, at least i hope it wouldn't because we would lose and end up in a military dictotorship.
I think it definately would, and hopefully we'd outnumber them or use smart guerilla tactics to win quickly because I don't think the entire army will surrender if any do. I think many in the army will be hardcore fight to the death cappies and they have to be if they joined the imperialist forces.

[Delta]

If resistance by the people is widespread enough, it would be tough for the government to use extreme force such as artillery and heavy bombing. Not that the government wouldn't love to, but the members of the army would likely be very worried about collateral damage to their own family and friends.

This is one of the reasons why we must always strongly oppose any attempt to mechanize the military, since it will only lead to a superior armed force that has absolutely no regard for the lives of the people.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 09:22 PM
Ok,

"times will be radically different at the time of the revolution" aside, how would we fund or arm and feed a revolution in the type of world we live in today? Just curious about your opinions.
We would expropriate the provisions we require from our class enemies.

[Enragé]

raid barracks, arsenals, police stations.

Part of the military is likely to join us.

Look at the start of the spanish civil war ;)

[Wanted Man]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 01:46 PM
i doubt the british army would fire on there own people. if it got to the stage a few million were marching on westminster and the financial city of london i can't see the anyone ordering the army to open fire.
The cops have done it, and they'll do it again. Why not the military?

Anyway, I'm noting down the names of most people in this thread. Come the revolution, I'll make sure that they never get to be strategists! :lol: