'68 ---> Now

[Ander]

I've been reading about the May 1968 uprisings in France lately and I've become very inspired. Often I read members here saying that the time is not ripe for revolution and that we have to continue waiting.

My question is, for how fucking long?

In 1968, students, workers, and groups of communists, anarchists, and situationists almost brought the French government to its knees. A revolution was right around the corner before the whole incident ended (sadly). Did they spend years and years talking and planning for this? I don't think so. How much longer are we going to go on with this talk?

In my opinion, I don't think we need to keep waiting. I don't think revolution is something that is mapped out, it just happens. All it needs is a spark to light the fuse which is going to explode.

Maybe I'm just pumped up from the constant playing of Refused all day or maybe I'm just in an angry mood, I don't know if I'm right or wrong.

Any thoughts?

[apathy maybe]

An interesting point. Revolutions aren't planned by Vanguardist parties. (Despite what Leninists might tell you. The Russian Revolution caught all the "professional" revolutionaries by surprise.)

Similarly, the French mass protests where not engineered by the Communist Party, in fact they played a large part in trying to suppress them.

The trouble is, that we can't engineer mass protests that easily. You need a combination of events, and we can only take advantage of them.

So you might as well hope for a mass reduction in civil liberties and workers rights, which then provokes mass demonstrations against them. Or you might be better of hoping for mass student demonstrations, that was the spark for the French protests.

(See also an alternative view in theory. What is the point of protests?)

[manic expression]

At the same time, it's hard to ignore the differences between the present day and 1968. Even the WTO protests in 1999, what can be considered a high point for the US left, didn't come remotely close to the magnitude and direction that the movements in 1968 reached easily (and please, I'm not being critical of what happened in Seattle by any means).

Do we have any organization? Momentum? Presence? Anything? I'm not so sure. I'll try my best to change it, and that's all we can hope to do.

Let me ask people a question: Provided there are a dozen or so activists in a given city, what can this group do to make real progress toward our aims?

apathy maybe, I think you are underestimating the role of the vanguard in Russia. The Red Guards siezed the Winter Palace, how can you say that the Bolsheviks had nothing to do with it? The organization and direction that the Bolsheviks had in place before the revolution was key IMO. That's just my opinion.

[apathy maybe]

The thing with the WTO protests in Seattle (and this is just pissing in the wind), is that there was an event, and the protesting was based around that event. The protests in France started out with students protesting educational things, and likely would have stayed their if they had have got their demands. But they just kept moving, there was momentum, and it kept moving.

The Revolution in Russia, well I just disagree with your assessment of the importance of the Bolsheviks in the initial revolution.
An Anarchist FAQ is a very good resource, it uses both anarchist, Leninist and neutral references. It references everything, provides shit loads of quotes as well. See http://anarchyfaq.org

Originally posted by http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/append41.html#app1
This claim can be proven by looking at the history of the 1917 revolution. The February revolution started with a spontaneous protests and strikes. As Murray Bookchin notes, "the Petrograd organisation of the Bolsheviks opposed the calling of strikes precisely on the eve of the revolution which was destined to overthrow the Tsar. Fortunately, the workers ignored the Bolshevik 'directives' and went on strike anyway. In the events which followed, no one was more surprised by the revolution than the 'revolutionary' parties, including the Bolsheviks." [Post-Scarcity Anarchism, p. 194] Trotsky quotes one of the Bolshevik leaders at the time:

"Absolutely no guiding initiative from the party centres was felt . . . the Petrograd Committee had been arrested and the representative of the Central Committee . . . was unable to give any directives for the coming day." [quoted by Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution, vol. 1, p. 147]

The Winter Palace was not stormed until the October Coup, thus mentioning it is not really relevant when talking about the February Revolution (which is what I was talking about anyway).

[manic expression]

Originally posted by apathy maybe+January 26, 2007 04:18 am--> (apathy maybe @ January 26, 2007 04:18 am) The thing with the WTO protests in Seattle (and this is just pissing in the wind), is that there was an event, and the protesting was based around that event. The protests in France started out with students protesting educational things, and likely would have stayed their if they had have got their demands. But they just kept moving, there was momentum, and it kept moving.

The Revolution in Russia, well I just disagree with your assessment of the importance of the Bolsheviks in the initial revolution.
An Anarchist FAQ is a very good resource, it uses both anarchist, Leninist and neutral references. It references everything, provides shit loads of quotes as well. See http://anarchyfaq.org

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/append41.html#app1
This claim can be proven by looking at the history of the 1917 revolution. The February revolution started with a spontaneous protests and strikes. As Murray Bookchin notes, "the Petrograd organisation of the Bolsheviks opposed the calling of strikes precisely on the eve of the revolution which was destined to overthrow the Tsar. Fortunately, the workers ignored the Bolshevik 'directives' and went on strike anyway. In the events which followed, no one was more surprised by the revolution than the 'revolutionary' parties, including the Bolsheviks." [Post-Scarcity Anarchism, p. 194] Trotsky quotes one of the Bolshevik leaders at the time:

"Absolutely no guiding initiative from the party centres was felt . . . the Petrograd Committee had been arrested and the representative of the Central Committee . . . was unable to give any directives for the coming day." [quoted by Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution, vol. 1, p. 147]

The Winter Palace was not stormed until the October Coup, thus mentioning it is not really relevant when talking about the February Revolution (which is what I was talking about anyway). [/b]
Right, and to be honest, the WTO protests could've done a lot more had they used aggressive tactics (although I respect and admire what they did, in addition to having no real high ground to criticize it).

It's difficult to tell when and where something will happen, but the fact is that France has always had pretty solid organization and the like. Perhaps it is the potential that matters the most.

The Feburary Revolution put Kerensky into power, no? It wasn't a group making a revolution, it was a people tired of war and poverty and despair; the Feburary Revolution was a completely different situation than the October Revolution, and it was when the Bolsheviks siezed power that there finally started to be progress.

[YSR]

The Autonomist movements of the 1970's in Italy and 1980's in Germany and Switzerland seem to be another element of this: without any type of organizing, organic workers' and peoples' struggles arose. These groups came into contact with the Communist parties in both situations.

This illustrates to me that revolutionary activity is a continuum, not a sudden break with the previous era. Revolutionary movements rise up frequently and in different places.


I don't think revolution is something that is mapped out, it just happens.

Agreed, but organization in the course of the revolutionary struggle helps create situations where sudden "fuses" can react with tools ready to be picked up by the people.

[SPK]

The objective conditions in the usa today exist for a serious mass upsurge in struggle, much more so that at any time since the Great Depression in the thirties. The problem, I believe, is that the movements which have come and gone over the past ten years or so – the struggle against capitalist globalization, which started in Seattle in 1999, and the antiwar struggle being the two obvious examples – failed completely to understand the changed conditions here, particularly after the 911 attacks, and accordingly develop new perspectives and new modes of radical action against the state. Consciousness among workers and oppressed peoples as to the bloodthirsty, reactionary character of the system is now at an all time high, but there is no outlet or vehicle for these folx to help organize against that system.

That glaring lack is the product of a total failure of political leadership by the radical movements. Anarchist currents involved in the campaigns against capitalist globalization refused to refocus that struggle on the war in Iraq and were, in any case, too embedded in their parochial subcultures to effectively reach out to the many people newly concerned about conditions in the usa. Liberal and pacifist currents in the antiwar campaigns have not, over the past four years, proposed any mass direct action initiatives or, for that matter, anything beyond marching around with signs at rallies. Leninist currents have done what they’ve always done, which is engage in ideological struggle to bring as many people as possible to progressive positions against the war – a strategy which at this point is completely inadequate and must be pushed to a much higher level.

The problem today here is firmly among radical and revolutionary tendencies – it is a political question. The problem is not in the external, objective circumstances – such as the economy or the situation for imperialism -- as those could not be more advantageous for us at this point.

We cannot rely upon spontaneous, immediate action by the people. That is relatively rare (doesn’t the last four years prove that decisively?), and when it does happen, can quickly dissipate. Organization is needed to actually build creative, dynamic movements. And organization is needed to turn any spontaneous upswings that do occur into long-term mobilizations that engage massive number of people.

[RNK]

The fact is, the Bolsheviks successfully pounced on an oppurtunity, and carried it through to success. They had great initiative and the conditions were ripe for Revolution at the time.

At the same time, "Communism" was not the curse word it is today. The majority of Americans, even those that would gain massively from a Revolution, have been programmed for almost a century to distrust Communism. Even if conditions were right (and in my opinion it is), there is insufficient support for a truely communist revolution from the masses. It is true, that in most cases a vanguardist body is needed -- most if not all of the LASTING revolutions the world has seen in the past century were carried out by vanguardists in one form or another, who drew the path to revolution for the masses to follow. The majority of "spontaneous action by the people" has resulted in nothing more than a progressive liberal capitalistic society taking root, for one very good reason -- if there is no strong vanguard of communists to lead the way, there will always be bourgeoisie vanguardists who are quite willing and capable to take the reigns and shift the development of society towards their goal. These so-called "non-violent" revolutions we've seen in places like Eastern Europe, where spontaneous mass action by the people occured, have all degraded into capitalistic, American puppet states.

There are two courses of action as I see it. The first course will be to "wait it out", or more accurately, to focus our attentions on winning back the confidence of the masses and turn back the clock. This is no easy feat, and will require us Communists to win back all that we have lost. The second course will be for vanguardist elements to essentially begin violent actions in whatever form, be it open hostility towards military and civil defense, sabotage, attacks, etc -- which will need to be consistent and lasting, because in my opinion, for such tactics to win over the American people, they will have to become widespread and "accepted" over a period of years to the point that the initial shock of it all fades. This is somewhat "Guevarist" in that this is what Che attempted to do throughout his life; head to the hills, start a war and hope that it picks up momentum and support and carries through to success. But don't expect it to take only two years as it did in Cuba. In Nepal, after 10 years, the Communists still haven't quite won, although they're close, and besides, there are a lot more examples of this failing than succeeding. But we all know the risks involved in our line of "work".

It is a sad and unfortunate act that these things can't easily be accomplished. The number of people who would be willing to head out into the forests, train with weapons and launch a guerilla war are small, and they are spread widely throughout a huge country. And even if a group of these people could get together it wouldn't be out of the question to doubt their conviction. In places like Nepal and South America and Asia and Africa it is very easy for men and women to give up everything they have to go and fight a just war; they have very little to give up. Here in the West we are accustomed to a certain level of luxery, however small we may think it is, and the prospect of sacraficing friends, family, cherished possessions and our way of live is daunting to say the least. But if you're willing to do this, and you find other people who are also willing, then there's nothing stopping you.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 11:45 pm
My question is, for how fucking long?

2 years, 4 months and 15 days.

The reality is, when we actually have an organised working class. The sooner we have a decent level of proletarian organisation, the sooner we can attempt to put a spanner in the works.


How much longer are we going to go on with this talk?

Im not sure I understand what you mean, many of us do a lot more than talk. Personally im finding it hard to get the time to make posts like these, in between the piles of work I have to do for my local collective, work and my social life... :unsure:


In my opinion, I don't think we need to keep waiting. I don't think revolution is something that is mapped out, it just happens. All it needs is a spark to light the fuse which is going to explode.

If you want to look at it like this; the revolution is happening now. Im engaged in militant acts of class struggle regularly, to me, revolution would just be an escalation of the current state of our practice. Not some abstract event that has a start and a finish clearly defined by us.

We're expanding, we're growing and getting more organised. We are trying now to radicalise the working class community locally, and have some very interesting plans underway. Plans im hopeful could bolster our membership and support 100x

Because the fact is, that, the bigger you get, the greater your capacity, and so class tensions increase.

We slip into a trap when we say "lets start the revolution now" we could take the approach of groups like Whether underground, who believed in bombing police stations and barracks to "bring the war home" all it did was alienate everyone and make their movement irrelevant.

I mean, you're all pumped up, but would you and your friends throwing Molotovs at cop cars bring the state to it's knees? Or set the movement back a few decades?

The fact is you probably feel disempowered, either because your not in an organisation, or the organisation your in isn't doing anything. Either of those are easily remedied problems

[somebodywhowantedtoleaveandnotcomeback]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 12:45 am
I've been reading about the May 1968 uprisings in France lately and I've become very inspired. Often I read members here saying that the time is not ripe for revolution and that we have to continue waiting.

My question is, for how fucking long?
If we knew that, we wouldn't have to be doing all this organising work, protests, educationing etc., now would we?



In 1968, students, workers, and groups of communists, anarchists, and situationists almost brought the French government to its knees. A revolution was right around the corner before the whole incident ended (sadly). Did they spend years and years talking and planning for this? I don't think so. How much longer are we going to go on with this talk?
It might seem to you as if the '68 uprising, revolution if you will, just happened from one day to another, but the truth is it had been going on for much much longer beforehand, and it was only possible because of mass organising and a general class struggle awareness, made possible by exactly the same work we are doing now (or, at least, that I hope most of us are doing).

In other words, we are now working towards a revolution as our comrades in the sixties had been doing before us.


In my opinion, I don't think we need to keep waiting. I don't think revolution is something that is mapped out, it just happens. All it needs is a spark to light the fuse which is going to explode.
Indeed the revolution does not come planned, nor handy-packed and ready-to-use, that's exactly why we have to keep up the work we are doing now.
Yes, it may not seem like the kind of revolution you read about in books, see in Hollywood movies or play in computer games, but that's the point: revolution is not a book, nor a game, nor a movie. It is hard work, not fun.


Maybe I'm just pumped up from the constant playing of Refused all day or maybe I'm just in an angry mood, I don't know if I'm right or wrong.
I don't think it's a matter of right and wrong here. I mean, you've got the right attitude, you've got the spirit and you're willing to fight. However as I said, that's not all a revolution is about.

The only thing we know, is that our day will come.

[VukBZ2005]

If we are to talk about the causes of the great revolutionary situation of May-June 1968, we have to look at two dimensions, for it is these dimensions that were the instruments of insurrection.

The first dimension was that of the working class student.

From 1960 onwards, there was a heavy influx of university students, students who were born in the midst of the Second world war of 1939-1945 and were mostly from the working class.

Because of this influx, the university students began to overcrowd the system and it was collapsing from the inside due to that overcrowding.

The role the Situationist International played in the development of May 1968 from the dimension of the working class student, I believe, is more than essential, perhaps even invaluable, because of the fact that revolutionary ideas to the young university students began to spread rapidly through the Strasbourg Scandal of 1966-1967 (a scandal that was caused by the Situationist Internationals' pamphlet "The Poverty of Student Life"), which lead to the destruction of the student union - and the elevation of student struggles in France.

The second dimension was that of the working class.

From 1965 to 1968, the amount of strikes began to rise from 979,860 strikes to 4,222,00 strikes with their highest extent in May and June of 1968, when 10,000,000 workers took over their workplaces and joined the students, very nearly bringing down Capital in France.

What caused this?

What caused the elevated amount of strikes between 1965 and 1968 lie within this factor; that the alienation that one felt from the production of their work (on the Fordist-Tayorist Assembly Line) accelerated to such an extreme extent that they could not take it anymore.

They believed that the difficulties of their work were being ignored for the most part by the trade union bureaucracy and were being intensified by the Fifth Republic of Charles De Gaulle, especially with the government's attacks on social security and other basic things that were supposed to be guaranteed to the working class.

So, yes, what we need is organization.

But what we also need is the removal of ineffective, "revolutionary" theories, and the development of a "train of thought" that challenges alienated labor and all of its instruments, not just the state and the trade union - so that we could effectively put the ideas that need to put into practice - into practice.

[Brownfist]

I find this topic very interesting because I have submitted a paper for a conference entitled, "Resentiment, Revolutionary Machines and the Multitude: May '68 as a Dress Rehearsal".

I just watch Jean-Luc Godard's film La Chinoise today and it is about 4 french maoists in Paris in 1967. The film was released in 1968, just prior to to the May '68 uprisings and was watched by numerous students, although nearly had ideological criticisms of the film. Anyways, I think that one needs to understand the historico-economic context in which May '68 occurred. Some of these have been mentioned below, but I also think that the movements in the Third World i.e. anti-colonial conditions also contributed, the economic crisis, the university crisis and so forth. Having said that, we also need to recognize that it was because the anarchist groups and the ML parties were far better organized within the student population than anything we can see today in America. I think that those anarchists on this board need to look at some of the very concrete organizational methods developed and utilized by the French anarchist movement, they will find numerous differences from the anarchist movement in America. Having said that, we need to be sure not to try to follow an adventurist path, of the WUO for example, who thought that they could create the conditions for revolutions by a series of bombings.

But, I also think that we need to see what happened to May '68. It resulted in a failure and although some gains were made, they were no where near the demands that were made in those radical months. Also, we see a dissatisfaction in France with the working-class and PCF, which resulted in numerous French intellectuals (who were very involved) to argue that revolution was a waste of time or try to come up with new theoretical concepts such as the "revolutionary machine" or out of the failures of the Italian Red Brigades we see Antonio Negri come up with the concept of the "Multitude".

[Eshlonn-the-leader]

Finally, someone has voiced my words. and i thought that i was the only one.I think, that there is no time like the present. I think it is time to Revolt. to Rebel.

[Brownfist]

I think that the time is ripe to organize. Today, I have nothing against revolting or rebelling, however, if that does not occur in conjunction with the working class, then you will be crushed as a movement, and all that you would have achieved is some self-glory and martyrdom. Which in my opinion is of now use to anyone. If you are so insistent on this being the time to rebel and revolt, then I would say that then you must also be willing to organize the working class.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by Eshlonn-the-[email protected] 28, 2007 05:53 am
I think, that there is no time like the present. I think it is time to Revolt. to Rebel.
You won't be the next Che, you'll just be another washington sniper or Charls manson. A nutter or a group of nutters with guns that will get taken out on the highway, I'll watch it all unfold on 'Cops' re runs. :rolleyes:

Then again it'll provide brilliant propaganda for the state, for demonising our movement as a bunch of fringe-nutters that need mental help, it'll expose our inability to produce change at the moment, which will lead to a lot of activists giving up, and will alienate the contemporary public and entire working class. I mean, you really wouldn't be the first person to try this stupid shit. Essentially, if the media present it how they normally do, it could set us back decades, perhaps even a century, perhaps, forever.

So if you did start planning your gung-ho suicide, knocking down decades of movement building, I think we'd have to try and stop you beforehand, with force.

I mean, no offence. But your comments are very immature, and the fact that you have less interest in working class movement building, and the serious jobs that need to be done, and more with something fun like "revolution" suggests that you're probably a middle-class student, who got fired up by a Rage against the machine album and the bolivian diary. Are you even involved or interested in the current political movement on any level? What organisation is it that you lead? the IWW? the CPUSA? or some internet clan?

The communist movement is not some playground for you to masturbate over guerilla warfare. It's a serious process that needs a lot of dedicated people and tactical planning. We're just getting back into shape, and idiotic comments like "lets start the revolution now" are just frustrating to read.

So if the quality of your posts in this forum are limited to "lets revolt now" then please stop posting here. If you decide to start taking things seriously, I'd be more than willing to help, and applogise for my rude comments.

[Eshlonn-the-leader]

Originally posted by Love Underground+January 28, 2007 10:44 am--> (Love Underground @ January 28, 2007 10:44 am)
Eshlonn-the-[email protected] 28, 2007 05:53 am
I think, that there is no time like the present. I think it is time to Revolt. to Rebel.
You won't be the next Che, you'll just be another washington sniper or Charls manson. A nutter or a group of nutters with guns that will get taken out on the highway, I'll watch it all unfold on 'Cops' re runs. :rolleyes:

Then again it'll provide brilliant propaganda for the state, for demonising our movement as a bunch of fringe-nutters that need mental help, it'll expose our inability to produce change at the moment, which will lead to a lot of activists giving up, and will alienate the contemporary public and entire working class. I mean, you really wouldn't be the first person to try this stupid shit. Essentially, if the media present it how they normally do, it could set us back decades, perhaps even a century, perhaps, forever.

So if you did start planning your gung-ho suicide, knocking down decades of movement building, I think we'd have to try and stop you beforehand, with force.

I mean, no offence. But your comments are very immature, and the fact that you have less interest in working class movement building, and the serious jobs that need to be done, and more with something fun like "revolution" suggests that you're probably a middle-class student, who got fired up by a Rage against the machine album and the bolivian diary. Are you even involved or interested in the current political movement on any level? What organisation is it that you lead? the IWW? the CPUSA? or some internet clan?

The communist movement is not some playground for you to masturbate over guerilla warfare. It's a serious process that needs a lot of dedicated people and tactical planning. We're just getting back into shape, and idiotic comments like "lets start the revolution now" are just frustrating to read.

So if the quality of your posts in this forum are limited to "lets revolt now" then please stop posting here. If you decide to start taking things seriously, I'd be more than willing to help, and applogise for my rude comments. [/b]
heh, seriously? i wasnt offended. i've come to accept that people are going to be critical towards my beleifs, or actions. But as far as being the next Che? i dont plan to come close. Not even in the same ball-park. but i want to be someone. anyone. If i can die, knowing ive done something good for the people, let me die. But if i die without at least trying.... Then i will be less than a man. and i am still sticking to my words. it is the time to revolt in my eyes. If force need be for me to be stopped, then force will be used. I am done having this conversation. If you see me unfit, immature, mentally impared, then so be it. just another opinion for me to not care about. and, what would you be "More than willing to help" with? if i may ask? I am taking things seriously. it seems you have a hard time taking the things that I take seriously. now. if you see it fit better for me to discard everything i have said in the past and say: "Nice post." then maybe we can start again.

P.S. I dont much care for Rage Against The Machine

[Ander]

First of all, I'd like to say that I did not mean to insult the actions of those on here. I know many, if not most, of you are involved in actions, organisations, etc. If anything, I should be criticising myself for my lack of involvement (although this is because of communication issues). I apologise if I offended anyone, it was not my intention.

Thank you to those who helped clarify a lot about the situations in France, I understand it much better now...makes sense. Along with those student revolts that happened recently (last year?) it really solidifies my opinion that the French are some of the most revolutionary people around.

A lot of people are talking about America here. I don't care much for the US because I'm not American and I don't see many gains in terms of actual revolution going on there. In my opinion, the only real options for destruction of the system at the moment is in South America and Europe. Thoughts about this?

My question to you all is, if a genuine revolution was happening in another country or region, would you fight for it? If France went through another '68 would you be on the lines fighting the police and government?

[Forward Union]

it is the time to revolt in my eyes.

Which leads me to believe that you have absolutely no connection to reality, or even the movement in general. Because such a plan of action is counterproductive to say the least, it's absolutely suicidal, and impractical. We're in no state in terms of our capacity, or PR to organise even a general strike, let alone a revolt. Anyone that's been involved in the movement on any level, would know that.

If you did take things seriously, then you'd dedicate your time and effort into things that need to be done, and not satisfying your ego. Because you're not interested in what needs to be done, movement building, tactical development etc, you're interested in becoming some heir to Che, to fulfil your beret fetish, your pracitcal plan to burst down your front door and shoot your local police station up with a carbine and a couple of friends is nothing short of immature crap on every level.

It's been done before, several times, and as far as making a name for yourself by doing so; I bet you'd don't even know who weather undergound are.

If you make too much of a fuss about any of this trollish bullshit, I'll recommend administrative action. Im simply not going to put up with this idiocy in a serious discussion forum.


and, what would you be "More than willing to help" with? if i may ask?

Getting you into an organisation, or helping you set one up.

[seraphim]

If you really want to start a revolution a good place to start would not be discussing it on an internet forum. I agree with Love Underground actions speak louder than words. A movement by its very nature requires action.

[Eshlonn-the-leader]

Originally posted by Love [email protected] 28, 2007 05:08 pm

it is the time to revolt in my eyes.

Which leads me to believe that you have absolutely no connection to reality, or even the movement in general. Because such a plan of action is counterproductive to say the least, it's absolutely suicidal, and impractical. We're in no state in terms of our capacity, or PR to organise even a general strike, let alone a revolt. Anyone that's been involved in the movement on any level, would know that.

If you did take things seriously, then you'd dedicate your time and effort into things that need to be done, and not satisfying your ego. Because you're not interested in what needs to be done, movement building, tactical development etc, you're interested in becoming some heir to Che, to fulfil your beret fetish, your pracitcal plan to burst down your front door and shoot your local police station up with a carbine and a couple of friends is nothing short of immature crap on every level.

It's been done before, several times, and as far as making a name for yourself by doing so; I bet you'd don't even know who weather undergound are.

If you make too much of a fuss about any of this trollish bullshit, I'll recommend administrative action. Im simply not going to put up with this idiocy in a serious discussion forum.


and, what would you be "More than willing to help" with? if i may ask?

Getting you into an organisation, or helping you set one up.
You know, I was actually reading Che's Guerrila Warfare again today, and i came to realize that, you are right. It isnt really the time to revolt. see, i've been thinking more along the lines that i can take anything that comes at me, and never actually took the time to think it out. i mean i thought i did. but as i was reading, i first thought, that it would work. and after a got a few pages into it, i started understanding that it isnt. Weather underground..... wasnt that the group that was bent on stopping the war in vietnam? im not sure..... but, as far as a major organization, id love to be part of one. As far as around here, im only part of a small gang of rebels who are slowly growing. Now is not the time to rebel, but when the time is right, someone will have to start it. Im eager to find out who that someone is, or if it will even come in my life. so, as far as my suicidal head trip, it's basically over, like so many other things: Thanks to Che.

[Brownfist]

You know, I was actually reading Che's Guerrila Warfare again today, and i came to realize that, you are right. It isnt really the time to revolt. see, i've been thinking more along the lines that i can take anything that comes at me, and never actually took the time to think it out. i mean i thought i did. but as i was reading, i first thought, that it would work. and after a got a few pages into it, i started understanding that it isnt. Weather underground..... wasnt that the group that was bent on stopping the war in vietnam? im not sure..... but, as far as a major organization, id love to be part of one. As far as around here, im only part of a small gang of rebels who are slowly growing. Now is not the time to rebel, but when the time is right, someone will have to start it. Im eager to find out who that someone is, or if it will even come in my life. so, as far as my suicidal head trip, it's basically over, like so many other things: Thanks to Che.

The Weather Underground was a revolutionary organization that believed that through the bombing of numerous places, in relation to historical occurrences in the United States like the Kent massacre, they could cause the American proletariat to rise. That of course did not happen, and actually further isolated the group. This is what we would call an "adventurist line". As for joining a mass organization or party, you should evaluate the political lines of parties, and read the documentation surrounding it and see whether you actually agree with their analysis. Thus, if you think about joining the RCP(USA) you should read their documentation, Mao and critiques of the RCP. Or, you think about joining the Spartacist League then read their materials and Trotsky etc.. I mean one needs to be comfortable, and be well read before joining a party because that is an important commitment. I do not think that there is any party in the USA that is capable of being a truely vanguardist party and lead the proletariat, but I am sure that numerous comrades will disagree and try to convince you that their party, faction, group or tendency has the correct line, and you must your own independent thought and reason, and figure it out.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by Eshlonn-the-[email protected] 30, 2007 01:34 am
as far as a major organization, id love to be part of one.
Well, that's a start. Where about's do you live I will put you in touch with your nearest organisation.

I presume you're a Leninist of some variation?


Now is not the time to rebel, but when the time is right, someone will have to start it. Im eager to find out who that someone is, or if it will even come in my life.

It's normally brought about by social conditions and not initiated by a person or organisation. In fact, it's never brought about by a person or persons. But you do indeed need as strong revolutioanry organisation.

[Eshlonn-the-leader]

Originally posted by Love Underground+January 30, 2007 02:08 pm--> (Love Underground @ January 30, 2007 02:08 pm)
Eshlonn-the-[email protected] 30, 2007 01:34 am
as far as a major organization, id love to be part of one.
Well, that's a start. Where about's do you live I will put you in touch with your nearest organisation.

I presume you're a Leninist of some variation?


Now is not the time to rebel, but when the time is right, someone will have to start it. Im eager to find out who that someone is, or if it will even come in my life.

It's normally brought about by social conditions and not initiated by a person or organisation. In fact, it's never brought about by a person or persons. But you do indeed need as strong revolutioanry organisation. [/b]
I live in Virginia.
I'm Marxist-Leninist.

[RNK]

That's essentially what it boils down to. We're all waiting for someone else to start it so we can join.

Rather, we should all get off our asses, get our hands on some weaponry and start from wherever we are. Our lives will be sacraficed, yes, but not needlessly. From an acorn grows an international revolutionary movement, as they say. If we can kick-start a system where we have a steady group of men and women willing to stand up and take action despite the danger to themselves then eventually such a movement may take hold, and prosper into something much larger, something worth more than the mere sum of our efforts. Think of it like starting a fire. If we can get a handful of determined individuals to start acting over a period of several years then it may very well pick up enough momentum to sustain itself -- the same way that one repeatedly strikes rocks to create sparks, or uses friction to create enough heat to spark a fire that will eventually sustain itself once it gets past a certain point.

Forget joining "organizations". There are few, if any, organizations that are willing to do anything more than wait around playing cards until the national situation meets their impossible criteria for revolution.

Remember. In 1956 10-20 poorly armed men landed in eastern Cuba. 2 years later they were in control of the country. Reguardless of our personal opinions about Castro and Cuba, it was a mighty feat, and although it would be next to impossible for such a thing to happen in America, I bring it up merely to show that anything is possible -- especially with the right determination.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 10:06 am
That's essentially what it boils down to. We're all waiting for someone else to start it so we can join.

Well, no. But that's very revealing of how you feel.

I, and many others on here, are engaged in trying to build a movement toward revolution. And we're having many successes.


Rather, we should all get off our asses, get our hands on some weaponry and start from wherever we are.

No, because there's no movement to fight for. Using extreme violence in the current social context would be absolute suicide for our movement. Honestly, read the weatherman manifesto, then look at the results. Then look at successful (or semi) revolts revolutions, and look at how much effort went into building those movement, decades before they were even heard of.

There's really no room to debate this. If you want to shoot at your local cop station with your friends and get shot. Do it. But please don't associate yourself with us.


Forget joining "organizations". There are few, if any, organizations that are willing to do anything more than wait around playing cards until the national situation meets their impossible criteria for revolution.

If you're anti-organisational, then you're as useful as any other random individual. And with all respect I recommend you stop posting here. Because this is for serious discussion, and you seem to just want to live Ches life.

Although what you say is largely true of many Lenninist organisations, it is not true of all organisations.


Remember. In 1956 10-20 poorly armed men landed in eastern Cuba. 2 years later they were in control of the country.

Yes, but unlike you, Castro had popular support. There was an organised popular movement, that had been built up over many years, by anarchist and socialist unions and groups in Cuba. And given the historical economic and social developments of the time, it was acceptable, in the context of 1960s Cuba, to fire a weapon at the establishment. Because people were conscious that, that needed to be done.

Today is completely different.

[RNK]

I, and many others on here, are engaged in trying to build a movement toward revolution. And we're having many successes.

...there's no movement to fight for.

These are some astonishing accomplishments.

The proof is in the pudding. I attempted to connect with the fellow Communists on this board by speaking from a personal level; "We're all waiting for someone else to start it so we can join." For my efforts, I am confronted and attacked by an incredibly defensive person who seems overwhelmed with the need to argue about why we should all stay at home and "build support" until the "social context" is "perfectly suited" for "this very successful movement" that "doesn't exist".


But please don't associate yourself with us.

Don't worry. Back-seat drivers like yourself have no place in a post-revolutionary world. The Menshevists proved that.


Although what you say is largely true of many Lenninist organisations, it is not true of all organisations.

Name one Communist organization (here in the West) which has, during the past 100 years, done anything of any permanence to attack or weaken capitalism's strangle-hold on society.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Eshlonn-the-leader
But if i die without at least trying.... Then i will be less than a man

What a load of macho-bullshit; if you die without at least trying you'll be a 'revolutionary' poser - its got fuck all to do with 'being a man'.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 08:05 am
These are some astonishing accomplishments.

Just because the goal hasn't been achieved yet, does not mean that vast accomplishments have not been made. Nor does it mean we should resort to some nihilistic suicide stunt, such as going on an armed murder-spree.

I mean, everyone within the movement (though I use the term lightly) today has a good idea of the state that our movement is in. And pretty much everyone has an opinion on where we should go with it, whether to join up to the Zesta international, or maintain the contacts made in the Dissent network etc.

No one with any sense or understanding would propose starting the revolution now, its beyond absurd :lol:

But the odd nutter, often crops up from time to time.


"We're all waiting for someone else to start it so we can join." For my efforts, I am confronted and attacked by an incredibly defensive person who seems overwhelmed with the need to argue about why we should all stay at home and "build support" until the "social context" is "perfectly suited" for "this very successful movement" that "doesn't exist".

The thing is, we're not waiting for anybody, while you're sat there doing nothing, we're out there building a movement from the bottom up, for example, where I live, we went from no organisation, to a 30 person strong organisation, that has made significant steps toward radicalising the community, over the past 2 years, if we stay the course, open revolt isn't entirely unlikely, within the next decade or so. I think the social circumstances always harbour potential for revolution, the working class is always getting fucked, and we know it. We need to facilitate that potential to organise. Not ruin it by portraying ourselves as terrorists.

Look at the Spanish civil war. The CNT didn't just come out of some angsty kids like you shooting at the fascists, and then suddenly turning into a force of thousands. It took decades of hard work to organise the working class into the anarchist unions.

There are steps toward open revolt, that are long, tedious, and involve a lot of work, work that a lot of che-kiddies just don't want to do. Because Rage against the machine left that bit out of their lyrics.

But im interested in hearing your plans, in detail. How would you plan a millitary conflict against the British state, on your own? baring in mind that co-operation between all the leftist organisations in this country is non-existent. And you would certainly loose all support from the working class.

You'd clearly need an army, and an alliance between the larger leftist groups, with popular backing. And that's what I, and pretty much everyone involved today, is attempting to do.

[Eshlonn-the-leader]

Originally posted by Love Underground+February 10, 2007 11:52 am--> (Love Underground @ February 10, 2007 11:52 am)
[email protected] 10, 2007 08:05 am
These are some astonishing accomplishments.

Just because the goal hasn't been achieved yet, does not mean that vast accomplishments have not been made. Nor does it mean we should resort to some nihilistic suicide stunt, such as going on an armed murder-spree.

I mean, everyone within the movement (though I use the term lightly) today has a good idea of the state that our movement is in. And pretty much everyone has an opinion on where we should go with it, whether to join up to the Zesta international, or maintain the contacts made in the Dissent network etc.

No one with any sense or understanding would propose starting the revolution now, its beyond absurd :lol:

But the odd nutter, often crops up from time to time.


"We're all waiting for someone else to start it so we can join." For my efforts, I am confronted and attacked by an incredibly defensive person who seems overwhelmed with the need to argue about why we should all stay at home and "build support" until the "social context" is "perfectly suited" for "this very successful movement" that "doesn't exist".

The thing is, we're not waiting for anybody, while you're sat there doing nothing, we're out there building a movement from the bottom up, for example, where I live, we went from no organisation, to a 30 person strong organisation, that has made significant steps toward radicalising the community, over the past 2 years, if we stay the course, open revolt isn't entirely unlikely, within the next decade or so. I think the social circumstances always harbour potential for revolution, the working class is always getting fucked, and we know it. We need to facilitate that potential to organise. Not ruin it by portraying ourselves as terrorists.

Look at the Spanish civil war. The CNT didn't just come out of some angsty kids like you shooting at the fascists, and then suddenly turning into a force of thousands. It took decades of hard work to organise the working class into the anarchist unions.

There are steps toward open revolt, that are long, tedious, and involve a lot of work, work that a lot of che-kiddies just don't want to do. Because Rage against the machine left that bit out of their lyrics.

But im interested in hearing your plans, in detail. How would you plan a millitary conflict against the British state, on your own? baring in mind that co-operation between all the leftist organisations in this country is non-existent. And you would certainly loose all support from the working class.

You'd clearly need an army, and an alliance between the larger leftist groups, with popular backing. And that's what I, and pretty much everyone involved today, is attempting to do. [/b]
And, I would like to help....but know not a one organization to start with around here.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by Eshlonn-the-[email protected] 19, 2007 03:40 am
And, I would like to help....but know not a one organization to start with around here.
Well as I said, I'll do everything I can to help. If you let me know where abouts "here" is, I'll be more than happy to put you in touch with the nearest group(s)

[Eshlonn-the-leader]

Originally posted by Love Underground+February 19, 2007 04:58 pm--> (Love Underground @ February 19, 2007 04:58 pm)
Eshlonn-the-[email protected] 19, 2007 03:40 am
And, I would like to help....but know not a one organization to start with around here.
Well as I said, I'll do everything I can to help. If you let me know where abouts "here" is, I'll be more than happy to put you in touch with the nearest group(s) [/b]
I live in Roanoke, Virginia. Sorry. I should have elaborated.